Posts
All Comments
Regular readers of Jihad Watch have known for years that Musharraf and Co. were talking out of both sides of their mouths, pledging support for the war on terror on the one hand while aiding the jihadists on the other. Now direct and abundant confirmation of this comes from, of all places, The New York Times.
"Right at the Edge," by Dexter Filkins, September 7: ....
With both parties' U.S. presidential and vice presidential nominees now set, American voters have their last opportunity to decide whether Democrats or Republicans can field the team best qualified to meet the challenges of the next four to eight years.
Voters' primary concern in November should be the war - but not the one in Iraq or Afghanistan. It is the unavoidable war, already begun but not yet fully fought, that will be fully fought within the next one to two presidential terms. Our votes later this year will determine if we are prepared to do so.
This unavoidable war will be with Iran. Every American voter should understand this before casting a ballot. Every voter should understand the theocratic leadership in Tehran is of one dominant mindset. The mullahs, led by the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and current president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who serves at the former's call, are committed to developing a nuclear weapon for Iran. Mr. Ahmadinejad has made his convictions on this clear. An Islamist zealot, he believes the 12th imam will return to lead Islam to world domination. As the 12th imam can only return after global cataclysmic chaos, Mr. Ahmadinejad believes he must become the vehicle for creating this chaos. (As Tehran's mayor prior to becoming president, Mr. Ahmadinejad so convinced of the 12th imam's return - widened some city streets for the welcoming parade.) In 2006, observers at the United Nations heard Mr. Ahmadinejad pray to the 12th imam before delivering his speech.
When one understands all this, factoring in Mr. Ahmadinejad's past warnings about wiping Israel off the map and his lack of intimidation over retaliatory U.S./Israeli nuclear strikes (rationalizing the deaths of any Muslim victims will expedite their journey to an afterlife of rewards for their sacrifice), one understands why war with Iran is inevitable.
When Mr. Ahmadinejad's term in office ends in August 2009, he is eligible to run for re-election. And, in Iran, where presidential election outcomes are known ahead of time by the supreme leader, Mr. Ahmadinejad, absent a flagrant act of disloyalty, will remain in office through August 2013. This is more than sufficient time, by any conservative estimate, to make final Iran's development of its first nuclear weapons.
How will war with Iran start? Three likely scenarios follow.
(1) Least likely regardless of who wins the next presidential election, the United States, having been ineffective in numerous diplomatic efforts, gives Iran a final warning to stop its nuclear weapons development, followed by surgical strikes against its nuclear facilities.
(2) Israel, realizing its survival is threatened, conducts a pre-emptive strike against Tehran to knock out its nuclear development capability. This scenario is gaining momentum. Should such an attack - which Israel has already practiced - happen, the consequences to the United States, from Iran's perspective, would be the same as if the United States had initiated the attack itself. And this scenario may receive renewed focus in view of Democratic vice-presidential nominee Joe Biden's recent defeatist comments to Israeli officials. As Barack Obama's supposed foreign policy "expert," Mr. Biden said, "Israel will have to reconcile itself with the nuclearization of Iran. ... It is doubtful economic sanctions will be effective, and I am against opening an additional military and diplomatic front." Israel is running out of options.
(3) Most likely, having developed nuclear weapons as the United States and Israel stood by, Iran will conduct a coordinated nuclear attack on Israel and terrorist nuclear/EMP (Electromagnetic Pulse) attack upon the U.S. - to await a retaliatory strike by both countries. (Having lost any land-based capability to strike back but with its submarine fleet intact, Israel will still have a sub-surface capability to do so). As the United States reels from this devastating hit and Israel ceases to exist as was forewarned, Mr. Ahmadinejad, much as Emperor Nero was said to have done as Rome lay burning, will simply fiddle away his time. Awaiting the doom on Iran his actions will have wrought, Mr. Ahmadinejad will smile, firmly believing the 12th imam's return to be imminent and that Mr. Ahmadinejad's destiny to lead the imam home will be recognized.
Only by our next president aggressively taking very focused diplomatic steps is there any possibility war will be avoided. These steps, coordinated with our allies where possible, include maximizing economic sanctions against Iran, unleashing the Iranian MEK opposition group Tehran fears most by removing them from the State Department's terrorist list and rearming them, funding all such Iranian opposition groups and taking whatever other actions are necessary to effect regime change in Tehran.
