New Page 5

News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to go to the LCCC Daily English/Arabic News Buletins Archieves Since 2006

Bible Quotation For Today/‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed meto bring good news to the poor.
Luke 04/14-21: "Then Jesus, filled with the power of the Spirit, returned to Galilee, and a report about him spread through all the surrounding country. He began to teach in their synagogues and was praised by everyone. When he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he went to the synagogue on the sabbath day, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written: ‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed meto bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind,to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour.’ And he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant, and sat down. The eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him. Then he began to say to them, ‘Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.’"

Bible Quotation For Today/At an acceptable time I have listened to you, and on a day of salvation I have helped you.
Second Letter to the Corinthians 05/20-21/06,01-10: "We are ambassadors for Christ, since God is making his appeal through us; we entreat you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. As we work together with him, we urge you also not to accept the grace of God in vain. For he says, ‘At an acceptable time I have listened to you, and on a day of salvation I have helped you.’ See, now is the acceptable time; see, now is the day of salvation! We are putting no obstacle in anyone’s way, so that no fault may be found with our ministry, but as servants of God we have commended ourselves in every way: through great endurance, in afflictions, hardships, calamities, beatings, imprisonments, riots, labours, sleepless nights, hunger; by purity, knowledge, patience, kindness, holiness of spirit, genuine love, truthful speech, and the power of God; with the weapons of righteousness for the right hand and for the left; in honour and dishonour, in ill repute and good repute. We are treated as impostors, and yet are true; as unknown, and yet are well known; as dying, and see we are alive; as punished, and yet not killed; as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing everything."

LCCC Latest analysis, editorials from miscellaneous sources published on July 18-19/15
Question: "What does the Bible mean that we are not to judge others?"/GotQuestions.org/July 18/15
Abdulazeez was the third Jordanian-Palestinian to attack US military personnel in six years/DEBKAfile/July 18/15
Iran policy against ‘arrogant’ U.S. won’t change/Bozorgmehr Sharafedin Nouri & Babak Dehghanpisheh/July 18/15
The Iran nuclear deal and its discontents/Hisham Melhem/Al Arabiya/18 July 2015
Is a Western-Iranian alliance really the solution/Mohammed Fahad al-Harthi/Al Arabiya/18 July 2015
US warns Israel against 'provocative' plan to raze Palestinian village/JPOST.COM STAFF/18 July 2015
ICC/Last chance for Christian mother facing gallows to be decided by Pakistan's Supreme Court/18 July/15
Iran Deal: The Great Bamboozle Festival/Douglas Murray/Gatestone Institute/July 18/15
Charlie Hebdo Editor: No More Mohammed Cartoons/Raheem Kassam/Jul 18/15
Claiming Food Is Halal a Federal Crime/Johanna Markind/The American Thinker/July 15/15
UK's First Female Sharia Judge: 'We Can't Ask Muslims Not to Have More than One Wife'/Raheem Kassam /July 18/15
How Israel Might Destroy Iran's Nuclear Program/Daniel Pipes/National Review Online/July 18/15
Swedish Jihadi: "Go There with a Bomb"/One month of Islam in Sweden/Ingrid Carlqvist/July 148/15
The NGO Campaign to Destroy Israel/Denis MacEoin/Gatestone Institute/July 18/15
The Middle East, Syria, Iraq: Implications of the Iran Nuclear Deal/Samir Altaqi/Esam Aziz/Middle East Briefing/July18/15

LCCC Bulletin itles for the Lebanese Related News published on July 18-19/15
Five Czechs and a Lebanese Feared Kidnapped in West Beka
Four Wounded in Dispute at Palestinian Refugee Camp
Residents of Jbeil and Hbaline Block Roads to Landfill
Six Wounded in Family Clashes in Wadi Khaled, Akkar
Media Exposes Yatim's Criminal Past, Aoun Urges State to 'Deter' Offenders
Families of Arsal Abductees Meet Sons in Outskirts of Town
Jumblat, Geagea Abroad for High-Level Talks

LCCC Bulletin Miscellaneous Reports And News published on July 18-19/15
Phares to Skynews: "Sending the Iranian deal to the UN, in spite of Congress, will impact Clinton's candidacy
Canada Appalled by Car Bombing in Iraq
Sailor's Death Lifts Toll in Chattanooga Shooting Rampage
Ministry: Saudi Breaks Up IS Network, Arrests 431
IS Executes Journalist in Iraq's Mosul
Hamas Leader in Landmark Saudi Visit
Yemen Ministers Back from Saudi Exile in 'Liberated' Aden
Syria Frees Political Prisoners in Eid Gesture
Kurds claim ISIS used chemical weapons in Syria
U.S. seeks justice at United Nations for MH17 victims
Israel signals may ask for more US military aid over Iran deal
Over 100 former US ambassadors send Obama letter praising Iran nuclear deal
Obama calls critics of Iran nuclear deal 'overheated and dishonest

Five Czechs and a Lebanese Feared Kidnapped in West Bekaa
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/ 18 July/15/Lebanese authorities are searching for five Czechs feared kidnapped in the eastern Bekaa Valley, a military source and the state-run National News Agency said Saturday. The five, along with their Lebanese driver Munir Taan, a resident of Nabatiyeh, have been missing since Friday night, when their car was discovered in the Kefraya region in the western part of the Bekaa. "We don't know what happened to them but we assume they were kidnapped because we found their passports and documents and belongings in the car," the source said. "We are carrying out searches of local hotels and other places in the area."NNA said the car contained personal suitcases, scattered clothes, three cameras and five Czech passports inside.
The Voice of Lebanon radio later said that the father of Taan had filed a complaint to the police station in al-Dweir and claimed that his son has disappeared in mysterious circumstances. VDL added that the five Czechs have entered Lebanon on the seventh of June.
Later during the day, the army intelligence carried out a wide inspection operation in hotels of the Bekaa and West Bekaa where the driver made some stops. Czech FM Lubomír Zaorálek confirmed that five of his country's nationals have gone missing in Lebanon. Kidnappings have declined in Lebanon since the 1975-1990 civil war, when some 100 foreigners, mostly Americans and West Europeans, were snatched. But some cases have been recorded, often for ransom and involving Lebanese as well as foreigners. In the most high-profile case in recent years, seven Estonian cyclists were kidnapped at gunpoint in the Bekaa in 2011, being released some four months later. The group claiming the abduction was previously unknown, and its motives were never entirely clear. A ransom was reportedly paid, but that was never confirmed by any side.

Four Wounded in Dispute at Palestinian Refugee Camp
Naharnet/18 July/15/Four people were injured on Saturday in a personal dispute at a Palestinian refugee camp east of the southern city of Sidon, the state-run National News Agency reported. NNA said knives and sticks were used by the young men at the Miyeh Miyeh camp. The joint Palestinian security force contained the incident and arrested several youth involved in the fight, said the agency. Among the injured are Ahmed M. and Abdullah MP who were treated at a field hospital inside the camp, NNA added.

Residents of Jbeil and Hbaline Block Roads to Landfill
Naharnet/18 July/15/Residents of the Jbeil district town of Hbaline blocked on Saturday all the roads leading to the controversial garbage landfill in their town, the state-run National News Agency reported. Their move comes after the announcement of Environment Minister Mohammed al-Mashnouq that the Sukleen firm will continue collecting waste in Beirut and its suburbs in the coming days. Amchit municipality chief Toni Issa said that he requested the municipality's police to stop any dump truck from outside the district to enter Hbaline landfill “the police will be on the lookout.”Earlier during the week, the so-called Hbaline Landfill Follow-Up Committee stressed that residents will not allow trucks coming from “areas outside the Jbeil district” to dump waste at the landfill. “The garbage that has been accumulating since tens of years represents a great challenge and it must be recycled,” the committee said, warning that the waste is “causing major pollution in the river's stream.” The expiry of a deadline for the closure of the Naameh landfill south of Beirut, threatens to plunge the country into a major garbage management crisis. The crisis started looming after environmentalists warned this week that they would stop trucks from hauling waste at the landfill starting Friday, which coincided with Eid al-Fitr. The July 17 deadline for the closure of the landfill coincided with the expiry of the contract with Sukleen, which is responsible for collecting and transporting the garbage in Beirut and Mount Lebanon. In January, the cabinet decided to delay the closure of the landfill, drawing the ire of the residents of Naameh and environmentalists. It approved the controversial decision after a long-heated debate regarding the country's plan to treat solid waste.

Six Wounded in Family Clashes in Wadi Khaled, Akkar
Naharnet/18 July/15/Six people were wounded Friday in two separate clashes in the North district, al-Jadeed television reported. A dispute between the Attiya and Hammoud families escalated into a fight involving the use of batons and knives in the Akkar district town of al-Muqaybleh. Gunshots were also fired in the air during the incident. Al-Jadeed said three people were injured in the clash, identifying them as Raed Khaled Attiya, Mahmoud Ahmed Khaled and his brother Majd. They were all rushed to hospital for treatment. In another incident, three people from the Haddara family were wounded in a clash with members of the al-Mir family in the Akkar district town of Mar Touma.

Media Exposes Yatim's Criminal Past, Aoun Urges State to 'Deter' Offenders
Naharnet/18 July/15/Lebanese media outlets scrambled Friday to highlight the criminal record of Tareq Yatim, the man who stabbed to death a 45-year-old father of four children in Ashrafieh, as Free Patriotic Movement chief MP Michel Aoun urged the state to “start deterring criminals.”According to OTV, Yatim -- identified by the media as a bodyguard of SGBL Bank chairman Antoun Sehnaoui -- was among the group that beat up a valet parking attendant in 2009 outside the Sofitel Le Gabriel Beirut Hotel in Ashrafieh. He was arrested over the incident before being eventually released. In 2012, Yatim was among those who opened fire at a motorcycle repair shop in Sidd al-Baouchrieh, killing Elie Numan and wounding two others, OTV said. According to LBCI television, Wednesday's knife man and his group were also involved in a 2010 shooting at the Maison Blanche nightclub in Beirut. Mazen Zein and Sami al-Maamari were wounded in that incident. Speaking to LBCI, Zein said Yatim was jailed for a period ranging from eight to ten months.
“He confessed to taking part in the crime … security forces did not allow me to face him after he was detained,” Zein said. “All of them are protected by Antoun Sehnaoui. Who else is providing these young men with weapons? Who is giving them money? How are they roaming the streets? Who is getting them firearm licenses?” Zein added. LBCI also reported that Yatim was involved in a 2012 incident at the Zahrat el-Ihsan School in Ashrafieh. It said the man and his associates beat up sports instructor Elie Farah and ripped off his ear after he did not allow a schoolgirl not donning sportswear from taking part in his class. The TV network said the residents of the Ashrafieh neighborhood of Karm al-Zaytoun had been complaining of the “daily practices” of Yatim and his group.
Meanwhile, Antoun Sehnaoui issued a statement condemning the killing of George al-Rif and calling for the harshest penalties against Yatim. Sehnaoui, however, warned against linking his name to the incident, which he described as an “individual” dispute. He also vowed legal measures over any “defamation, lies or blackmail attempts” in this regard. In a phone interview with OTV, FPM chief MP Michel Aoun hoped the investigation will reveal all the circumstances of the crime. “The criminal is known for his criminal record … The murderer's affiliation is also well-known and we hope the state will start deterring criminals,” Aoun added. In response to a question, Aoun said “the killer was protected by certain security agencies.”The FPM announced Friday that al-Rif was one of its activists. He was laid to rest Friday after a funeral at the Mar Mitr church in Ashrafieh. Yatim was arrested Thursday by army intelligence agents in Ashrafieh. He had chased al-Rif all the way from the airport road to Ashrafieh to stab him with a knife on Wednesday after a dispute over traffic priority. Some media reports said Yatim was under the influence of drugs when he was arrested.

Families of Arsal Abductees Meet Sons in Outskirts of Town
Naharnet/18 July/15/The families of the Arsal hostages met their sons on Saturday after the kidnappers agreed to the step as a good-will gesture on the occasion of Eid al-Fitr. Families of the abductees arrived at the northeastern border town of Arsal and were later transported to its outskirts to meet their sons, the state-run National News Agency reported. Three passengers buses transported the families to the destination. Following their return, several family members said: "Our children are in good heath but the negotiations (for their release) have been frozen."On Friday, Sheikh Mustafa al-Hujeiri received a call from Abou Malek al-Talli, the so-called emir of al-Nusra Front in Qalamoun, asking him to inform families of the abductees to head to the outskirts of Arsal to meet the kidnapped. The soldiers and police were taken hostage by al-Nusra Front and Islamic State group fighters when they overran Arsal in August last year. The jihadists have executed four of the captives. Among the demands of the hostage-takers is the release of Islamists from Roumieh.

Jumblat, Geagea Abroad for High-Level Talks
Naharnet/18 July/15/Two of Lebanon's top politicians, Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat and Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea, traveled on Saturday for high-level talks abroad. Jumblat and his son Taymour traveled to Paris while Geagea headed to Saudi Arabia for talks with top Saudi officials. The PSP chief is expected to meet with French President Francois Hollande next week, pan-Arab daily al-Hayat reported on Friday. The newspaper said that the meeting is set to take place at the Elysee Palace in Paris on Monday afternoon.

Canada Appalled by Car Bombing in Iraq
July 18, 2015 - Ottawa, Ontario - Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada
Andrew Bennett, Canada’s Ambassador for Religious Freedom, today issued the following statement:
“Canada strongly condemns the attack that took place in a busy market in an Iraqi town on Friday, killing at least 110 people, including children, celebrating Eid al-Fitr, which marks the end of the Muslim Holy month of Ramadan.
“On behalf of all Canadians, I extend my prayers and deepest sympathies to the families and friends of those who lost their lives, to those injured in the attack and those now without homes.
“Such violence, including that perpetrated against any faith community, must never be tolerated.
“ISIS’s actions are unconscionable violations of religious freedom and reveal the true nature of ISIS’s agenda, which is driven by hate and intolerance. That is why Canada is participating in the campaign against ISIS.
“Canada stands with the Government of Iraq in its fight against terrorism and calls upon Iraqi authorities to bring those responsible for these crimes to justice.”

Phares to Skynews: "Sending the Iranian deal to the UN, in spite of Congress, will impact Clinton's candidacy
Walid Phares DC/FaceBook/18.07.15
In an interview with SkyNews Arabia, Dr Walid Phares said "the Obama Administration will be sending the Iran deal to the UN Security Council for approval. Such an unusual act, without the approval of the majority of the American people, meaning without the approval of Congress, will have serious consequences on the candidacy of Madam Hilary Clinton. The Obama Administration is taking an action which could deeply jeopardize the chances of the Clinton campaign. The Administration may have miscalculated on the link between national security issues and the feelings of a silent majority of Americans. They will be crossing a psychological red line, never crossed before

Sailor's Death Lifts Toll in Chattanooga Shooting Rampage
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/ 18 July/15/The death toll in the mass shooting of U.S. military personnel in Tennessee rose to five on Saturday as investigators pursued the motive behind the rampage. In a brief statement, the U.S. Navy said a petty officer succumbed overnight to wounds he sustained in Thursday's attack on two military centers in Chattanooga. The Navy did not identify the sailor, but relatives named him as Petty Officer Randall Smith, a father of three daughters who had recently re-enlisted and transferred to Chattanooga. "It's hard to understand how somebody can hurt somebody that's serving for you, for your freedom, for your safety," his step-grandmother Darlene Proxmire told WANE television in Indiana. Four Marines also died in the attack -- which authorities are treating as "an act of terrorism" -- before the gunman, Mohammad Youssuf Abdulazeez, 24, a naturalized U.S. citizen born in Kuwait, died in a shootout with police. The FBI has asked foreign intelligence agencies to help trace Abdulazeez's movements and activities abroad, and analysts will be tracing his activity on social media, officials said. But it warned against jumping to conclusions, after Michael McCaul, chairman of the House of Representatives homeland security committee, branded the attack "an ISIS-inspired attack." "At this time, we have no indication that he was inspired by or directed by anyone other than himself," FBI special agent Ed Reinhold said, referring to Abdulazeez. "We obviously want to know what his thoughts were and who else he was associating with." The shooting has jarred Chattanooga, a city of 168,000, where the Islamic Society of Greater Chattanooga condemned the attack and cancelled its end-of-Ramadan Eid al-Fitr celebration out of respect for the victims. - Details emerge - Going into the weekend, more details about Abdulazeez -- a University of Tennessee engineering graduate and mixed martial arts enthusiast who grew up in a middle-class neighborhood -- slowly emerged. Investigators were looking at Abdulazeez's foreign travel, with a reported trip to Jordan last year of particular interest.
There was evidence, however, that he came from a troubled family. Divorce papers filed by his mother alleged that his father beat his wife and five children. The father was also reportedly investigated for ties to a terrorist group, but ultimately was cleared. Abdulazeez's only known brush with the law was in April, when he was arrested for driving under the influence. He briefly worked at a nuclear power plant in Ohio in May 2013, but was fired after failing to meet minimum employment requirements, a spokeswoman for Perry Nuclear Power Plant operator FirstEnergy said. In Washington, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter has asked for recommendations on how to "ensure the safety of service members and civilians at military installations," Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook said.
But state governors in Louisiana and Oklahoma opted to immediately sign orders that would allow U.S. military personnel to carry firearms at recruiting centers, which often are situated in civilian shopping malls.

