America is facing its greatest challenge ever. We have seen a president negotiate a far reaching `deal` with Iran, a designated State Sponsor of Terrorism, that will enable it to become a nuclear armed nation. This is reminiscent of negotiations in 1938 that resulted in the Munich Accord and paved the way for WW II. We have seen a President by-pass the Congress and proceed to the U.N. for approval of the `deal` and then threatening that he will veto any vote of dis-approval.

Click here to send
Blue Line
Breaking News

The invasion of Europe and America

Europe is on the verge of descending into utter chaos. Reuters reported that “thousands of migrants stormed across Macedonia’s border on Saturday, overwhelming security forces who threw stun grenades and lashed out with batons before apparently abandoning a bid to stem their flow through the Balkans to western Europe.”

These thousands of Muslim “refugees,” most of them from the jihad hotspots of Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq, have been pouring into Greece and the Balkans in huge numbers for some time now. But they do not, of course, want to stay in Greece, Macedonia and Serbia. They want to reach the European Union: primarily Germany, France and Britain.

More of these “refugees” arrive every day. Media reports of this Muslim invasion focus on the crying women and children, who seem to have been deliberately brought to the front of the crowd. Clearly the vast majority of these “migrants” are men, and in any case, under normal circumstances, wouldn’t you take the women, and especially the children, to the side so that they wouldn’t get hurt in clashes with police? Instead, they are used as human shields.

How very like Hamas. Just as the “Palestinian” terrorists launch attacks from civilian areas to try to provoke civilian casualties they can use to manipulate world opinion, so now the international media obscures the reality of this flood of “refugees” into Europe in an attempt to blunt legitimate concern over it….

Read more

America's Dangerous Bargain With Turkey

WASHINGTON — AFTER a year of intense diplomatic negotiations, the Turkish government is now permitting the United States to use Turkey’s Incirlik Air Base, which will allow American aircraft to fly missions in Syria and Iraq with greater operational effectiveness and economic efficiency.

The price of this agreement, however, may well be too high in the long run, both for the success of America’s anti-Islamic State campaign and for the stability of Turkey.

That’s because the Turkish government’s recent change of heart and its sudden willingness to allow American access to the Incirlik base was driven by domestic political considerations, rather than a fundamental rethinking of its Syria strategy.

Shortly after granting access to the base, Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, launched a wave of airstrikes on Kurdish targets, reigniting a conflict that had been on the road to resolution. To make matters worse, Turkey has struck hard at Syrian Kurds who have, until now, been America’s most reliable ally in fighting the Islamic State, often called ISIS, in northern Syria….

Read more

Israeli professor explains why the Islamic State is 'the anti-Islam'

Ze’ev Maghen is professor of Arabic Literature and Islamic History and Chairman of the Department of Middle East Studies at Bar-Ilan University. Here he joins an apparently endless stream of Muslim and non-Muslim authorities who assure us that the Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam, in terms that will reassure non-Muslims, but will do nothing to make even one Islamic State jihadist lay down his arms and become a “moderate.”

The problem with Maghen’s piece in general is that he relies on several ahadith that appear to establish that the Islamic State is violating the clear words of Muhammad. That would seem to be an open-and-shut case, were it not for the fact that the Hadith are extremely voluminous, and many were fabricated by competing factions in the Muslim community to appear to give Muhammad’s support to a particular side of a contested issue. The other faction would counter with its own fabricated hadith depicting Muhammad supporting the opposing position. Consequently, Muhammad can be found to be speaking on both sides of numerous issues throughout the hadith literature.

The Islamic State has support in the Hadith (and the Qur’an) for what it does. There is also support, in many cases, for the opposing point of view. But for Maghen to invoke only one side without informing his readers of the other is misleading. The Islamic State jihadis, were they to hear his critique of their activities, would simply invoke the ahadith he ignores….

Read more

Meet the Americans Flocking to Iraq and Syria to Fight the Islamic State

Photo illustration by FP

When a U.S. citizen going by the name “Abu Abdullah al-Amriki” blew himself up in a suicide attack in Baiji, Iraq, this month, he was the most recent example of a troubling trend: the roughly 200 Americans who have traveled or attempted to travel to Iraq and Syria to fight for the Islamic State.

Not all of the foreigners have left for the region looking to fight for the Islamic State, however. Instead, growing numbers of Americans are heading there to fight against the extremists. The American fighters — mostly military veterans, with a strangely disproportionate share of Texans — are linking up with Kurdish groups and Christian militias in the region to battle the Islamic State militants who currently control broad swaths of Iraq and Afghanistan. A new report by the investigative website Bellingcat, released Wednesday, takes the first systematic look at these “other foreign fighters.”

The report finds that at least 108 Americans — including one woman — have made the journey to Iraq and Syria to take on the Islamic State, highlighting the global nature of the conflict and the relative ease of recruitment and travel to the battlefield. It’s a dangerous undertaking, and one American has already been killed in the fighting. Massachusetts resident Keith Broomfield, 36, died while fighting with a Kurdish militia in Syria earlier this year. Broomfield, who had no military experience, traveled to the war zone after a Christian religious awakening.

Nathan Patin, the author of the Bellingcat report, combed through social media posts and news accounts to compile the database. Although Patin was able to find information on the fighters using open sources, the report withholds the identities of those fighters who haven’t gone public in prior news accounts and does not include personally identifying information or information that could lead to their location on the battlefield, out of concern for their safety and that of their families….

Read more

The better alternative to the Iran deal

…Since the agreement allows Iran to continue developing intercontinental ballistic missiles, that is just too close for comfort—especially when Iran’s constitutionally designated “Supreme Leader” was not only chanting “Death to America” after the agreement was announced, but went on to call those words a “major orientation of the Iranian nation.”