While most Americans fail to grasp it, the war with Iran unilaterally began three decades ago. The Islamic extremists who took power there in 1979 embarked upon a jihad which since then has claimed hundreds of U.S. citizens' lives. We have failed to fight this war as it continues today in Iraq, where Iran's Islamic Republican Guard Corps' (IRGC) elite Quds unit is actively killing Americans.
Against this backdrop, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has proven himself dangerously naive about Iran. In 2007, he refused to support a nonbinding Senate resolution which recommended IRGC be designated a terrorist organization as he erroneously believed passage would authorize war with Iran. Too busy campaigning instead of voting on an immensely important issue to future world stability, Mr. Obama failed to vote, condemning the resolution as "excessively provocative." Instead of condemning the IRGC, Mr. Obama introduced legislation specifying use of force against Iran is unauthorized by any previous act of Congress. Instead of keeping all arrows in our diplomatic options quiver to stop Iranian aggression, Mr. Obama sought to remove a critical one.
Also against this backdrop while campaigning earlier, Mr. Obama said he would meet with Mr. Ahmadinejad - without preconditions. Yet the one precondition to a meeting upon which all our allies agree is that Tehran stop its uranium enrichment program. Even Mr. Obama's not-yet-selected vice presidential running mate at the time, Sen. Joe Biden, criticized Mr. Obama's suggestion. And, his willingness to talk with Mr. Ahmadinejad suggests Mr. Obama naively sees him as rational - rather than the religious fanatic he is, undeterred about creating the world chaos he seeks.
November's U.S. presidential election will seal America's fate. The inevitable confrontation with Iran will boil over during the next president's term. This is a time in which we can ill afford inexperienced leadership.
Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations, which claims to represent the interests of American Muslims, allegedly defrauded a number of Muslims recently seeking help with citizenship delays, and then threatened to sue them if they complained to the media, according to a security watchdog group which has obtained internal CAIR documents.
The former legal director of CAIR's Maryland/Virginia chapter shook down Muslim hardship cases for thousands of dollars without providing promised services, officials with the Mapping Sharia Project charge.
CAIR, a nonprofit group, promoted the services of the employee, Morris L. "Jamil" Days, whom it publicly described as a civil-rights attorney, even after discovering Days was unlicensed and was fraudulently representing CAIR's clients.
CAIR's board allegedly covered up the scandal by paying defrauded Muslim families partial restitution payments while insisting they sign agreements releasing CAIR from legal liability, officials said.
The release threatens to sue them for "damages in the amount of $25,000 for the purpose of conducting meetings, workshops, press releases, flyers and the like to reverse ... the damage to CAIR's reputation caused by the recipient's breach" of the agreement to remain silent about the "incident." ....
By the National Terror Alert Response Center
Russia is considering increasing its assistance to Iran’s nuclear program in response to America’s calls for Nato expansion eastwards and the presence of US Navy vessels in the Black Sea delivering aid to Georgia.
The Kremlin is discussing sending teams of Russian nuclear experts to Tehran and inviting Iranian nuclear scientists to Moscow for training, according to sources close to the Russian military.
Moscow has been angered by Washington’s promise to give Georgia £564m in aid following the Russian invasion of parts of the country last month after Tbilisi’s military offensive. Kremlin officials suspect the US is planning to rearm the former Soviet republic and is furious at renewed support for attempts by Georgia and Ukraine to join Nato.
Last week a third US Navy ship entered the Black Sea with aid bound for Georgia. Moscow has accused the Americans of using the vessels to deliver weapons but has failed to provide any evidence.
Vladimir Putin, the prime minister of Russia, who has been the driving force during the crisis, has declared he will take unspecified action in response.
“Everything has changed since the war in Georgia,” said one source. “What seemed impossible before, is more than possible now when our friends become our enemies and our enemies our friends. What are American ships doing off our coast? Do you see Russian warships off the coast of America?
“Russia will respond. A number of possibilities are being considered, including hitting America there where it hurts most – Iran.”
Increasing nuclear assistance to Iran would sharply escalate tensions between Moscow and Washington. Over the past 10 years Russia has helped Iran build its first nuclear power station in Bushehr. Iran claims the plant is for civilian purposes. Officially at least, Moscow accepts that. The West has little doubt the aim is to build a nuclear bomb.
Posts
All Comments