Ministry: Saudi Breaks Up IS Network, Arrests 431
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/ 18 July/15/Saudi authorities announced on Saturday that they have broken up an organisation linked to the Islamic State group and have so far arrested 431 of its members, mostly Saudis. Authorities have "managed over the past few weeks to destroy an organisation made of a cluster of cells, which is linked to the terrorist Daesh organisation," the interior ministry said, using the Arabic acronym for IS. Network members were engaged in a "plot managed from areas of unrest abroad, with the aim of sowing sectarian sedition and spreading chaos", the ministry said. The cells were involved in several attacks and plots, including deadly suicide bombings at Shiite mosques in the kingdom's Eastern Province, it said. The ministry said that authorities foiled attacks plotted during the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan, including a bombing at a mosque belonging to security forces in Riyadh and Shiite mosques in Eastern Province. The group also plotted to attack a diplomatic mission, the statement said without elaborating. Among those detained are 144 people accused of supporting the network by "spreading the deviant ideology on the internet and recruiting new members". The Islamic State group, which considers Shiites to be heretics, claimed responsibility for the mosque attacks. IS controls swathes of neighboring Iraq and Syria, and has claimed widespread abuses including the beheading of foreign hostages. It has expanded its operations in the region, also claiming an unprecedented attack on a Shiite mosque in Kuwait, and several attacks in Yemen. Saudi Arabia and its Sunni Gulf neighbors last year joined a U.S.-led military coalition bombing IS in Syria, raising concerns about possible retaliation in the kingdom. Interior Minister Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef said after a deadly mosque attack in May that Saudi Arabia's security remains "under control". "Incidents such as this will not destabilize us. We have been through bigger ones," said the minister. He had led the crackdown on al-Qaida which waged a campaign of shootings and bombings against foreigners and Saudi security personnel between 2003 and 2007.

IS Executes Journalist in Iraq's Mosul
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/ 18 July/15/The Islamic State group has executed an Iraqi journalist in the northern city of Mosul on charges of spying, local officials and colleagues said Saturday. Jala al-Abadi was taken from his home with his phone and laptop on June 4 and executed on Wednesday by firing squad after being sentenced by an IS court. A former senior security officer in the area and a medical source in Mosul confirmed the young journalist's death. The father of two was born in 1988 and had worked as a cameraman for a local channel before IS took over Iraq's second city in June 2014. He left his city then but, according to a someone who was close to the journalist, he returned to Mosul for personal reasons. He did not elaborate. Abadi was arrested when he tried to leave again and charged by IS, which has run the city since June 10 last year, with "leaking information" about the jihadist group to the national press. IS has executed several journalists in Mosul, the capital of Nineveh province and the largest IS-held city in the "caliphate" the group proclaimed over parts of Iraq and Syria a year ago. Mohammed al-Bayati, the head of the Nineveh Media Network, condemned the latest execution and urged the United Nations to support the families of murdered journalists.

Hamas Leader in Landmark Saudi Visit
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/ 18 July/15/ Hamas chief Khaled Meshaal has met Saudi King Salman during a pilgrimage to the kingdom, state news agency SPA said Saturday.
He headed a delegation from the Palestinian Islamist movement in a two-day Umra pilgrimage to the Muslim holy city of Mecca, SPA said. "The delegation offered Eid greetings" to King Salman during prayers at the Grand Mosque, SPA said, adding that they "praised the positive stance of the kingdom's leadership towards the Palestinian cause." Eid al-Fitr is the holiday that follows on the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan. Hamas-linked Al-Aqsa television said the delegation also met Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef and Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The relationship between Hamas and Riyadh deteriorated after the kingdom threw its full support behind Egypt's military following the ouster of Islamist president Mohamed Morsi in 2013 and the subsequent crackdown on his Muslim Brotherhood. Meshaal has been based in Qatar since he abandoned his base in Damascus in 2012 after the group sided with Syrian rebels against President Bashar al-Assad. The decision to back the rebels jeopardized Hamas' strong links with Iran, the kingdom's archrival in the Gulf.

Yemen Ministers Back from Saudi Exile in 'Liberated' Aden
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/ 18 July/15/Yemeni ministers have arrived back in Aden from Saudi exile after the government announced the "liberation" of the country's second city from Iran-backed rebels, the interior minister said on Saturday.
"We arrived last night," Abdo al-Huzeifi told AFP, adding that he was accompanied by Transport Minister Badr Basalma and several security officials. Huzeifi did not say how the delegation reached Aden. But Saudi-owned daily Asharq al-Awsat quoted a Saudi security official as saying that they had flown from Riyadh to Eritrea and then travelled on by boat. The minister said that the rebels had been pushed out of the city, except for "few besieged groups that are refusing to surrender." The Riyadh-based government said on Friday that its loyalists had ousted the rebels and renegade troops who had seized much of Aden in March, forcing President Abedrabbo Mansour Hadi into exile. "The government announces the liberation of the province of Aden," Vice President Khaled Bahah said on Facebook. But witnesses said that rebels remained in control of the city's Al-Tawahi district on Saturday and that heavy fighting was continuing there. Southern militiamen of the Popular Resistance launched Operation Golden Arrow against the rebels on Tuesday, boosted by reinforcements freshly trained and equipped in Saudi Arabia. A Saudi-led coalition has also kept up the air campaign it launched in March. At dawn on Saturday, coalition aircraft bombed a rebel reinforcement convoy east of Aden, killing 25 fighters, a military official said. Agence France Presse could not independently verify the toll. Aden was Hadi's last refuge after he fled the capital Sanaa earlier this year as the rebels took over the government and launched an offensive in which they seized much of the country. Swathes of the city have been reduced to rubble by the four months of ferocious fighting.

Syria Frees Political Prisoners in Eid Gesture
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/ 18 July/15/Syrian authorities have released more than 200 prisoners, many of whom were detained under "anti-terror" laws, to mark the Muslim Eid al-Fitr holiday, a lawyer told Agence France Presse. Dozens of women were among 240 detainees who were released on Friday, said attorney and leading human rights activist Michel Shammas. Most of the prisoners in Syrian jails being prosecuted under "anti-terror" laws are opponents of the Syrian government or those who have taken part in the uprising that began in March 2011. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a Britain-based monitor, also reported the releases, but put the number of freed detainees at around 350. The monitor said most of them were people who had been arrested at anti-government demonstrations. "Syrian authorities released more than 240 prisoners from Adra prison (near Damascus), most of whom were tried before what is know as the anti-terrorism court," Shammas told AFP late Friday. Among those freed was prominent Syrian blogger Hussein Ghreir, who was arrested in February 2012 along with fellow activists Mazen Darwish and Hani Zaitani and accused of "promoting terrorist acts."A friend of Ghreir's, who spoke on condition of anonymity, confirmed that the blogger was "at his home in Damascus and is in good health".According to the Observatory, some 200,000 people are being detained by government forces in Syria in detention centers, prisons and security facilities. Among them are thousands of people who have effectively disappeared since being detained, with their families unsure where they are being held. According to the Observatory, nearly 13,000 Syrians, including dozens of children, have been tortured to death in government prisons since March 2011.Last year, President Bashar Assad signed an amnesty that was supposed to see tens of thousands of political prisoners freed, but rights activists say that only several hundred were actually released.

Kurds claim ISIS used chemical weapons in Syria
By Staff writer | Al Arabiya News/Saturday, 18 July 2015/ISIS had used poison gas in attacks in late June in northeastern Syria, a Syrian Kurdish militia said on Saturday
The YPG militia said poison gas had been used in attacks on June 28 and June 29 against YPG-held areas in the northeastern province of Hasaka, Reuters news agency reported citing Redur Xelil, the YPG spokesman. Xelil said the type of chemical used had not been accurately determined. None of the YPG fighters exposed to the gas had died because they were quickly taken to hospital, he said. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a UK-based group that reports on the war using an activist network on the ground, said it had also documented the use of poison gas by ISIS in northeastern Syria on June 28. On Friday, ISIS claimed a deadly car bomb blast in an Iraqi town on Friday, killing dozens - including children - celebrating the end of the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan, the militants said in a statement. The attack occurred in a market area of the predominantly Shiite town of Khan Bani Saad as people shopped on the eve of the Eid al-Fitr holiday marking the end of Ramadan. Confusion remains over the death toll, with wildly differing numbers from officials. Some reports put the number of dead at 35, 40 and 80 - while ISIS said 180 had been killed in the blast. More than 70 were wounded, said Mohammed Jawad al-Hamadani, a member of the Diyala provincial council in which Khan Bani Saad is located. “The explosion was big, it caused a lot of damage,” Raad Fares al-Mas, a member of parliament, said from nearby Baquba, the capital of Diyala. In a statement, the Sunni militant group said the suicide bomber had three ton of explosives, Reuters reported. In video footage purportedly showing the aftermath of the blast, people cry out in anguish while black smoke and fires billow out from the blast site.

U.S. seeks justice at United Nations for MH17 victims
By AFP | United Nations/Saturday, 18 July 2015/The U.S. envoy to the United Nations called Friday for responsible parties to be “brought to justice” for the downing of flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine one year ago. Samantha Power said that the U.S. "will not rest" until the victims' relatives "obtain the justice and closure they seek and deserve." All 298 people onboard MH17 -- the majority Dutch -- died on July 17 last year when the Malaysia Airlines jet, on a flight between Amsterdam and Kuala Lumpur, was shot down over rebel-held east Ukraine during heavy fighting between Ukrainian forces and pro-Russian separatists. Kiev and the West point their finger at the separatists, saying they may have used a Buk surface-to-air missile supplied by Russia to down the Boeing 777 plane. But Moscow denies involvement and instead accuses Ukraine's military. In a statement, Power referred to a U.N. Security Council resolution that members including Russia adopted just after the crash. It called for the perpetrators to be held accountable. However, she stopped short of calling for a U.N.-backed tribunal to prosecute those responsible. Britain, France, Malaysia, the Netherlands and others have backed a tribunal, but veto-wielding Security Council member Russia is opposed. The Netherlands, where most of the victims came from and other countries paid tribute to the victims with memorials Friday.

Israel signals may ask for more US military aid over Iran deal
REUTERS/07/17/2015/
Israel signaled on Friday that it would ask the United States for increased military aid to counter any threats that may arise as result of the international agreement on Iran's nuclear program. Israel gets $3 billion in annual military aid from Washington under a package due to expire in 2017 and has in recent years secured hundreds of millions of dollars in additional US funding for missile defense. Israel and the United States had been in talks on future grants but Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu suspended them in the run-up to Tuesday's agreement which curtailed Iran's nuclear projects, which he condemned as insufficient.
Netanyahu plans to lobby the US Congress not to approve the nuclear deal.
But Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon on Friday appeared to regard congressional ratification as a foregone conclusion and described the deferral of aid discussions with Washington as an opportunity to assess the ramifications of the agreement
"We talk about the American defense aid, it is clear that the situation here has changed and must be studied," Ya'alon told Israel's Channel 2 TV.
Ya'alon said Tehran's economic gains from a lifting of Western sanctions could boost Iranian-backed guerrillas in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories. It could also lead to an arms race with Arab states unfriendly to Israel, he said.
"We will ultimately, of course, have to go and talk about the trade-offs that Israel has coming to it in order to preserve a qualitative edge," he said, referring to Israel's military superiority in the Middle East.
This would not be next week, when US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter visits Israel, he said.
"It will be in several more months, certainly, after the (Iran) deal is approved and studied."
Before Netanyahu's suspension of aid talks, the two sides were close to a new package of grants starting in 2017 and worth $3.6 billion-$3.7 billion. US and Israeli officials said.
That sum would likely rise once talks resumed, they said.
In the interim, defense-related contacts between the allies have not ceased completely.
Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper said Defense Ministry director-general Dan Harel was in the United States this week to assess the Obama administration's planned military aid to Gulf Arab states and its impact on the Israeli "qualitative edge."
An Israeli official confirmed Harel's US trip to Reuters but did not comment on Yedioth's account of what was discussed.
Isaac Herzog, center-left leader of Israel's parliamentary opposition, closed ranks with Netanyahu against the Iran nuclear deal and said he would go to Washington "to work on advancing a package of security measures befitting the new situation."

Over 100 former US ambassadors send Obama letter praising Iran nuclear deal
JPOST.COM STAFF/07/18/2015 /Earlier this week it was revealed that over 100 former US ambassadors sent a letter to President Barack Obama expressing their support for the "landmark agreement" struck between world powers and Iran.
"The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran stands as a landmark agreement in deterring the proliferation of nuclear weapons," the letter begins. "Without your determination and the admirable work of Secretary of State Kerry and his team, this agreement would never have been reached."Notable signatories of the document included former under secretary of state Nicholas Burns; Daniel Kurtzer, the former envoy to Israel and Egypt; and Thomas Pickering, the former ambassador to Israel, Russia, India, and the United Nations. Madeleine Albright, who served as secretary of state in the Clinton administration, also penned a piece for TIME magazine in which she wrote favorably of the deal on the same day the letter was released Thursday.
"We recognize that the JCPOA is not a perfect or risk-free settlement of this problem," the letter states. "However, we believe without it, the risks to the security of the United States and our friends and allies would be far greater."According to the ambassadors, the agreement reached achieved its most imperative goal: Iranian nuclear nonproliferation and security for the Middle East, especially Israel. "Effective diplomacy backed by credible defense will be critically important now, during the period of inspection and verification of Iran’s compliance with the agreement."

Obama calls critics of Iran nuclear deal 'overheated and dishonest'
REUTERS/07/18/2015/US President Barack Obama on Saturday defended the historic nuclear deal made with Iran last week and warned that some critics of the agreement will offer the American people "dishonest arguments" against the accord in the weeks ahead.
"There's a reason this deal took so long to negotiate. Because we refused to accept a bad deal. We held out for a deal that met every one of our bottom lines. And we got it," Obama said during his weekly address to the American people.
"This deal will make America and the world safer and more secure. Still, you're going to hear a lot of overheated and often dishonest arguments about it in the weeks ahead," he said. Obama has run into a storm of accusations from Republican lawmakers and Israel that he gave away too much to Tehran and is seeking to sell the Iran nuclear deal to skeptical US lawmakers and nervous allies, insisting the landmark agreement was the only alternative to a nuclear arms race and more war in the Middle East."Does this deal resolve all of the threats Iran poses to its neighbors and the world? No. Does it do more than anyone has done before to make sure Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon? Yes. And that was our top priority from the start," Obama continued. Obama has vowed to veto any effort to block the deal and although he faces a tough challenge in the Republican-controlled Congress, he is expected to prevail. The agreement is a triumph for Obama, who has made outreach to America's enemies a hallmark of his presidency, but it is also seen as his biggest foreign policy gamble since taking office in 2009.