In addition to the urgent need for renegotiation, the time available to do it, and the incentive to make it happen, there is also ample precedent.

Congress has insisted on improvements to over 200 agreements negotiated by the executive branch—which it then, despite dire predictions of doom, nonetheless renegotiated to achieve better deals.

For example, in the 1970s, the Senate failed to approve two major arms control agreements with the Soviet Union, instead, demanding more from the Soviets. Despite that administration’s protests that doing so was impossible, the executive branch resumed negotiations and won a better deal.

America needs a better deal with Iran, and we have the tools and the time to get one.

Landrieu served in the Senate from 1997 to 2015. Krulak served as Commandant of the Marine Corps from 1995 to 1999.

Read more

Nearly 200 Retired Generals and Admirals Urge Congress to Reject Iran Deal

(Photo: Breaking Israel News)

A group of nearly 200 retired generals and admirals sent an open letter to Congress urging U.S. lawmakers to reject the Iran nuclear deal.

“The agreement will enable Iran to become far more dangerous, render the Mideast still more unstable and introduce new threats to American interests as well as our allies,” states the letter, which was first reported by the Washington Post.

The letter, addressed to Republican and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate, is a response to one sent last week that was signed by 36 retired senior military officers who supported the nuclear deal.

The group of former high-ranking military officials include William G. “Jerry” Boykin, undersecretary of defense for intelligence under president George W. Bush; John Poindexter, national security advisor under president Ronald Reagan; and retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney, who was vice commander of U.S. Air Forces in Europe.

“What I don’t like about this is, the number one leading radical Islamic group in the world is the Iranians,” McInerney told the Washington Post. “They are purveyors of radical Islam throughout the region and throughout the world. And we are going to enable them to get nuclear weapons. Why would we do that?”

Read more

Sandboxing' Islam: How to Protect America from Jihad Terrorism

…If we think of America as being, ideally, a safe and free place for its citizens, within which we should be able to live, work, play, and, as the ubiquitous bumper sticker says, “Coexist,” then when it comes to Islam and Muslims, we need a solution analogous to the IT security process of “sandboxing.” We need to isolate malicious jihadi forces, “in such a way that whatever they do, they will not spread havoc elsewhere.”

What would “sandboxing” look like when it comes to Muslims in America? In practice, it could include the following policies:

  • A moratorium — a complete freeze — on Muslim immigration. Senator and presidential candidate Rand Paul expressed a similar policy concept following the Chattanooga jihad murders of five US servicemen, proposing a halt to immigration from Muslim countries with known jihad activity. Going one step further, Franklin Graham wrote at the same time that “We should stop all immigration of Muslims to the U.S. until this threat with Islam has been settled.”
  • All mosques must be classified and treated as “agents of foreign power,” in accordance with the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), a U.S. law (22 U.S.C. § 611 et seq.) passed in 1938.

The law presciently allows for application in gray areas such as Islam presents, as it states that any entity with a “political or quasi-political capacity” disclose their relationship with the foreign government and information about related activities and finances. The purpose is to facilitate “evaluation by the government and the American people of the statements and activities of such persons.”

Islam certainly thinks and behaves like a foreign power, is guided in America by the Muslim Brotherhood, the Saudis and other foreign Islamic groups, and has a definite political dimension.

  • Any and all mosques associated with Muslim terrorists must be investigated, and if found to be advancing jihad doctrine, sharia law, and Islamic supremacism over the United States, they should be prosecuted and closed, in accordance with the FARA act referenced above.
  • Stop all foreign funding of mosques, whether by FARA, new legislation, or executive power. We already know that Saudi Arabia is providing extensive funding to advance its extremist Wahhabi strain of Islam worldwide, including of mosques in America, as is Turkey. There already exist covert lobbying groups for Muslim nations, including Iran.
  • These are just some starting points to aid in getting this conversation going. The American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) has an 18-point platform with similar policy proposals which may be considered as well….
Read more

The 5 Worst Treaties the United States Ever Signed

…In its relatively short history, the United States has done its share of terrible diplomatic deal making, too. To cut through the hyperbole surrounding the Iran deal, Foreign Policy reached out to eight experts on treaties and international agreements to help us identify some of the worst treaties the United States has ever signed. (Although, please note, that the nuclear deal with Iran is a “political agreement,” not a “legally binding plan” or a treaty, as Orde Kittrie, a professor of law at Arizona State University and senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, was quick to point out.) Kristol, Krauthammer, and their colleagues would do well to look at this list next time they prepare to reach for the superlatives.

Treaty of Versailles, 1919

The peace treaty at the end of World War I wasn’t all bad news. “It set up the League of Nations, precursor to the U.N., along with early human rights provisions,” Duncan Hollis, associate dean of Beasley School of Law at Temple University and former attorney-advisor for treaty affairs at the U.S. State Department, told Foreign Policy. But historians have long criticized the excessively punitive reparations the treaty levied on Germany, destroying the country’s economy and helping create fertile ground for the rise of Nazism.

Versailles was unsuccessful “not because the U.S. failed to get what it needed, but because [the signatories] tried to divide up too much of Europe, were excessively punitive to Germany, and what looked like a victory at first blush ended up hurting everyone,” said Edward Swaine, a professor and treaty expert at George Washington University Law School. President Woodrow Wilson added his name to the document, “acting in his own name and by his own proper authority,” but the U.S. Senate ultimately failed to ratify the treaty — not for its punitive clauses, but over isolationist fears that the League of Nations would jeopardize U.S. sovereignty….

Read more