Abdulazeez was the third Jordanian-Palestinian to attack US military personnel in six years
DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis July 18, 2015/Mohammed Youssuf Abdulazeez, 24, who Thursday, July 16, murdered four US Marines in Chattanooga, Tennessee, and wounded three people, was the third Muslim of Jordanian-Palestinian descent to perpetrate a massacre of American military or intelligence personnel in six years debkafile’s intelligence and counter-terrorist experts point out that these acts of terror were the price that US army and intelligence agencies paid for relying on Jordan’s General Intelligence Directorate (Dairat al-Mukhabarat al-Amman) as a source of penetration agents for fighting Al Qaeda, the Islamic State and other radical Islamist organizations. US investigators reported Saturday that Abdulazeez had visited Jordan four times in the last 10 years, and during one of those visits traveled to Yemen. There is no chance that the killer - a naturalized American citizen whose real name may be Mohammed Youssuf Said – could have traveled to Yemen on a Jordanian passport “under the radar” of Jordanian intelligence, which may also have succeeded in recruiting him. And there is no way that Jordan’s GID would not have tipped off US intelligence and counter-terrorist authorities. It is obvious that US law enforcement agencies, who claim to have found “no evidence that he had any contact with militants or militant groups,” know a lot more about the killer’s background than they admit and are feeding out tidbits slowly. This goes far to explain the unusual aspects of the Chattanooga attack. Within minutes of the shooting, hundreds of agents of the FBI and other agencies dealing with the war on terror were spread out at the scenes of the crime – the Navy recruiting center and the Navy reserve center 12 km away. On the scene with exceptional speed too was the Tennessee US Attorney who said at once that the attacks were being treated as an “act of domestic terrorism.” But it is hard to understand how a Muslim, who wrote this message on his blog: “Life is short and bitter. And the opportunity to submit to Allah may pass you by “- managed to acquire an arsenal of deadly weapons, including at least two AK-47 automatic rifles and a handgun, which he used on his murderous rampage in Chattanooga. More weapons were found at his home.
It appears likely to debkafile’s intelligence experts that Abdulazeez or Said, whatever his name, exploited a “dead spot” in the cooperation between US and Jordanian intelligence services to coolly and thoroughly prepare his act of terror in Chattanooga. This opportunity and its timing, on the last day of Ramadan, may have been engineered by his handlers, whether a clandestine Islamic State operative in Jordan, or Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula-AQAP in Yemen. His methods recalled the modus operandi employed by Al Qaeda in 2009, when Humam Khalil al-Balawi, a Jordanian physician, was recruited by the GID for a US Central Intelligence operation, which was to use his medical qualifications to penetrate Ayman Zawahiri’s close circle. Dr. Balawi succeeded in gaining the Al Qaeda leader’s confidence. But Zawahiri also managed to turn him round. On Dec. 30, 2009, he arrived at the covert US base of Camp Chapman in southeast Afghanistan to deliver his report on the Al Qaeda leader’s plans, which was eagerly was awaited and destined to reach the desk of President Barack Obama. Instead of handing over his report, the Jordanian doctor detonated the bomb vest strapped around his chest, killing himself and nine of the CIA agents standing around him. A month earlier, on Nov. 9, 2009, Army psychiatrist Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, with whom the Tennessee killer shared the same Jordanian-Palestinian background, shot dead 13 American soldiers and injured 32 in a sudden attack at the US base of Fort Hood in Texas.
Abdulazeez clearly followed in the footsteps of both these forerunners.

Iran policy against ‘arrogant’ U.S. won’t change
Tehran, Iran. (AP)/By Bozorgmehr Sharafedin Nouri & Babak Dehghanpisheh | Reuter
Saturday, 18 July 2015
Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Saturday the nuclear deal with world powers did not signal any wider shift in Iran’s relationship with Washington or its policies in the Middle East. The agreement struck this week was met with celebrations in the streets of Tehran as many Iranians anticipated it would allow the economy, battered by years of sanctions, to stabilize and make their daily lives easier. But Khamenei, who has the last word on high matters of state and had given his blessing to the nuclear talks, moved to dampen any speculation it would lead to a broader rapprochement with the United States. “We have repeatedly said we don’t negotiate with the U.S. on regional or international affairs; not even on bilateral issues. There are some exceptions like the nuclear program that we negotiated with the Americans to serve our interests.”U.S. policies in the region were “180 degrees” opposed to Iran’s, he said in a speech at a Tehran mosque punctuated by chants of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.”
“We will never stop supporting our friends in the region and the people of Palestine, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Bahrain and Lebanon. Even after this deal our policy towards the arrogant U.S. will not change,” he said.
Rowhani’s diplomacy.
Iran’s pragmatist President Hassan Rowhani struck a more conciliatory tone than Khamenei on Saturday. After a phone call with the ruler of the Gulf Arab state of Qatar on Saturday, Rowhani said the nuclear agreement would improve Iran’s relations with its neighbors.“No doubt, deal will lead Iran to closer relations w/ neighbors, esp Qatar,” Rouhani said on Twitter. Under the agreement reached on Tuesday, sanctions will be gradually removed in return for Iran accepting long-term curbs on a nuclear program that the West has suspected was aimed at creating a nuclear bomb. Iran denies it seeks a nuclear bomb. Rouhani belongs to the technocrat part of the Iranian establishment and has a more pragmatic approach to diplomacy. He hailed the deal as a “political, technical and legal victory” for Iran and has emphasized that “no deal is 100 percent.” Khamenei, however, has decided to take a more cautious stance and see if any red lines had been breached. The supreme leader said on Saturday he wanted Iranian politicians to examine the agreement to ensure national interests were preserved, as Iran would not allow the disruption of its revolutionary principles or defensive abilities. But his remarks did not shed light on Iran’s procedures for ratifying the accord, which are not known in any detail. Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif will brief parliament on July 21, Iranian media have said, and the agreement will also be examined by the National Security Council, the country’s highest security body.
Mistrust
Zarif is set to travel to Gulf countries shortly after the end of the Eid holiday. In a message to Muslim countries, Zarif echoed Rowhani’s diplomatic stance, saying: “By solving the artificial crisis about its nuclear program diplomatically, a new opportunity for regional and international cooperation has emerged.”Iran regards its nuclear program as an emblem of national dignity and dynamism in the face of what it sees as decades of hostility from Western countries that opposed its 1979 Islamic revolution.
Khamenei’s remarks radiated a broad mistrust of U.S. intentions. He said successive American presidents had sought Iran’s “surrender,” and declaring that if war broke out America would come off worst. He later praised Iranian negotiators who thrashed out the accord in marathon negotiations in Vienna. “During the nuclear talks, we saw the Americans’ dishonesty over and over,” Khamenei said during meetings with senior Iranian officials and ambassadors from several Muslim states, according to his official website. “But fortunately our officials fought back and in some cases showed revolutionary reactions.”

The Iran nuclear deal and its discontents
Hisham Melhem/Al Arabiya/Saturday, 18 July 2015
For almost two years, the Islamic Republic of Iran, one of the oldest, most intractable countries in the world, found itself, negotiating secretly, dueling publicly and bargaining incessantly and cunningly with the six most powerful countries in the world, led by its arch-nemesis for more than three decades, the United States of America. It has emerged with an empowering nuclear deal legitimizing it as a threshold nuclear state and marking its return from the cold. As one of those harsh critics of the theocratic regime in Tehran, who abhor its brutal suppression of the human rights, aspirations and tremendous potentials of a talented youthful population, I have to grudgingly admit that the Iranian negotiating team more than held its own, hence my use of the word ‘cunningly’ should be seen in a positive and not a pejorative context. As one who tries not to get swept away by the immediacy of events, even those billed as ‘historic’ and is always conscious of the long, complex and tumultuous history of the region I have to note that the nuclear deal came into fruition at a time when the dominant perception in the Middle East is that the United States is a declining power in the region and beyond; that the ‘Arab world’ is not only a house divided, but a house with no roof, and some of its rooms are literally in flames, with Iran poised to elevate its dual role as the arsonist and the fireman to new levels.
A river of ink ran through it
A river of ink was used to explain, judge, justify or denounce every word and punctuation in the text of the ‘Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action’ and its annexes. The maestro of the large chorus of supporters is President Obama, who conducted the orchestra in an unusually brash and even giddy style, particularly when he was playing to the American people and their representatives through the media. But the opponents of the deal inside the United States, as well as beyond the seas have more than one conductor and more than one chorus and different musical sheets.
The Republicans and the Israelis poured over the details of the technical aspects of the deal, crunched the numbers, spoke of ‘core reactors’, centrifuges, percentages of enriched uranium, breakout time, international inspections and their discontents with all the above. For the Arabs, particularly those who resent living in the shadow of Iran, the technical components of the deal were not their primary concern; they did not bother much with numbers, fuel cycles, heavy waters or plutonium and they certainly did not see the devil in the details of the annexes, but their heavy hearts saw the devil in the blunt regional ambitions and machinations of an assertive, even belligerent Iran, that has mastered the art of proxy wars by fighting Arabs with Arabs from Lebanon, to Syria, to Iraq and all the way to Yemen, and is still bent on becoming the regional hegemon.
The yea and the nay corners
There were serious arguments presented by the opponents and the supporters of the deal. The yea corner stressed that the deal will stop the production of heavy waters which eliminate Iran’s ability to produce plutonium, it places a ceiling for a decade on the quantity (and quality) of the centrifuges Iran is allowed to operate under a relatively enhanced, but not full proof, inspection regime, and that Iran will limit enrichment of uranium to 3.7 percent and cap its low enriched uranium to 300 kilograms, an amount insufficient to quickly assemble a bomb, for 15 years. The nay corner, stresses the limitations on the inspection regime which gives Iran at least 24 days’ advance notice before International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors can visit the nuclear facilities. The agreement will achieve Iran’s main immediate objective which is sanction relief, and release up to $150 billion that will enhance Iran’s ability to do more mischief through its proxies in the region. It is possible that in order to compensate the hardliners, who would supposedly ‘lose’ if the agreement is implemented, that more resources will go their way to buy their acquiescence. The agreement puts short limits on Iran’s ability to acquire ballistic missile technologies to eight years, and sales of conventional arms to Iran will be prohibited for only five years.
From the beginning of his presidency, President Obama looked at Iran, and saw the old Persia beckoning
What is not in dispute are the facts that Iran will be a threshold nuclear nation even before the expiration of the 15 year duration of the agreement, that most of the physical infrastructure of the nuclear program will remain intact, and the scientific knowledge will expand, and even if Iran remains in full compliance, the agreement gives it more nuclear capacity than it would need, if it is truly interested only in a strictly civilian program. The harsh reality is that while there are military options to degrade and to delay Iran’s nuclear program, there is no military solution to this problem; and if Iran wants to develop a nuclear device 15 or 20 years from now it will be next to impossible to prevent it from doing so. If a backward country with limited resources like North Korea can built nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them and a poor country like Pakistan can assemble scores of nuclear warheads with delivery systems, then surely Iran can do so. In this context, a region-wide system of containment, robustly enhanced and supported by the United States, including an American protective nuclear umbrella, similar to the one the U.S. erected in Europe during the Cold War, can go a long way in satisfying the legitimate concerns of America’s allies.
The allure of ancient cultures
The American-Iranian negotiations over the nuclear deal were a reminder of the contrasts between old and new powers. For an ancient culture like Iran that measures its history in millennia and centuries (almost 2500 years ago Persia was engaging the Greek city-states in battles that shaped Western Civilization) suspending a nuclear program for 10 or 15 years is barely a fleeting moment. Iran badly needs sanction relief to ensure the regime’s survival, and a tiny interregnum in the life of an ancient civilization can barely be noticed. Every time American officials negotiate with representatives of old, non-democratic cultures, like Iran or China, they encounter the civilizational heft of these cultures.
The diplomats of these cultures don’t operate like American diplomats do, that is according to 4 year cycles, or the myriad of domestic constraints from public opinion to congressional oversite, that are also measured in short attention spans. Secretary Kerry maybe very conscious of his legacy while negotiating with minister Zarif, and while Mr. Zarif may be interested in ensuring a legacy, his mandate is broader than that. These old cultures usually convey a sense of permanency, empowerment, endurance and patience. Their sense of time is very elastic, and they have a capacity to endure pain and absorb sacrifices. Their influence throughout history went way beyond their geographic boundaries. These old civilizations have their own allure and charm. See how Alexander the great was seduced by the allure of Persia. From the beginning of his presidency, President Obama looked at Iran, and saw the old Persia beckoning.
A president in search of a legacy
After almost six and half years of trying to shape events and influence outcomes in the Middle East, President Obama has very little to show for except the nuclear deal with Iran. From his first inaugural speech, the President wanted very much to reach out to Iran. President Obama would like his nuclear deal with Iran to be the Middle Eastern equivalent of President Richard Nixon’s historic opening to China. Although the President says he is not betting on the agreement to change Iran’s regional behavior or improve its abysmal human rights record, there is nonetheless ample evidence (and wishful thinking) to the contrary. In their on- the- record and background briefings, administration officials talk about their hope that the agreement and its financial windfall will hasten Iran’s reintegration into the global economy, by empowering the ‘moderate’ forces in the regime and the middle class and Iranian youth seeking to open up the country to the outside world. If Iran decides to partake in economic globalization, which is almost inevitable, it is likely to follow in China’s footsteps. The regime will maintain political control through the alliance of the clerical establishment and the powers that be behind the Revolutionary guards, while gradually opening the country to the world and the very products that the Iranian middle class and youth are yearning for. But the opening to the world will remain as long as possible, limited to the economic domain solely.
Humming a similar tune
The agreement itself is a recognition of Iran’s regional weight and influence, and represents an American (and European) shift in attitudes towards ending the old policy of isolating Iran. In April, the President said ‘it is possible that if we sign this nuclear deal, we strengthen the hand of those more moderate forces inside Iran’. It is not an exaggeration to say that President Obama would like to see the next decade (assuming the agreement is complied with) as one of transformation in Iran. The President hinted at that when he said ‘the deal offers an opportunity to move in a new direction. We should seize it’. Iran’s chief negotiator, the ever smiling foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, was humming a similar tune before the end of the Vienna talks when he issued a YouTube message in English hoping that the nuclear deal could create ‘new horizons to address important, common challenges’. Even the austere, unsmiling Ayatollah Ali Khamenei hinted in April, that Iran could entertain a different approach and cooperate on issues of mutual interests, of course with the usual caveats; ‘ if the other side gives up its usual diversionary tactics, this will become an experience for us that, very well, we can negotiate with them on other issues’.
The striking irony is that theocratic Iran, the country that sponsors major non-state actors such as Hezbollah and others that engage in violence and terror on its behalf in the region and beyond is projecting itself now as the bulwark against Islamist (Sunni) terrorism. Once again, the ever slick Zarif in an interview with CBS after the deal ‘ it is important for the people in the U.S. to look at the realities in the region. See who is supporting these very serious threats to our regional security and stability and who is defending the region against the threat of extremism, violence and sectarianism, and then they will see’. The emergence of the so-called ‘Islamic State’ (ISIS) as a common threat against the Iraqi regime, has helped to rehabilitate in practical terms, Iran’s notorious al-Quds force and its leader Qassem Soleimani designated as a terrorist by the U.S. because of the American blood on his hands, who is very instrumental in establishing the sectarian Shiite militias as an effective fighting force against ISIS.
Arabs exposed
Iran is saddled now with a plethora of regional burdens, stretching from propping up a failing regime in Syria and a disintegrating state at the same time, a persistent challenge from ISIS in Iraq, and a new challenge in Yemen. These burdens have deprived Iran from its previous hollow claims that it is seeking the mantle of leadership of the Muslim world, and not simply acting as a regional Shiite power. Yet Iran remains the major outside and decisive player in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon, and to a lesser extent in Yemen. If anything, the nuclear deal which alarmed the main players in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, will likely lead to the intensification of the on-going civil wars with regional powers doubling down on their support for their proxies. There is no prospect whatsoever, in the foreseeable future for an entente between Tehran and Riyadh. The Arab states talk occasionally about creating an effective joint Arab force, but that force at best is a chimera. The hemorrhaging and the disintegration in Syria will continue, Iraq’s sectarian and ethnic polarizations will continue to deepen, while Iran tighten its grip on it, and Yemen will experience more deprivation and despair and Lebanon will become more marginalized with Hezbollah, Iran’s formidable proxy penetrating its brittle institutions and destroying what’s left of its sovereignty.
Walid Jumblatt, a veteran Lebanese leader may have articulated what many Arabs feel about the nuclear deal with Iran at these painful and confusing times in the region when he said that the deal was reached ‘over the ruins of the Arab world’. In a short commentary, Jumblatt added: ‘It was concluded on the wreckage of the Arab world which has descended into chaos and darkness at a time when regional and international players content to watch Arab blood wasted as they seek only their interests’. Jumblatt linked the deal to the American invasion of Iraq and the war in Syria. Jumblatt’s hyperbole aside, he is touching a raw nerve in what seems to be a fading Arab region. While we should not ignore the centrality of human agency in understanding (and ultimately solving) these conflicts, Jumblatt’s observations bring into bold relief the depth of malaise, despair and alienation most Arabs feel while watching their world disintegrating.

Is a Western-Iranian alliance really the solution?
Mohammed Fahad al-Harthi/Al Arabiya/Saturday, 18 July 2015
Some politicians and analysts keep reiterating that the West has an interest in taming Iran and forming an alliance with it. They consider Sunni extremism as the fuel for the region’s crises and the reason for the creation of al-Qaeda and ISIS. Based on this assumption, they call for a fundamental change in the current political situation in our region. These calls coincide with the signing of the deal with Iran. Despite its condemnation of the “Great Satan,” Iran has been caught sleeping with the devil. Now Tehran has taken a calmer approach toward Uncle Sam and is calling for openness and talking about mutual interests. The Iranian regime came to power with the idea of exporting its revolution and ideologies to other nations Probably the article by Sir Christopher Meyer, former British ambassador to the U.S., in The Daily Telegraph, conveyed this sense when he said that the West’s interests are with the Iranian Shiites and not with the Arab Sunnis. He believes that fighting ISIS and other extremist organizations requires an alliance with Iran.
Simplifying the political situation
What is dangerous is that these calls simplify the political situation in the region and repeat strategic mistakes previously made by the West from which they did not learn. Iraq, which was destroyed by an American invasion, was then torn apart from the inside and handed as a gift to the Iranians. The late visionary Prince Saud al-Faisal told the Americans in a speech at the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, “We waged a war together to eject Iran from Iraq after ejecting Iraq from Kuwait and now we are giving the whole country to Iran for no reason.” Unfortunately, despite its history and origins, Iraq now falls under Iranian dominance. The game of alliances in the region is a serious one and the political history shows how alliances and external interventions lead to tragic results. Despite efforts to portray the conflict as a Sunni-Shiite one, it is a purely political dispute based on different political ideologies. The Iranian regime came to power with the idea of exporting its revolution and ideologies to other nations and using religious beliefs in politics. At the same time, political thought in the Gulf aims to avoid problems and wars and use diplomatic channels and economic interests instead. This has led those states away from the idea of revolution and other similar phenomena.
Region’s internal politics and social structure
Sir Christopher wrongly believes that the situation in the region came about at the push of a button. This shows what I believe is his ignorance of the region’s internal politics and social structure. Any mistake will lead the West to being trapped in quicksand and will need an expert who understands the complexities to solve the problems. Iran’s politics, even during the period of sanctions, was to interfere in Arab affairs and support militias which made it a permanent part of the problem. It would be politically naive to believe that Iran will turn into a state with good intentions once the sanctions are lifted. Politics uses the language of power and instead of speaking about a change in strategic alliances in the region as if it were a prize for troublemaking countries, the discourse should aim to have a commitment by Iran to stop its intervention in Arab states and respect their sovereignty. Such a commitment should happen through the Security Council in order to ensure effective implementation. Correcting one mistake with another is not good politics. ISIS and the other terrorist organizations are a product of the West’s inaction in Syria which allowed the extremists to expand. The sectarian policies of former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki contributed to the increase of sectarianism in Iraq and marginalized the main sections in Iraqi society.
Security breakdown
These factors gave rise to a security breakdown which led a third of the state to fall within hours. Consequently, the situation cannot be resolved by ignoring these issues. Understanding basic reasons is a way to develop appropriate solutions and those solutions start from the current opportunity. This agreement gives Iran the opportunity to continue its expansionist policies. This will open a nest of vipers in the region and launch a series of wars that will not only destroy the whole area but will also harm the West and the entire world.
Despite all the changes in the region, the GCC, along with the principal Arab states such as Egypt, Jordan and Morocco, remains the Arab world’s safety valve as their moderate policies aim to avoid conflicts and crises. Major powers have a responsibility to promote peace and security in the region.

US warns Israel against 'provocative' plan to raze Palestinian village
JPOST.COM STAFF/07/18/2015/
The United States on Friday warned Israel against following through with a planned demolition of a tiny Palestinian village in the South Hebron Hills of the West Bank. Israeli authorities say that many of the structures in the village of Sussiya were built illegally, but the US State Department on Friday said that razing the buildings would constitute a provocative act. "We’re closely following developments in the village of Sussiya in the West Bank, and we strongly urge the Israeli authorities to refrain from carrying out any demolitions in the village," said State Department spokesman John Kirby. "Demolition of this Palestinian village or of parts of it, and evictions of Palestinians from their homes would be harmful and provocative."
Human rights groups say that if Israel goes through with the demolition, it would force the more than 300 residents of Sussiya to leave since they would not be able to survive the harsh desert climate.
"Such actions have an impact beyond those individuals and families who are evicted," Kirby said. "We are concerned that the demolition of this village may worsen the atmosphere for a peaceful resolution and would set a damaging standard for displacement and land confiscation, particularly given settlement-related activity in the area."
"We urge Israeli authorities to work with the residents of the village to finalize a plan for the village that addresses the residents’ humanitarian needs."
The State Department echoed a similar plea from the European Union, which last month called on Israel not to demolish the illegal village.
“On behalf of the EU, I call on the government of Israel to reverse its plans to carry out demolitions here in Sussiya,” its representative to the Palestinian territories, John Gatt-Rutter.
As part of a stepped-up campaign by the EU and the Palestinian Authority against such IDF demolitions, Gatt-Rutter visited the village in the morning, along with PA Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah, under the watchful eye of the IDF, which was stationed just outside.
“Sussiya has become a byword for policies that deprive the Palestinians of their land and their resources,” Gatt-Rutter said.
He and Hamdallah sat by a plastic folding table under a tent, to speak with villagers and representatives from 23 of the 28 EU countries, all of which have representative offices that handle relations with the Palestinian territories.
Palestinian flags fluttered above the tent and a number of Palestinian security officers sat inside.
Just a short distance away, across the barren, dusty brown landscape, one could see the adjacent Jewish settlement that bears the same name, Sussiya.
Children on the swings in the small playground of Palestinian Sussiya shouted out for the cameras, “One, two, three, four, occupation no more.”
Gatt-Rutter told those in the tent that his presence in the village was “intended to indicate the seriousness with which the EU views the orders to demolish Palestinian homes and structures in this village and to evict the villagers.”
The EU, he said, has worked to support the village through educational initiatives and by providing temporary shelters. The EU symbol is on the sign to the village and on at least one of its structures. Last month, the nongovernmental group Regavim charged that the EU is helping Palestinians build hundreds of illegal structures in the West Bank, in an attempt to help shore up the Palestinian hold on Area C of the West Bank.
In Sussiya, Gatt-Ratter said, “Israel has a duty to facilitate Palestinian development in these areas occupied by it, including in Area C, which represents over 60 percent of the West Bank.
“Palestinian development, not Palestinian exclusion, should be at the heart of Israel’s policies here in Area C,” he said.
Unfortunately, he added, Sussiya is not a unique case. Israel is also working to relocate Palestinian herder communities and Beduin in an area of the West Bank just outside of Jerusalem, on the way to the Dead Sea. Hamdallah and Gatt-Ratter made a similar visit to those communities in May.
Israel should “halt efforts to transfer Beduin and other herder communities elsewhere in the West Bank,” he said.
Casting an eye in the direction of the nearby Jewish settlement, Gatt-Ratter said, “We can see the settlements which surround this piece of land.
“The EU, which you know has a clear position on settlements which are illegal according to international law and threaten the viability of a two-state solution, in which the EU has a profound and significant interest,” he said.
Hamdallah called on the EU representatives to pressure Israel to halt the destruction of Sussiya. The village’s resistance to such plans, he said, is a source of “pride for the PA,” which would do everything it could to support it, he said. The state wants to relocate the village to a plot of territory that is close to Area B, which is under the civil control of the PA.
According to a report on Sussiya published by the NGO B’Tselem, the village was initially located in the middle of an archeological site.
In 1986, the IDF forced the village to relocate to its present location. The villagers rebuilt their homes of tents and temporary structures on agricultural land they owned just a few hundred meters away. The fate of the village is now before the High Court of Justice, which is examining a petition by Rabbis for Human Rights with regard to a master plan it prepared that could allow for the legalization of the structures. The civil administration has rejected the master plan, but Rabbis for Human Rights appealed the decision and asked the High Court to intervene. The court agreed to hear the case but failed to approve an injunction to prevent the demolition of the village during the judicial proceedings. Members of the village and nongovernmental groups that fear that existing demolition orders against the village could be carried out at any time, have mounted a stiff public relations battle in support of Sussiya.
The coordinator of government activities in the territories said of the Sussiya village, “It’s a gathering of illegal houses next to the archeological site of Susya. It has been expanded through the years despite the issuance of warrants.”
The spokesman for the South Hebron Hills Regional Council, Assaf Fassy, accused the PA of supporting illegal growth such as occurred in Sussiya to achieve its policy objective of creating contiguous Palestinian territory between Gaza and the West Bank. “The PA has been trying for a long period to create a sterile [‘Judenrein’] Palestinian territory that connects Gaza and Judea and Samaria,” he said. “It is for this reason that they are using international pressure and engaging in activities that are illegal,” Fassy said.
**Tovah Lazaroff contributed to this report.

Question: "What does the Bible mean that we are not to judge others?"
GotQuestions.org/
Answer: Jesus’ command not to judge others could be the most widely quoted of His sayings, even though it is almost invariably quoted in complete disregard of its context. Here is Jesus’ statement: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged” (Matthew 7:1)Many people use this verse in an attempt to silence their critics, interpreting Jesus’ meaning as “You don’t have the right tell me I’m wrong.” Taken in isolation, Jesus’ command “Do not judge” does indeed seem to preclude all negative assessments. However, there is much more to the passage than those three words.
The Bible’s command that we not judge others does not mean we cannot show discernment. Immediately after Jesus says, “Do not judge,” He says, “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs” (Matthew 7:6). A little later in the same sermon, He says, “Watch out for false prophets. . . . By their fruit you will recognize them” (verses 15–16). How are we to discern who are the “dogs” and “pigs” and “false prophets” unless we have the ability to make a judgment call on doctrines and deeds? Jesus is giving us permission to tell right from wrong.
Also, the Bible’s command that we not judge others does not mean all actions are equally moral or that truth is relative. The Bible clearly teaches that truth is objective, eternal, and inseparable from God’s character. Anything that contradicts the truth is a lie—but, of course, to call something a “lie” is to pass judgment. To call adultery or murder a sin is to likewise to pass judgment—but it’s also to agree with God. When Jesus said not to judge others, He did not mean that no one can identify sin for what it is, based on God’s definition of sin.
And the Bible’s command that we not judge others does not mean there should be no mechanism for dealing with sin. The Bible has a whole book entitled Judges. The judges in the Old Testament were raised up by God Himself (Judges 2:18). The modern judicial system, including its judges, is a necessary part of society. In saying, “Do not judge,” Jesus was not saying, “Anything goes.”
Elsewhere, Jesus gives a direct command to judge: “Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly” (John 7:24). Here we have a clue as to the right type of judgment versus the wrong type. Taking this verse and some others, we can put together a description of the sinful type of judgment:
Superficial judgment is wrong. Passing judgment on someone based solely on appearances is sinful (John 7:24). It is foolish to jump to conclusions before investigating the facts (Proverbs 18:13). Simon the Pharisee passed judgment on a woman based on her appearance and reputation, but he could not see that the woman had been forgiven; Simon thus drew Jesus’ rebuke for his unrighteous judgment (Luke 7:36–50).
Hypocritical judgment is wrong. Jesus’ command not to judge others in Matthew 7:1 is preceded by comparisons to hypocrites (Matthew 6:2, 5, 16) and followed by a warning against hypocrisy (Matthew 7:3–5). When we point out the sin of others while we ourselves commit the same sin, we condemn ourselves (Romans 2:1).
Harsh, unforgiving judgment is wrong. We are “always to be gentle toward everyone” (Titus 3:2). It is the merciful who will be shown mercy (Matthew 5:7), and, as Jesus warned, “In the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you” (Matthew 7:2).
Self-righteous judgment is wrong. We are called to humility, and “God opposes the proud” (James 4:6). The Pharisee in Jesus’ parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector was confident in his own righteousness and from that proud position judged the publican; however, God sees the heart and refused to forgive the Pharisee’s sin (Luke 18:9–14).
Untrue judgment is wrong. The Bible clearly forbids bearing false witness (Proverbs 19:5). “Slander no one” (Titus 3:2).
Christians are often accused of “judging” or intolerance when they speak out against sin. But opposing sin is not wrong. Holding aloft the standard of righteousness naturally defines unrighteousness and draws the slings and arrows of those who choose sin over godliness. John the Baptist incurred the ire of Herodias when he spoke out against her adultery with Herod (Mark 6:18–19). She eventually silenced John, but she could not silence the truth (Isaiah 40:8).
Believers are warned against judging others unfairly or unrighteously, but Jesus commends “right judgment” (John 7:24, ESV). We are to be discerning (Colossians 1:9; 1 Thessalonians 5:21). We are to preach the whole counsel of God, including the Bible’s teaching on sin (Acts 20:27; 2 Timothy 4:2). We are to gently confront erring brothers or sisters in Christ (Galatians 6:1). We are to practice church discipline (Matthew 18:15–17). We are to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15).
Recommended Resources: Judging Others: The Dangers of Playing God by Ken Sande and Logos Bible Software.
What's new on GotQuestions.org?

Last chance for Christian mother facing gallows to be decided by Pakistan's Supreme Court
Asia Bibi Appeals Blasphemy Conviction to Pakistan's Highest Court
07/17/2015 Washington D.C. (International Christian Concern) - International Christian Concern has confirmed that Asia Bibi, a Christian mother sentenced to death for allegedly committing blasphemy, will be given one last appeal to avoid execution in Pakistan. The Supreme Court of Pakistan has set the appeal date for Wednesday starting at 9:00 a.m. Pakistan time.
Human rights and religious freedom organizations, consider Bibi's case symbolic of the persecution faced by Christians in Pakistan and of how the country's blasphemy laws are widely abused.
"The hearing will take place on July 22nd in Lahore," Saif-Ul-Malook, Bibi's Supreme Court Advocate told ICC. "I am very much sure and optimistic that the honorable Supreme Court will acquit Bibi. The evidence available as the record is, is not sufficient evidence for the Islamic standards of evidence to sustain the conviction."
Bibi has been on death row since her conviction and death sentence were announced by the Session's Court in District Nankana, Pujab, in 2010. Her appeal hearing was delayed and rescheduled seven times but was finally held October 16, 2014 at the Lahore High Court. At that appeal, Justice Anwar-ul-Haq, one member of a two-judge bench hearing the appeal, passed a short order confirming Bibi's death sentence.
This supreme court appeal represents Bibi's last chance to avoid execution through Pakistan's court system. At the hearing scheduled on Wednesday the supreme court will decide whether to "grant or reject" Bibi's appeal.
If granted, the supreme court will set a future date for Bibi's appeal over the course of several hearings before deciding whether to uphold or overturn her death sentence. If the death sentence is upheld, Bibi's only chance of avoiding execution would be through a presidential pardon, a power granted to Pakistan's President in Article 45 of Pakistan's Constitution.
"The case against Asia Bibi is one of the best examples of how Christians and other religious minorities are abused in Pakistan by fundamentalists wielding Pakistan's controversial blasphemy laws. The blasphemy laws were originally written to protect against religious intolerance in Pakistan, but the law has warped into a tool used by extremists and others to settle personal scores or spread religious hatred against Pakistan's vulnerable religious minorities," said William Stark, ICC's Regional Manager for South Asia. "Sadly, the vast majority of blasphemy accusations brought against Christians and others are false. Pressure from Islamic radical groups and general discrimination against Christians in Pakistan has transformed courts into little more than rubber stamps for blasphemy accusations brought against Christians, regardless of the evidence brought to bear in the case."
The blasphemy accusation against Bibi originates from a dispute that took place in June 2009 between Bibi and a group of Muslim women with whom she had been harvesting berries in Sheikhupura. The Muslim women became angry with Bibi when she, a Christian whom they considered unclean, drank water from the same water bowl as the Muslim women. An argument between Bibi and the Muslim women ensued and later the Muslim women reported to a local cleric that Bibi had blasphemed against Islam by saying, "My Christ died for me, what did Muhammed do for you?"
In April 2014, ICC held a press conference on "The Hope and Peril of Religious Minorities in Pakistan" at the National Press Club. As part of that hearing ICC highlighted Bibi's case by reading a letter written by her husband, Ashiq Masih, saying, "Since Asia was sentenced to death in November 2010, my family has lived in constant fear. We are now trying our best to present the final case to the Supreme Court. But we are convinced that Asia will only be saved from being hanged if the honorable Prime Minister Sharif and President Hussain grant her pardon. No one should be killed only for drinking a glass or water."
Upon learning that the supreme court had scheduled Bibi's appeal, Masih told ICC that, "It is a great pleasure that Asia's appeal hearing has been fixed by the Supreme Court. Our whole family is praying for her release so she may come out of the prison and may live with her children. May God protect her and all our children so that we may live safely and peacefully together."
www.persecution.org | E-mail: icc@persecution.org

Iran Deal: The Great Bamboozle Festival
Douglas Murray/Gatestone Institute
July 18, 2015
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6183/iran-deal
A generous person might say that this is unimportant -- that in Iran, chanting "Death to America" is like throat-clearing.
Surely only an uncharitable person would wonder why Iran's rulers are buying the technology they would need to repel any attack on their nuclear project at the same time as they are promising the Americans that they are not developing nuclear weaponry.
What exactly is it that the Obama administration thinks has changed about the leadership of Iran? Of all the questions which remain unanswered in the wake of the P5+1 deal with Iran, this one is perhaps the most unanswered of all.
There must, after all, be something that a Western leader sees when an attempt is made to "normalize" relations with a rogue regime -- what Richard Nixon saw in the Chinese Communist Party that persuaded him that an unfreezing of relations was possible, or what Margaret Thatcher saw in the eyes of Mikhail Gorbachev, which persuaded her that here was a counterpart who could finally be trusted.
After all, the outward signs with Iran would seem to remain unpromising. Last Friday in Tehran, just as the P5+1 were wrapping up their deal with the Iranians, the streets of Iran were playing host to "Al-Quds Day." This, in the Iranian calendar, is the day, inaugurated by the late Ayatollah Khomeini, when anti-Israel and anti-American activity come to the fore even more than usual. Encouraged by the regime, tens of thousands of Iranians march in the streets calling for the end of Israel and "Death to America". Not only Israeli and American flags were burned -- British flags were also torched, in a touching reminder that Iran is the only country that still believes Britain runs the world.
The latest in a long line of "moderate" Iranian leaders, President Hassan Rouhani, turned up at one of these parades himself to see the Israeli and American flags being burned. Did he intervene? Did he explain to the crowd that they had got the wrong memo -- that America is now our friend and that they ought at least to concentrate their energies on the mass-burning of Stars of David? No, he took part as usual, and the crowds reacted as usual.
Participants in Tehran's Quds Day rally burn U.S. and Israeli flags, on July 10, 2015. (Image source: ISNA)
It was the same just a few weeks ago, when the Iranian Parliament met to discuss the Vienna deal. On that occasion, after some authorized disputation, the Iranian Parliament broke up, with the representatives chanting "Death to America."
A generous person might say that this is unimportant -- that in Iran, chanting "Death to America" is like throat-clearing. This is just what we are being told -- that these messages are "just for domestic consumption," and don't mean anything.
Putting aside what they say for a moment, what is it about Iran's actions that have changed enough to persuade the U.S. government that the Iranian regime might be a regime in transition?
Internally there has been no let-up in the regime's campaign of oppression against their own Iranian people: hanging people for a range of "crimes," from being gay to being a poet found guilty of "blasphemy," continue.
Iran has hanged more than a thousand of these internal "enemies" in the last eighteen months alone, as negotiators sat in Vienna thrashing out a deal. In the wider region, Iran remains the most voraciously ambitious, and perhaps the only successfully outgoing, regional power. In the years since the "Arab Spring" began, only Iran has been able significantly to extend its reach and grip in the region. It now has a vastly increased presence and influence in Yemen, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. It continues to arm its terrorist proxies, including Hezbollah, which in turn continues to increase its build-up of rockets and other munitions on the northern border of Israel.
Iran has not released the four American hostages it continues to hold -- Pastor Saeed Abedini, for the crime of converting to Christianity; Washington Post journalist Jason Rezian, on the patently nonsensical charges of espionage; former U.S. Marine Amir Mirza Hekmati, who went to Iran to visit his grandmother; and retired DEA and FBI agent Robert Levinson, who was abducted eight years ago and has not been heard from since early 2013. This, in spite of last-minute requests from Iran to lift a ban on conventional weapons, acceded to by the members of the P5+1, wasting yet another abandoned opportunity actually to get something in return for their total surrender.
From the outside, it would seem that very little has changed in the rhetoric of Iran and very little has changed in the regime's behavior. That is why the mystery of what change the U.S. administration and its partners see in the eyes of the Ayatollahs is so doubly curious.
Because the nature of the deal makes it exceptionally important that there is some change. In the next decade, in exchange for the supposed "managed inspections" of limited Iranian sites, the Ayatollas are going to enjoy a trade explosion with a cash bonanza of $140 billion unfrozen assets, just to start them off. Throughout that same decade, there will be a lifting of restrictions on -- among other things -- the sale and purchase by Iran of conventional arms and munitions. Iran will finally be able to purchase the long-awaited anti-aircraft system that the Russians (also of course present at the table in Vienna) want to sell them. This system -- among the most advanced surface-to-air missile systems -- will be able to shoot down any American, Israeli or other jets that might ever come to destroy Iran's nuclear project. And surely only an uncharitable person would wonder why Iran's rulers are buying the technology they would need to repel any attack on their nuclear project at the same time as they are promising the Americans that they are not developing nuclear weaponry.
And it is even more important that the signs of hope located by the U.S. administration are correct, because after all, barring an internal uprising -- which the Vienna deal makes more unlikely than ever (having strengthened the diplomatic and financial hand of the regime) -- it is safe to say that over the next decade and beyond the Mullahs will remain in charge in Iran.
In the U.S., Germany, France and Britain, by contrast, who knows who will be in charge? In Britain, the Labour party may have romped to victory with, at its head, Jeremy Corbyn MP (currently Labour leadership contender) -- a man who has openly and repeatedly praised Hamas and Hezbollah as his "friends." That would certainly change the dynamics.
But put aside such a potentially unlikely situation and assume that Britain and America simply do politics as usual. In ten years, there will have been four U.S. governments overseeing the implementation of this deal and scrutinizing the inspections-compliance of the Iranian regime.
In the UK, there will have been at least two new governments. Who is to say that all these different governments -- of whatever party or political stripe -- will pay the same attention, know what to look out for, and feel as robust about totally unenforceable "snapback sanctions" and other details of the implementation of this deal as the signatories to the deal appear to expect? Is it possible that the Iranians actually know this?
Perhaps, after all, there is something in the eyes of the Ayatollahs. Maybe US Secretary of State John Kerry and President Barack Obama really have looked into the Iranian leaders' eyes and seen a smile. But whether it is for the reason they appear to believe is, of course, quite another matter.

Charlie Hebdo Editor: No More Mohammed Cartoons
Raheem Kassam/Jul 17, 2015
Cross-posted from Breitbart
http://www.meforum.org/blog/2015/07/charlie-hebdo
The end of an era?
The editor of satirical French magazine Charlie Hebdo has declared that he will not publish any more cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed, just six months after the Islamist terrorist attack on the magazine that killed 11 civilians and one police officer. Speaking to the Hamburg-based Stern, Laurent Sourisseau, the cartoonist and publishing editor who took a gunshot to the shoulder in the attacks, said, "We've done our job. We have defended the right to caricature." Some may view the magazine's new approach as a capitulation to the radical Islamist terrorists demanding censorship in fealty to their fundamentalist ideals. The fact is that images of the Prophet Mohammed have been commonplace throughout Islam's history. "We still believe that we have the right to criticize all religions," Sourisseau added.
Sourisseau was present as his colleagues were murdered in January. In fact, he himself had to play dead to avoid further targeting. But his interview in Stern also reveals that he believes that new pioneers in the area of free speech have taken up the Charlie Hebdo mantle.
"Now others are off," he said – a signal that he is pleased that there are others, such as Pamela Gellar and Geert Wilders, leading the charge. Breitbart London understands that a draw Mohammed cartoon competition will soon come to London, as well as having reared its head in other European cities. "I prefer to die standing than living on my knees," explained Charlie Hebdo editor Stéphane Charbonnier before his murder in January. Last month, Dutch politician Geert Wilders told Breitbart London that he believed every country should have a draw Mohammed contest, in order to draw a line in the sand on free speech. "You should be able to depict Mohammad without a death sentence. We live in the West, not Saudi Arabia or Pakistan," he said.Twelve people were killed early this year in Paris, when Islamist gunmen brothers Said and Cherif Kouachi broke into the Charlie Hebdo offices and opened fire with assault rifles on the magazine's staff. Then-editor of the paper, Stéphane Charbonnier, as well as famous cartoonist Cabu, were killed, resulting in millions pouring out onto the streets of France and other European countries to protest against the fundamentalist Islamic threat, using the hashtag #JeSuisCharlie. **Raheem Kassam is a fellow at the Middle East Forum and editor-in-chief of Breitbart London

Claiming Food Is Halal a Federal Crime?
Johanna Markind/The American Thinker
July 15, 2015
http://www.meforum.org/5389/halal-food-federal-law
The US Department of Justice appears to be criminally prosecuting people for failing to satisfy Islamic religious standards, thereby putting the First Amendment's Establishment Clause at risk.
The case concerns the financial empire of the Aossey family of Cedar Rapids, Iowa. To summarize briefly, last year the government indicted brothers Jalel and Yahya Aossey, along with two companies they operate, Midamar Corporation (Midamar) and Islamic Services of America, Inc. (ISA). Midamar distributes supposedly halal meat, which is to say, meat slaughtered according to Islamic law. Islamic Services of America, Inc. (ISA) certifies meat and other products as halal. Jalel, Yahya, and their father, William (Bill) Aossey, serve as corporate directors. Yahya is president of ISA. Bill is president of Midamar.
Federal courts have generally declined to intervene in claims of religious fraud.
ISA's website claims the company is a "globally recognized symbol of Halal integrity. Islamic Services of America is a leading Halal Certification body in the United States and North America, recognized internationally." Midamar's website claims it is "a trusted Halal brand that has earned a solid reputation for Halal integrity." Previously, Midamar's website also claimed the company was a "trusted Halal food supplier and sponsor for the annual conferences and conventions hosted by ISNA, CAIR, AMC, ICNA, and MAS, and W.D. Muhammad" – each of which has "had dealings with Islamic extremist and/or hate groups." It is unclear whether Midamar still supplies food to these groups.
The government's theory is that the defendants sold non-halal meat by misrepresenting it as halal. Some of the claimed misconduct involved falsifying paperwork to make it appear as though the meat were slaughtered at a warehouse whose meat was halal, whereas in fact it was slaughtered at another warehouse whose meat was not halal. Other claims are even more obviously religious. For example, the indictment states, "Contrary to representations made by defendants... beef certified by defendant ISA as complying with the Halal slaughter standards... had not been slaughtered in accordance with the represented or required standards." It also claims defendants misrepresented "the manner of slaughter" and "the level of adherence to certain represented Halal practices and standards."
Bill Aossey was separately indicted two months before the others. The charges against him were more straightforward and less encumbered with religious claims.
Bill Aossey (2nd from right) receives a certificate of recognition for 40 years of business in Iowa from Sen. Chuck Grassley in 2014, accompanied by his sons Jalel (left) and Yahya (right).
On June 5, Jalel and Yahya Aossey, along with Midamar and ISA, filed a motion to dismiss some claims against them on the theory that the court could not decide whether they lied about the meat's halal status without making religious determinations that would violate the Establishment Clause. The defendants complain, "The United States Attorney's office seeks the criminal enforcement of adherence to Halal slaughter requirements of the Muslim countries of Malaysia, Indonesia, Kuwait, and UAE."
It is possible that the charges are sufficiently focused on objective issues of false paperwork to survive the defendants' challenge intact.
It is worth noting that last January, former Midamar operations manager Philip Payne pleaded guilty to falsifying US Department of Agriculture marks of inspection of halal meat shipments, "to give the false impression that shipments of beef complied with import requirements of Malaysia and Indonesia where the beef was shipped and also complied with US export requirements." Payne also admitted that some meat Midamar sold as halal was actually kosher.
But federal courts have generally declined to intervene in claims of religious fraud, as noted in defendants' motion. In the 1995 case Barghout v. Bureau of Kosher Meat & Food Control, the federal Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a Baltimore ordinance making it a misdemeanor to sell non-kosher food mislabeled as kosher. Commack Self-Service Kosher Meats, Inc. v. Rubin is a 2000 case in which a federal court struck down New York State laws aimed at protecting consumers from fraudulent claims that food is kosher. In the 2013 case Wallace v. ConAgra Foods, Inc., the lower court declined on First Amendment grounds to hear plaintiffs' claim that the defendant "failed to slaughter cattle used in its products in compliance with 'objective' standards" required for the meat to be considered kosher; an appeals court later returned the case to state court on jurisdictional grounds.
The ACLU is absent from the case, despite previously opposing a government role in identifying religiously acceptable food.
One "usual suspect" has been notably absent from the proceedings. The American Civil Liberties Union has previously opposed government involvement in identifying religiously acceptable food. Besides representing George Barghout in the case noted above, it filed a lawsuit in 2009 challenging the constitutionality of a Georgia law, the Kosher Food Labeling Act. "By mandating that any food sold as kosher in the state of Georgia must meet the 'Orthodox Hebrew religious rules and requirements,'" the ACLU explained, "the challenged statute delegitimizes alternative interpretations of kosher adhered to in other Jewish communities." That suit was voluntarily dismissed after Georgia changed its law. Despite its track record on the issue, the ACLU did not respond to inquiry about whether it had any Establishment Clause concerns over prosecuting someone for halal meat violations.
The ACLU's Iowa chapter likewise declined to express an opinion about the prosecution. Interestingly, ACLU-Iowa was previously on the same side as the Aosseys on an Establishment Clause issue. Back in 2003, the Aosseys were involved in a project of Muslim Youth Camps of America (MYCA) to build a camp on the shores of Coralville Lake. The proposed development tract was owned by the US Army Corps of Engineers, and would have included construction of a 36-foot high prayer tower, in addition to a conference center, cabins, and a caretaker's residence. Bill Aossey was MYCA's representative, and Jalel Aossey served as a board member. On that occasion, ACLU-Iowa had no concerns about the prayer tower on federal land violating the Establishment Clause. About the current case, ACLU-Iowa has taken no position.
The government has not yet responded to the motion. The court gave it until one week after the conclusion of Bill Aossey's trial to respond. The trial concluded July 13 with a verdict of guilty on 15 of the 19 charges against him. Jalel and Yahya Aossey are scheduled to begin trial on September 28.
**Johanna Markind is associate counselor at the Middle East Forum

UK's First Female Sharia Judge: 'We Can't Ask Muslims Not to Have More than One Wife'
Raheem Kassam /Cross-posted from Breitbart/July 17/15
Britain's first female Sharia law judge has issued a brazen warning that flies in the face of UK law, stating that the "government cannot ask Muslims not to have more than one wife." The news comes on the back of a report by the Times newspaper which claims that Britain is experiencing a "surge" in Sharia marriages, as young British Muslims adopt a more hardline religious stance than their parents.
The Times reports:
As many as 100,000 couples are living in such marriages, which are not valid under UK law, experts said. Ministers have raised fears that women can be left without the right to a fair share of assets if the relationship ends, while others are forced to return to abusive "husbands." A leading Islamic family lawyer warned that the increase in Sharia ceremonies among the 2.7 million-strong Muslim population in Britain was also behind a growth in "secret polygamy." "Probably a quarter of all couples I see involve polygamy issues," Aina Khan told The Times. "There has been a huge rise in recent years because people can have a secret nikah [Islamic marriage] and no one will know about it." The growth in a parallel marriage system that bypassed the register office was being driven by Muslims aged below 30, who were becoming more religious, she said. Other factors include finding a way around the expectation of no sex before marriage and a fear of British family courts, which presume that assets should be split equally. Muslim Arbitration Tribunals, colloquially known as Sharia courts, have existed in the United Kingdom since 1996, when the Arbitration Act began to allow for different religious laws to be applied in cases such as divorce. Muslim Arbitration Tribunals, colloquially known as Sharia courts, have existed in the UK since 1996. While the tribunals are supposed to work within UK law, recent reports suggest that young Muslims are not registering their marriages with the government under UK civil law, instead simply using nikah ceremonies, which can lead to men having a number of wives, and none of the legal responsibilities towards them usually required under the 1949 Marriage Act. Now Amra Bone, who is the UK's first female Sharia council judge, has said that "the government cannot ask Muslims not to have more than one wife. People have a right to decide for themselves," implying that British Muslims are free to operate outside UK law, as a rule unto themselves and the Sharia courts they feel are legitimate. Muslim women who enter into marriage in Islamic ceremonies are often duped into thinking that the marriage under Islamic law is enough to protect them under UK law. As such, they receive none of the usual protections under UK law, such as assets being divided in cases of divorce.
**Raheem Kassam is a fellow at the Middle East Forum and editor-in-chief of Breitbart London

How Israel Might Destroy Iran's Nuclear Program
Daniel Pipes/National Review Online/July 16, 2015
Israeli alternatives in dealing with the Iranian nuclear threat
The Vienna deal has been signed and likely will soon be ratified, which raises the question: Will any government intervene militarily to stop the nearly inevitable Iranian nuclear buildup? Obviously it will not be the American or Russian governments or any of the other four signatories. Practically speaking, the question comes down to Israel, where a consensus holds that the Vienna deal makes an Israeli attack more likely. But no one outside the Israeli security apparatus, including myself, knows its intentions. That ignorance leaves me free to speculate as follows. Three scenarios of attack seem possible: Airplanes. Airplanes crossed international boundaries and dropped bombs in the 1981 Israeli attack on an Iraqi nuclear installation and in the 2007 attack on a Syrian one, making this the default assumption for Iran. Studies show this to be difficult but attainable. Special ops. These are already underway: computer virus attacks on Iranian systems unconnected to the Internet that should be immune, assassinations of top-ranking Iranian nuclear scientists, and explosions at nuclear installations.Israel will likely intervene in some capacity to stop the Iranian nuclear buildup. Presumably, Israelis had a hand in at least some of these attacks and, presumably, they could increase their size and scope, possibly disrupting the entire nuclear program. Unlike the dispatch of planes across several countries, special operations have the advantage of reaching places like Fordow, far from Israel, and of leaving little or no signature. Nuclear weapons. This doomsday weapon, which tends to be little discussed, would probably be launched from submarines. It hugely raises the stakes and so would only be resorted to, in the spirit of "Never Again," if the Israelis were desperate. Of these alternatives, I predict the Netanyahu government will most likely opt for the second, which is also the most challenging to pull off (especially now that the great powers promised to help the Iranians protect their nuclear infrastructure). Were this unsuccessful, it will turn to planes, with nuclear weapons as a last resort.
Daniel Pipes (DanielPipes.org, @DanielPipes) is president of the Middle East Forum.

Swedish Jihadi: "Go There with a Bomb"
One month of Islam in Sweden: June 2015
Ingrid Carlqvist/July 148, 2015
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6144/swedish-jihadi
Translation of the original text: Svensk jihadist: "Gå dit med en bomb i stället"
"Muslims in Sweden will become more and more degraded ... so instead of putting on a T-shirt and going to the most hated place for Allah just to stand there and do dawah [missionize], you should go there with a bomb instead. ... Now is the time to show who the earth belongs to!!! ... Save yourself from narr [hellfire] by killing a kafir." — Mikael Skråmo, Swedish convert to Islam. If the 18-year-old had been a Swedish citizen, the Security Service would not have been able to stop him from going to Syria: it is not yet illegal in Sweden to travel to join ISIS or any other terror group. They would have had to be content with seeing him off, and perhaps politely asking for an interview if and when he came back. "Why are these attacks happening during Ramadan? It's because the jihadis don't view the violence as something unholy. If the violence is happening for God's sake and according to the rules Islam is perceived to decree, it is in fact a holy action. To the jihadis, this type of holy violence is more meritorious in God's eyes than fasting, prayer and charity. ... In the hadith, jihad in the month of Ramadan is portrayed as giving extra glory." — Mohamed Omar, poet and social commentator. "The situation in the suburbs is a disaster for Sweden." — Mona Sahlin, national coordinator of the struggle against violent extremists.
In early June, a public debate began on the oppression of women in the Muslim-dominated suburbs of Sweden. Zeliha Dagli, who labels herself a secular feminist, wrote in an article in the newspaper Aftonbladet that she fled Turkey 30 years ago, but now wants to seek asylum "again" -- in Sweden. Dagli lives in Husby, the Stockholm suburb that made headlines around the world in the summer of 2013, when it was plagued by massive immigrant riots. Dagli says these suburbs are no longer a part of Sweden, but, rather, redolent of the Middle East. She writes that her everyday life is being more and more influenced by suburban fundamentalists:
"I want a safe haven and I want to be able to drink a glass of beer with my friends Lars, Hassan, Maria, Osman, Ayse and others. I want to go to the Senior Citizens Association and listen to jazz and dance the twist. I want to grow vegetables in the garden and wear short pants, and go to the bathhouse in a bikini. In my neighborhood, I want to escape the judgmental looks of men staring at me. I want to bring home whomever I like, but I can't do these things today because my rights are limited and controlled in my neighborhood. These bearded 'shadows' frighten me."
In a televised debate, Mona Sahlin, Sweden's "national coordinator of the struggle against violent extremists," was forced to admit that the situation in the suburbs is a "disaster for Sweden." Ironically, Sahlin herself has been instrumental in laying the groundwork for contempt against Swedish culture, by saying in reply to a question about what Swedish culture is:
"I've been asked that a lot, but I can't put my finger on what Swedish culture might be. I think that might be the reason many Swedes envy the immigrants. You have a culture, an identity, a history, something that binds you together. And what do we have? We have Midsummer's Eve and 'corny' things like that."[1]
On June 8, a Norwegian teenager was apprehended at Gothenburg's Landvetter Airport by the Swedish Security Service. The young man was on his way to join ISIS; the arrest was made thanks to Norwegian authorities, who had put out a warrant for him. The remarkable thing is that if the 18-year-old had been a Swedish citizen, nobody would have been able to stop him from going: it is not yet illegal in Sweden to travel to join ISIS or any other terror group. The Security Service would have had to be content with seeing him off, and perhaps politely asking for an interview if and when he came back.
On June 10, the alternative online newspaper Fria Tider noted that an 18-year-old Somali man had been taken into custody, suspected of robbing a pawnshop in Västerås. Last summer, the same man had been arrested on suspicion of taking part in the brutal rape of a woman who had a gun shoved up her vagina. He was not, however, convicted of this rape. Ironically, in April of last year, he was honored by the police as a role model for his commitment to the "Tro, hopp och kärlek" [Faith, hope and love] Association in the Stockholm suburb of Rinkeby. The police posted photos on their website, showing him meeting the then Minister of Justice, Beatrice Ask -- even though he had already been convicted of unlawful threats, drug-related offenses and driving without a license. After Fria Tider's article, police removed the photos from their website.
On June 12, blogger Torbjörn Jerlerup revealed that a Swedish-Norwegian convert to Islam, Mikael Skråmo, is urging Muslims to commit terrorist acts in Sweden. Skråmo wrote on his Facebook page:
"Muslims in Sweden will become more and more degraded ... so instead of putting on a T-shirt and going to the most hated place for Allah, just to stand there and do dawah [missionize] you should go there with a bomb instead. ... Download Inspire Magazine, start making bombs from simple stuff you can buy at whatever Ica and Coop [stores], you choose. Now is the time to show who the earth belongs to!!!"
According to the journalist Per Gudmundson, this is the first time a Swedish ISIS-jihadi has promoted terror on Swedish soil. Skråmo also urged his brethren to kill the artist Lars Vilks and stressed that Islam sanctions the killing of infidels. "He who kills a kafir [infidel] will never go to the same place as he in hell. Save yourself from narr [hellfire] by killing a kafir."
Skråmo, born in Sweden to Norwegian parents, used to be known as a preacher in radical Muslim circles. Gudmundson writes: "He used to give lectures, for example, for United Muslims of Sweden [Sveriges Förenade Muslimer], and they recently received a 300,000 kronor [about $33,000 USD] subsidy from the Authority for Youth -- and civil society issues, to fight "intolerance." United Muslims of Sweden is a part of the dawah-movement -- and a radical awakening among Swedish Muslims.
Mikael Skråmo, a Swedish convert and ISIS jihadist, brought his family to Syria. Now he is urging Muslims in Sweden to bomb their workplaces.
Also on June 12, journalist Per Gudmundson wrote that the well-known hate preacher Kamal El-Mekki is going to visit Rinkeby Folkets Hus [a community center in a Stockholm suburb] and the Stockholm mosque. "El-Mekki," he wrote, "is an advocate of Saudi criminal laws -- such as mutilation and beheading -- in the West. He is an advocate of capital punishment for those who leave Islam. He also promotes slavery in our time, and thinks that the celebration of Christmas and other non-Muslim holidays is 'evil'."
Three days later, Rinkeby Folkets Hus announced that they had cancelled the meeting with El-Mekki: "In accordance with our policy, we have decided that the preacher Kamal El-Mekki, who was scheduled to attend a meeting at Folkets Hus, is no longer welcome, due to expressing undemocratic views. He has also expressed contempt against women and homosexuals. To lend our facilities to Kamal El-Mekki would be a breach against our policy regarding all men being equal."
On June 15, Mona Walter was also stopped from speaking at Rinkeby Folkets Hus. Walter, a native of Somalia and a convert to Christianity, was scheduled to speak on democracy and freedom of religion. She lives under constant threat for having left Islam, and for travelling around Sweden talking about Islam. Unlike the Islamist Kamal El-Mekki, who was cancelled after Mona Walter, she has never spread hate or undemocratic views. Exactly why she wasn't allowed to speak at Rinkeby Folkets Hus is unclear. Walter herself said that she was sure it was due to Muslims in the area signing petitions against her. In an interview with Christian paper Dagen, she said:
"I've wanted to come to Rinkeby for a long time, to talk to my fellow Somalis, about freedom of religion, about the fact that there are Christian Somalis and that their numbers are increasing, and about Jesus working miracles. Many of the Somali converts from Islam are threatened, and in some cases beaten, so they keep their conversions on Christianity to themselves. But I want to tell them that we have freedom of religion and freedom of speech in Sweden, and it's important to tell it like it is – that not all Somalis are Muslims."
Mona Walter has not given up on Rinkeby. She is determined, she says, to go there one day, "with Bible in one hand and the Quran in the other, and say that you Somalis have freedom of choice to believe anything you like. I have chosen Jesus, and so can you."
On June 17, Sweden's government presented its fast-tracked investigation into how terrorist travel can be made illegal. The members suggested that travelling to commit, or conspiring to commit, terrorist acts should be punishable by up to two years in prison. Financing terrorist activities should also be made illegal. "There is no excuse for these people [ISIS fighters]," said Morgan Johansson, the Minister of Justice, at the press conference. "They can't say afterwards that they didn't know what it was all about. They go with their eyes open."
The changes in the law are now up for review and may come into force around April 1, 2016. Ironically, no suggestion has yet been put forth to criminalize the act of fighting for a terror organization. The government has started a separate inquiry, expected to conclude in June of next year, into this matter.
On June 21, the Israeli human rights organization Shurat HaDin-Israel Law Center demanded that the Swedish bank, SE-Banken, stop offering its services to the Free Gaza Movement and "Ship to Gaza," both of which provide ships to try to break the legal Israeli naval blockade, established to prevent weapons, intended to kill Israelis, from being smuggled into the Hamas-controlled Gaza strip. For the last few years, Shurat HaDin has been successful, on behalf of the victims' families, in suing terrorists who have murdered many people. Shurat HaDin found that SE-Banken had a mortgage on the fishing trawler Marianne av Göteborg, named after Marianne Skoog, who passed away in May 2014 and was said to have been a veteran within the Swedish "solidarity movement with Palestine." Shurat HaDin wrote:
"You are placed on formal notice that Mr. Charles Bertel Andreasson, to whom SEB provided a mortgage to finance the purchase of the Marianne Av Goteborg intends to attempt to breach the Israel Defense Forces' (IDF) coastal blockade of the Gaza Strip and enter into a violent confrontation with the Israeli armed forces. He has publicly announced he is seeking to smuggle contraband to the terrorist Hamas controlled enclave in violation of international law."
But the letter to SEB CEO Annika Falkengren does not seem to have had any effect. The trawler cast off and headed for the Gaza Strip; it was boarded by the Israeli navy, and all aboard were deported to Sweden. According to the passengers on Marianne, the trawler was in international waters when it was boarded. Sweden therefore filed an official protest against Israel. When the Gaza-bound travellers came back to Sweden on July 6, the Swedish media greeted them as heroes. But sailor Charlie Andreasson has now lost all his licenses and certificates.
On June 22, several alternative media sites commemorated five years since Jennifer Lindström's suicide. On June 6, 2008, 15-year-old Jennifer was subjected to a brutal gang rape, during which several immigrant boys dragged her off to a wooded area. The police found DNA evidence, but the suspects did not have prior criminal records, so police decided not to arrest them. When the inquiry was dropped after a year, Jennifer tried to commit suicide by slashing her wrists. She was saved that time, but two years after the gang rape, she killed herself by jumping in front of a train. A year later, a suspect was apprehended after he had attacked and beaten two girls. His DNA revealed that he had also been one of Jennifer's rapists. Another youth was also later arrested. The sentences were lenient: Abdirahaman Abdullahi Yusuf, a Somali, was sentenced to five months in juvenile detention, and Granit Nito Rashica served six months in prison.
On June 26, Swedish Public Radio [Sveriges Radio] interviewed Magnus Sandelin, a journalist and author of the book Jihad-svenskarna i de islamistiska terrornätverken ["Jihadi Swedes in the Islamist Terrorist Networks"]. The book details the power struggle going on in Eskilstuna for the city's mosques. Muslim groups have tried to take over the city's biggest mosque, run by convert Leif Karlsson, also known as Abd al Haqq Kielan. Karlsson is considered by many to be not radical enough in his struggle to Islamize Sweden, thus, more fervent believers have tried to outmaneuver him through bribes and negative campaigns.
Sandelin says it has been hard discussing these problems in Sweden. One reason is that all criticism of immigrants' culture and religion is thought to favor the Sweden Democrats Party (Sverigedemokraterna). Critics also runs the risk of being labeled racists, and having their lives threatened. Sandelin has had several death threats, just for pointing out some of the problems.
On June 27, the day after the world was shocked by three bloody global Islamist terror acts that took at least 200 lives, the church bells rang in the grand 12th century church of St. Petri in Malmö. They were not ringing to commemorate the victims of Islamist terror, but rather to support Islam. Officially, the bells tolled "in solidarity for the city's diversity," and in protest against the Pegida movement, which had held a meeting nearby criticizing Islam.
In a press release from the church, Vicar Anders Ekhem said he invited Rabbi Rebecca Lillian and Imam Salahuddin Barakat from the Islamic Academy. The goal of the gathering was said to be "to unite for an open and democratic society against antisemitism and Islamophobia".
Immediately after the Pegida meeting, artist Dan Park was reported to the police for breaching hate speech laws. He had held up a banner equating Islam with fascism. Park has been convicted of the same crime before, in connection with an exhibition at a Malmö art gallery.
Also on June 27, the daily tabloid Aftonbladet revealed that their reporters had connected with ISIS recruiters on Facebook. A woman calling herself Umm G is recruiting girls to join the ISIS jihadists in Syria. One of the girls lured into going is 15-year-old "Anna." Three weeks before Aftonbladet met her, she said goodbye to her mother, supposedly to go to school, but instead took a train to Copenhagen Airport in Denmark, where she boarded a plane bound for Istanbul. No one in her family had any idea where she was going, they told the paper, even though "Anna" had started using full-cover clothing and had even shown ISIS videos to the family. Nobody in the family could imagine she would really go, not even when social services showed up in response to an anonymous tip that "Anna" might try to run away to Syria.
She had formed a connection with an 18-year-old man, who told her about life in Syria, describing it as a paradise of money and wealth, where women are free because of how they dress -- full niqab face-covering, long black robes and black gloves.
"He said it's good down there, it's not war everywhere. It's freedom to cover your face," Anna told Aftonbladet.
A friend notified the police, so the 15-year-old girl could be stopped by Turkish police at Istanbul Airport. She was put on a plane back to Copenhagen, where her family came and got her. The International Prosecutor's Office in Malmö has opened an investigation concerning human trafficking.
On June 28, poet and social commentator Mohamed Omar warned about the danger of the Salafists, now beheading people in Europe. Mohamed Omar, who has a Swedish mother and an Iranian father, has a colorful past. As a 16-year-old, he converted to Islam, then debuted as a poet. He won cultural awards and became editor of Minaret magazine. In 2009, he suddenly declared himself an Islamist, praised Iran and explained on Swedish Public Television that "the great threat against society are the Zionists."
Last year, Omar once again changed his stance and wrote a couple of books on why he since left Islamism. Omar is still a Muslim, but now he warns about the Salafists in particular, whom he feels have gained too much influence in Sweden. In an article on the debate website Det goda samhället ["The good society"], Omar wrote:
"But why are these attacks happening during Ramadan? A month of fasting, prayer and stillness? It's because the jihadis don't view the violence as something unholy. If the violence is happening for God's sake and according to the rules Islam is perceived to decree, it is in fact a holy action. To the jihadis, this type of holy violence is more meritorious in God's eyes than fasting, prayer and charity. They rely on the hadith, statements supposedly uttered by the prophet Muhammad himself, that praise jihad and make it a religious duty. In the hadith, jihad in the month of Ramadan is portrayed as giving extra glory."
On June 29, the foundation Tryggare Sverige ["Safer Sweden"] reported that only one in five rape cases in Sweden are "resolved" by the police and judiciary, meaning that most rapists are either not arrested, not prosecuted, or not convicted. During the last five years, some 31,600 rapes or attempted rapes have been reported to the police. Of these, 6,235, or about 20% percent, have been "resolved." Peter Strandell, of Tryggare Sverige, says that no one knows what to do about this problem -- disastrous in a country with the second-highest number of reported rapes in the world.
"There are no surveys indicating what should be done," Strandell says. "Instead, we're in a deadlocked discussion about education and resources. That may be right. But as long as we don't know the requisites, we don't know what we need to do."
Tryggare Sverige now demands vigorous efforts to increase the clearance rate, and suggests that the government should set up an expert team to review how the police and the prosecutors work.
[1] Interview, Euroturk magazine, 2002

The NGO Campaign to Destroy Israel
Denis MacEoin/Gatestone Institute/July 17, 2015
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6123/israel-ngos
When an NGO receives a sizeable portion of its budget from governments, it is no longer a non-governmental organization. And when such funding to NGOs is provided by allied states such as the U.S. or the UK, or international unions such as the EU, it constitutes disproportionate interference by external governments in the internal affairs of another democratic state.
"NGOs are meant to represent civil society, not the interests of foreign governments. Israeli NGOs that receive foreign government funding benefit from the misleading image of being 'non-governmental,' non-political, and based in 'civil society'" — NGO Monitor.
NGO Monitor research reveals that a number of funders made their grants conditional on the NGO obtaining a minimum number of negative "testimonies." It should be clear that a wide range of church organizations, human rights NGOs, and a number of European governments are engaged in an extremely one-sided enterprise to bring about the defamation and destruction of the Jewish state. All of these NGOs have much the same political agenda of defaming, pressuring and undermining Israel; and using human rights issues to promote a steadily negative view of the country, its government, its laws, and its defence forces.
Many never criticize the Palestinian Authority or Hamas, nor do they turn their attentions to the desperate state of human rights in states such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, China, Russia and Lebanon, among others. NGOs are being well paid to urge total changes in the constitutions of other nations, and in the total abolition of another nation's right to exist at all. No other country in the world would stand for it; why should Israel?
The Western world is full of charities that do nothing but good, such as fight disease; help the less fortunate, or offer legal protection. But there are other sorts of charities, the so-called non-governmental organizations (NGOs); these often work on the international stage, supposedly for human rights, humanitarian aid, and peace. These NGOs are funded by foundations, businesses, private persons -- oh, and governments. They exist in astonishingly large numbers: 1.5 million in the US, 2 million in India, and thousands in Europe, over 500 of which are lobbyists in the European Parliament. The total income of OECD-linked NGOs amounts to around $16 billion. Unfortunately, some of these betray their love of humanity by adopting discriminatory policies.
Many of these NGOs -- especially those heavily dependent on government money -- seem to be driven by an ideological or political commitment, and are inevitably drawn into political engagement.
In a desire to help the underdog, wherever he may be, many NGOs make ideological choices as to whom they place in that category, and who falls into the category of "oppressor." This view often means that their good work may be used as "air cover" for people and actions that are less admirable.
It is not uncommon to find NGOs ignoring human rights abuses in countries they seek to have as allies, or with whom they are obliged to work. Sometimes, NGOs adopt a political stance that is deliberately prejudiced or prejudicial. The vast majority of politicized NGOs, whatever their original remit, are those who condemn only one country and who do so time and time again. That country is, of course, Israel. Within Israel, the community they attack is, without exception, the Jewish community. Israelis, it seems, can never do right, while on their borders, the Palestinians, who are seen as underdogs and victims, can never do wrong.
Quakers, for example, have always been known for their support for non-violence. Yet Quaker NGOs claiming to work for peace in the Middle East grossly ignore Palestinian violence while condemning Israel's right to self-defence against it. In cooperation with the World Council of Churches, the Quaker-led organization calling itself the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in the Palestinian territories and Israel (EAPPI), repeatedly blasts Israel for its use of checkpoints, while saying nothing about the would-be Palestinian suicide bombers who make Israeli security such an imperative -- a hypocrisy that does not seem to trouble their consciences much. And this is exactly where these politicized NGOs do damage. Their contribution to the recent UN report on Israel's 2014 war in Gaza has warped it to such a degree that it is useless for any serious enquiry.
This selection of Israel that emanates from countless NGOs -- as well as from non-transparent and unaccountable supra-national organizations such as the UN and the International Criminal Court (ICC) -- is also reflected in the totally unbalanced singling out of Israel for rebuke by the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). Last week, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, Keith Harper, protested in no uncertain terms about the fact that the UNHRC criticizes Israel more than it does all the other countries in the world combined:
We remain troubled, however, by this council's standalone agenda item directed against Israel, and by the many repetitive and one-sided resolutions under that agenda item. None of the world's worst human rights violators, some of whom are the object of resolutions at this session, have their own standalone agenda item at this council. Only Israel receives such treatment.
For centuries, almost no other religious or racial community has received such universal hatred or been subjected to such high levels of hypocritical double standards and persecution as the Jewish communities of Europe and the Middle East. Today, the obsessive focus on Israel is a simple reanimation of these classic hatreds. It is manifestly anti-Semitic in nature, yet dozens of NGOs that claim to be opposed to racism are happy to employ it.
Readers who want to gain a broader picture of how this anti-Israel discrimination works for NGOs can do no better than to consult the many articles and press releases of NGO Monitor, an Israeli information, legal advisory and advocacy organization established by Gerald Steinberg, a professor of political science at Bar Ilan University. NGO Monitor is the most crucial resource for the media, the international community and for anyone who needs to know about the frequently anti-Semitic charges levelled against the Jewish state -- whether "war crimes," "apartheid," or ethnic cleansing.
What is significant is not so much the evident hatred of Israel expressed by some NGOs, as that so many of them are heavily funded by foreign governments or foreign institutions
According to NGO Monitor, "NGOs are meant to represent civil society, not the interests of foreign governments. Israeli NGOs that receive foreign government funding benefit from the misleading image of being 'non-governmental,' non-political, and based in 'civil society.'"
When such funding is provided by allied states such as the U.S. or the UK, or international unions such as the EU, it constitutes disproportionate interference by external governments in the internal affairs of another democratic state.
These foreign agents of influence are why the new government of Israel needs legislation to bring accountability for those activities, in part by insisting on transparency in all funding.
A 2008 conference on "Impunity and Prosecution of Israeli War Criminals," held in Egypt in 2008, was sponsored by the European Union. (Image source: NGO Monitor)
It should come as no surprise to learn that Israel's efforts to curb unregistered foreign agents -- NGOs that together receive tens of millions of dollars every year, primarily from Europe -- have been, and are, condemned as "undemocratic." This charge is usually levelled despite the fact that no country would tolerate undue interference in its internal policies by other states, beyond a very limited and truly humanitarian level.
The pushback began in earnest in 2011, with two bills proposed and approved for consideration by Israel's Ministerial Legislative Committee.[1] Neither was passed into law, but both reflected the widespread realization that Israeli democracy has the right and obligation to defend itself against such foreign attacks and manipulation. The proposed mechanisms included a 45% taxation rate on income derived from foreign government donations to highly politicized NGOs, and placing limits on the amount of donations from governments and international bodies (such as the UN or the EU).
Although these and similar proposals have been condemned as discriminatory and anti-democratic by many organizations, and were not adopted, it is hard to see why that accusation is true. The NGOs are not being banned, and will continue to be free to act as they please, so long as they remain within the law. Democracies place restrictions on all sorts of things. There are those who think a ban on smoking in public places is a denial of smokers' rights, while others think the benefits to the nation's health outweigh any absolute claim to democratic priority.
The need for some sort of control on foreign funding stems from two considerations, both essential to the proper working of a real democracy. First, there must be limits to how far foreign governments and entities can interfere in the politics of another nation. Second, the sort of intervention to which Israelis object involves the funding and support of NGOs whose purpose is to attack, weaken -- and, for some, ultimately destroy -- Israel from without or within. These include groups and individuals who might well be described as seditious or insurgent, given that Israel finds itself in a more or less constant state of war-readiness and of being under attack -- militarily, economically and diplomatically -- by governments and organizations that would clearly like to see this lone pluralistic democracy in the region obliterated.
NGOs such as Breaking the Silence (BtS) use anonymous "testimonies" to undermine the reputation and morale of the Israel Defense Force, and to promote allegations of war crimes. Other NGOs issue reports replete with distorted or false information, clearly designed to weaken Israel's position within the international community; ignore or downplay Palestinian terror and thousands of rocket attacks from Gaza; call for an end to supposed Israeli "apartheid," or demand the establishment of a Palestinian state without necessary negotiations, agreements, checks or balances. Israel is singled out obsessively and through double standards, while the worst human rights violators are given a free pass.
A high-level delegation from Human Rights Watch (HRW), for instance, went to Saudi Arabia in 2009, according to the Wall Street Journal "to raise money from wealthy Saudis by highlighting HRW's demonization of Israel... Apparently, [HRW spokesperson Sarah Lea] Whitson found no time to criticize Saudi Arabia's abysmal human rights record. But never fear, HRW recently called on the Kingdom to do more to protect the human rights of domestic workers.... But Whitson wasn't raising money for human rights. She was raising money for HRW's propaganda campaign against Israel."
So far, Israel has been remarkably indulgent toward anti-Israel NGOs and their activities in Israel or the West Bank. But countries openly targeted for genocide, as Israel is by Iran, may be hampered when they provide such indulgence. By contrast, this May, Russia's State Duma passed a bill for the banning of "undesirable organizations" -- foreign NGOs that pose a threat to Russia's defence, security, public order or public health.
Unlike Russia, if any of the Israeli bills are passed, it would be in a thoroughly transparent and democratic manner.[2] Further, once the bill would be made law, any individual or NGO may address the High Court of Justice on issues of rights, infringements or contradictions to existing laws. It is very hard to see how such a painstaking and open process can be "anti-democratic."
In analyzing the legislative options, NGO Monitor argues that when an NGO receives a sizeable portion of its budget from governments, it is no longer a non-governmental organization:
"NGOs are meant to represent civil society, not the interests of foreign governments. Israeli NGOs that receive foreign government funding benefit from the misleading image of being 'non-governmental,' non-political, and based in 'civil society.' The government funders also use this framework to justify their use of NGOs as a policy instrument, and on a scale which is unique to Israel."
A current and controversial example of this is the Swiss government's funding of Breaking the Silence (BtS), a small group at the fringe of the political spectrum. The Swiss Foreign Ministry and the Zurich municipality have sponsored an expedition by this famously anti-Israeli NGO on the grounds that it has increased "dialogue about human rights." But Breaking the Silence refused to include in its events Israeli soldiers who would tell a different story. This means that the Swiss Foreign Ministry and a Swiss municipality are willing to interfere with Israel by funding a wholly one-sided narrative that impacts the country's reputation overseas and opens it to charges of criminal activity.
Breaking the Silence exists for one purpose only: to report on and quote from the views of anonymous disaffected former Israel Defense Force soldiers, who accuse Israel's armed forces of war crimes. BtS uses, according to NGO Monitor, "sweeping accusations based on anecdotal, anonymous and unverifiable testimonies of low level soldiers." In doing so, BtS deliberately undermines military morale, exposes Israel to international opprobrium, and brings about a likelihood of IDF officers and politicians facing war crimes trials.
No country at war -- and Israel, to its disquiet, is always at war -- should be exposed to an international attack on such a scale. Of course, there are countries and movements that do commit war crimes -- from Syria to Iran to ISIS and Hamas (recently highlighted by a rare and major Amnesty International report); and it is right that they be brought to book, which they seldom, if ever, are.
The irony here is that the Israel Defense Force is widely known to be among the most cautious and law-abiding armies in the world. British military commander Col. Richard Kemp has repeated this many times and in many forums. "No other army in the world has ever done more than Israel is doing now to save the lives of innocent civilians in a combat zone," he said in an interview with Channel 2 News during the last Gaza conflict.
But the role of NGOs in distorting information about Israel's military actions has reached crisis point. The June 2015 UNHRC report on the 2014 Gaza war, taken by many as gospel, relied heavily on NGOs. NGO Monitor takes up this point:
The report of the Commission of Inquiry on the 2014 Gaza War is different both substantially and methodologically than its predecessors, including the 2009 Goldstone Report, according to NGO Monitor. However, it still quotes extensively from biased and unreliable political advocacy NGOs. By repeating the unverified and non-expert factual and legal allegations of groups such as Amnesty International, B'Tselem, Palestinian Center for Human Rights, and Al Mezan, the UN investigation is irrevocably tarnished.
"The UNHRC report would be entirely different without the baseless and unverifiable allegations of non-governmental organizations," said Anne Herzberg, Legal Advisor at NGO Monitor. "Despite efforts to consult a wider array of sources, the report produced by McGowan Davis and her team lacks credibility as a result of NGO influence."
NGO Monitor's initial review of the Commission of Inquiry's "detailed findings" shows that NGOs were referenced, cited, and quoted at a high volume: B'Tselem was the most referenced NGO with 69 citations, followed by Amnesty International (53), Palestinian Center for Human Rights (50), and Al Mezan (29). UNWRA and UN-OCHA were also featured throughout the report. As repeatedly demonstrated by NGO Monitor, these groups are not appropriate for professional fact-finding.
Further commentary by NGO Monitor on the UN report may be found here. It includes a full list of the NGOs and their donors.
Writing of the Breaking the Silence report of May 4, 2015, NGO Monitor explains that,
Contrary to BtS' claim that "the contents and opinions in this booklet do not express the position of the funders," NGO Monitor research reveals that a number of funders made their grants conditional on the NGO obtaining a minimum number of negative "testimonies." This contradicts BtS' declarations and thus turns it into an organization that represents its foreign donors' interest, severely damaging the NGO's reliability and its ability to analyze complicated combat situations.
A screenshot of a document from 2009 (obtained from the Israeli Registrar of Non-Profits) shows how the British Embassy in Tel Aviv, the Dutch church-based aid organization ICCO (primarily funded by the Dutch government), and Oxfam Great Britain (funded by the British government) required Breaking the Silence to obtain negative testimonies...
In its report, Breaking the Silence thanks the following for financial support:
"Broederlijk Delen (Belgium), the CCFD - Terre Solidaire (France), Dan Church Aid, Die Schwelle, Foundation for Middle East Peace, Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Secretariat (funded by Switzerland, Holland, Denmark, and Sweden), Medico International, MISEREOR (a German "humanitarian aid" organization), Moriah Fund, New Israel Fund, Open Society Foundations, Pro Victimis, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Sigrid Rausing Trust, SIVMO, Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, The Royal Norwegian Embassy to Tel Aviv, Trócaire (Ireland) and countless private individuals."
There is no need to look at these funding bodies here, but it should be clear that a wide range of church organizations, human rights NGOs, and a number of European governments are engaged in an extremely one-sided enterprise to bring about the defamation and destruction of the Jewish state. The report also brings these organizations and individuals in line with the many anti-Israel groups that engage in the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement, and in daily propaganda hostile to Israel.
Some NGOs do not restrict their activities to claims about the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, the conflict in Gaza, or general Israeli "crimes." It has just been announced that the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) will unveil a new tax-exempt lobbying group, named NIAC Action, which will launch with 30 chapters across the U.S.
NIAC itself has been exposed as an agency of Iran's Islamic regime, a claim supported in 2012 by U.S. District Judge John Bates. Not only does its new NGO have an openly anti-Israel agenda, it has undertaken to support the Iran nuclear deal by working against the Israeli opposition to it. In February 2015, NIAC itself paid for a full-page advertisement in the New York Times to condemn Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's March 3, 2015 speech to the US Congress. The head of NIAC Action, Jamal Abdi, has made no secret that they plan "to shift the political landscape in Washington away from groups such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which has criticized the talks with Iran, and toward movements more inclined to pursue diplomacy with the longtime U.S. nemesis."
One Israel-based NGO, the New Israel Fund, plays by far the most important role in funding and encouraging other Israeli NGOs working against Israel's interests. It has recently been studied in a somewhat haphazard way by the American journalist Edwin Black in his book Financing the Flames. With a per annum income of $35 million, the NIF has financed smaller NGOs to the tune of $250 million over seven years and poured money into organizations such as the Arab-run Adalah, B'tselem, the pro-Palestinian Hamoked, Ir Amim, Rabbis for Human Rights, the lobby group Shatil, and others. All of these NGOs have much the same political agenda of defaming, pressuring and undermining Israel; and using human rights issues to promote a steadily negative view of the country, its government, its laws, and its defence forces. They never acknowledge the many positive human rights activities of the country or its basic qualities as a democratic, open, free and human-rights-observant state. Many never criticize the Palestinian Authority or Hamas, nor do they turn their attentions to the desperate state of human rights in states such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, China, Russia and Lebanon, among others.
Western democracies host many human rights organizations, NGOs that battle for civil rights, for legal action against discrimination, for support of minority groups and mistreated individuals, and that advocate for religious, political, and sexual freedom. Even the best countries are not perfect; democracies could function perfectly well without groups that call governments or institutions to account for their misbehaviour. Nowhere in the West, however, do we find such an array of haters who seek to bring about the demise of their own free nations.
How many foreign governments finance hatred against themselves to the extent that NGOs finance antagonism to the United States, the UK, France, Denmark, the Netherlands, or Canada?
NGOs are being well paid to urge total changes in the constitutions of other nations, and in the total abolition of another nation's right to exist at all.
Writing in Politically Incorrect Politics, Noru Tsalic demonstrates in a sequel that, "Despite the pretence, the 'Israeli NGOs' are neither 'Israeli' nor 'Non-Governmental': although operating in Israel, they depend on foreign funding... by foreign governments -- especially those from the European Union. In short, they are not 'Israeli NGOs', but Foreign Political Subversion Groups (FPSG)." Often called Foreign Agents or Agents of Influence, their job is to manipulate the internal workings of countries not theirs -- usually in ways they would not like other countries to do in their own countries.
Even if some governments may be forgiven for financing what purport to be human rights NGOs, it is a disgrace that so many private foundations and individuals (including many Jewish charities) use their money to promote what are deeply political, rather than humanitarian, agendas through NGOs in an open, pluralistic democracy such as Israel, possibly the one bright spot in a region of authoritarian repression.
The New Israel Fund has, until recently, obtained about twenty percent of its financing through its partnership with the Ford Israel Fund, an organization that emerged as an alternative after the US-based Ford Foundation was exposed for having paid to bring thousands of anti-Israel radicals to the infamous 2001 Durban conference.
Other organizations from around the world abound, however, adding to the wide pool of hostile and interventionist funding. These include many Christian aid, pro-justice and human rights organizations such as the UK's Christian Aid, Ireland's Trócaire, the USA's Catholic Relief Services, and the World Council of Churches. All of these have missionary and evangelization agendas, in addition to their obsession with politically destroying Israel and leaving the Palestinians to the tender mercies of their corrupt leaders.
In this regard, the World Council of Churches works chiefly through its Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI), which brings members of many churches to Israel and the West Bank. The stated role of participants in this program is:
Monitoring and reporting violations of human rights and international humanitarian law
Supporting acts of nonviolent resistance alongside local Palestinian and Israeli activists
Offering protection through nonviolent presence
Engaging in public policy advocacy
Standing in solidarity with the churches and all those struggling against the occupation
The British and Irish member organizations in EAPPI are:
Baptist Union of Great Britain
CAFOD
Christian Aid
Church of Scotland
Church Mission Society
Churches Together in Britain and Ireland
Iona Community
Methodist Church
Pax Christi UK
Presbyterian Church of Wales
Quaker Peace & Social Witness
Scottish Episcopal Church
United Reformed Church
Us
Trócaire
As written previously, many of these groups came together in 2012 for a conference held in the UK, where they gave their approval to only one side in a complex conflict, and lambasting Israel at every turn.
With such a one-sided pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel agenda, it must be asked why it seems undemocratic of Israel to want to exercise some degree of control over the rights of its citizens not to be exposed to such unrelenting disinformation, hatred and ruin. No other country in the world would stand for it; why should Israel?
Israel, a beacon for human rights in a region of war, prejudice, denial of free speech and opposition to democracy, should be singled out for its humanitarian commitment to these values. Instead, the diplomatic jihad, which is the usual response, is -- let us be frank -- nothing more than the same old anti-Semitism, only on a national, gargantuan scale. Israel has every right to defend itself from what everyone knows is the oldest and most vicious hatred in history, and again in the world today.
Denis MacEoin is a lecturer in Arabic and Islamic Studies. He has an MA in Persian, Arabic and Islamic Studies from Edinburgh University, a PhD in Persian Studies from Cambridge (King's College) and an MA in English Language and Literature from Trinity College, Dublin.
[1] Translations of both bills may be found in appendix 2 of "NGOs in Israel 101: Background to the Debate and FAQs".
[2] The process begins with a first reading before a Knesset plenary session; then the proposed law is sent to the Constitution Law and Justice Committee for debate and revision, with the revised version sent back to the Knesset; then a second review by the committee; and a second and third reading in a plenary session.

The Middle East, Syria, Iraq: Implications of the Iran Nuclear Deal
Samir Altaqi/Esam Aziz/Middle East Briefing/July18/15
The Iran nuclear deal will cause no qualitative change in the dynamics of the Middle East regional crisis. The change expected will be quantitative in nature. The wars in the region will intensify, the warring parties will become even more violent and the chances of ending this crises will be dimmer.
The psychological impact of the deal should not be taken lightly. It is usually translated into concrete and active traction on the ground. The Iranians and their proxies in the region will receive a substantial boost. The deal will appear to them as a victory over the “Great Satan”. Now, it will be, for them, the turn of an “easier” victory over the “smaller Satan”, the Arab countries. The preparation for that will come in the usual deceptive forms of “peace calls” to the Arabs and very conciliatory speeches by Iranian leaders. Just the same as confirmations were thrown everywhere before that no one in Iran ever thought of the nuclear bomb and that such a bomb is un-Islamic. One wonders why then was all this fuss.
Tehran’s aggressivity and audacity will increase after the nuclear deal. We will examine here the expected consequences of the deal in the Middle East within the next few years:
- Nuclear proliferation: Though we are familiar with the views that underestimate the risk of proliferation of potentially military nuclear programs in the region, we expect that several regional parties will head in this direction. Arab countries understand that the deal did not, in any realistic terms, deprive Iran of its military nuclear capabilities. It merely froze part of Tehran’s rush to make the bomb. At any given moment in the future, if not now already, Iran will be a de facto nuclear country. No spinning or linguistic skills can disguise that. It was a matter of months, if not weeks, for the Iranian to assemble their bomb. Now, they froze the assemblage of the bomb just for some time until they fortify their defenses. But the research labs and the whole infrastructure is still there.
The Arab countries are determined to use the window of the ten to fifteen years to build their own nuclear programs, infrastructure and skills. We will soon see that happening.
- Bilateral US-Iranian relations: The assumption that Tehran will pursue a “friendly” policy regarding US regional strategy does not seem to be supported by facts on the ground. Iran’s perception of its regional role is that of a regional superpower. It behaves already as such. Supporting Bashar Al Assad in Syria without reservations, creating its own militia in Iraq, aiding the Houthi rebels in Yemen in toppling the legitimate government there and looking at Hezbollah as an extension of the Islamic Republic in Lebanon, all these policies go against the official US stand on these accounts.
Furthermore, Tehran does not look at its role in political terms. Rather, it writes it in sectarian language. For example, Iran did not interfere in Libya. The reason is that there is no Shia community there. It interferes in Bahrain however, because there is such a community there. Speeches about supporting the “mostazafin”, or the weak and oppressed communities appear only wherever there are Shias.
In that context, the regional “superpower” role Iran claims for itself is defined in a specific way. First, it will always do its best to build bridges with the base that it claims to defend, the Shias, by virtue of the mentioned definition, hence pushing the Middle East further into the abyss of sectarian wars. Second, its policy towards the Sunni Arabs will be blackmailing and threatening, or worse – asymmetric wars, as we already see. The Sunni Arabs are after all Sunnis. They cannot be infiltrated by a force that defines itself in different sectarian terms.
As for its relation with the US, there will be no valid reason for Tehran to let the Americans challenge its role as “the” regional superpower. The Iranians dream of the day when the US has to knock on their doors and ask for permission to do anything in the region, looks to be closer. That is already happening in Iraq. But the Iranians want it to be the rule in the whole region.
The US considers Hezbollah a terrorist group. It said it wants Assad out. It said it wants to arm Iraq’s Sunni tribes to fight ISIL. All this was met by a called NO from Tehran. The US swallowed its pride and ran to give the Ayatollahs in Tehran a reward by lifting the sanction in return for merely freezing their nuclear activities. Do we expect that Iran will “allow” the US to get what it wants now, when it refused to give it while under sanctions?
- US relations with its regional allies: Already, Iran’s Iraqi militia, called the Popular Mobilization Force (PMF), threatened to kill American soldiers in Iraq if they detect that the US is arming the Sunni tribes to fight ISIL.
For the PMF and their masters in Tehran, it is the Shia that should control central and west Iraq, not the population of that region and certainly not the Americans or their allies.
In Syria, both the US and Russia have been examining political solutions that ends or shortens the rule of Assad. The reason is clear. Assad cannot rule a country where he killed 300, 000 of its population, caused the displacing of almost half this population and destroyed most of it. Yet, only Tehran says no. The reason is that Assad has become a prisoner of his dependence on Tehran. He has been an ally by choice before. Now he is an ally by necessity. And that suits Tehran better. He also is Iran’s bridge to Hezbollah.
In Lebanon, Hezbollah is a state within the state. Talking about a sovereign Lebanese State now is meaningless. The military force of Hezbollah is far greater than that of the National Army. The pretext of Iran’s continued support for Hezbollah, which is of course a Shia sectarian force, is fighting Israel. But Hezbollah fights the Syrian people now, not Israel. The reason is that Iran told Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah to enter Syria in order to defend its assets there.
In Iraq, the project of turning PMF into an Iraqi Hezbollah is in process. In Yemen, a Houthi Hezbollah is under construction. Why would anyone think now that Iran will be more flexible with the US or the Arabs? What we will see is certainly the opposite.
Tehran’s regional policy: Iran, drunk with its “victory” over the “Great Satan” and blinded by the arrogance of power, will not realize that its Middle East project is ultimately limited by realities. Tehran cannot win in Syria however long the war continues. Hezbollah could not gain in Zabadani despite the resources it poured there. Assad cannot win Ghota. His forces can hardly defend themselves in their part of Aleppo. The war in Syria will continue for decades to come.
Lebanon is boiling and can explode anytime. This country may be heading to another civil war.
In Iraq, the idea of Shia forces controlling Sunni land is absurd. The US faced the tough choice of either to assist the Shia PMF to defeat ISIL or to stand down. Some plastic surgeries were made to make the PMF look more “national” in order to give the US a face saving argument, even a thin one. It was a face lifting for a face saving. Washington took the offer.
Yet, this is not the right way to really defeat ISIL. Shias’ control over Sunni land will produce another Sunni armed group, hopefully a little more civilized, to fight subjugation on the hands of overtly sectarian forces that lynch Sunnis when there is no body watching. The war in Iraq will continue for decades to come.
Does this look like exaggeration? Well, how would it have sounded to anyone five years ago if he heard a prediction that there will be civil wars in Syria, Iraq, Libya and Yemen, plus a brewing one in Lebanon? Does it sound like over suspicion of Iranian intentions? Well, it is already happening in the region. We see it every day already. Reality does not help the naive, or those who pretend to be.
If what we see in the Middle East now is a storm, the region will be heading to a hurricane. By signing the deal and normalizing relations with Tehran, the US ran from the bees to the hyena den. It will pay a price later. But the burden will fall on the shoulders of those who stood by the US in all times.
Well, congratulations everyone for a great victory. Enjoy it. The Middle East will not. Unfortunately.
http://mebriefing.com/?p=1808&utm_source=MEB+VOL+-+II_+Issue+86_July+18th+2015&utm_campaign=VOL+II+-+Issue+86&utm_medium=email

News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006 Click Here to go to the LCCC Daily English/Arabic News Buletins Archieves Since 2006

News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to go to the LCCC Daily English/Arabic News Buletins Archieves Since 2006