U.S. Defense-Less During Iran Missile Testing

Posted on by

Navy won’t have aircraft carrier in Persian Gulf as Iran deal takes effect

TheHill: The Navy does not have an aircraft carrier in the Middle East region as the Iran deal takes effect and just days after Tehran conducted a controversial ballistic missile test, raising concerns.

The USS Theodore Roosevelt pulled out of the Middle East region on Tuesday, and the next carrier, the USS Harry Truman, won’t arrive to the Persian Gulf area until winter, leaving a months-long gap without a carrier. The Navy’s moves were planned well in advance, but Iran’s recent missile test, which the Obama administration said violated international sanctions, is sparking worries about Tehran’s actions without a visible symbol of American deterrence in the region. The missile test came just one day after the Roosevelt pulled out of the Persian Gulf. It leaves the Gulf area without a continuous U.S. aircraft carrier presence for the first time since 2008.

The test also comes just before the Iran nuclear deal’s “adoption day” on Sunday — when it is Iran’s turn to take actions to implement its side of the deal.

On adoption day, sanctions waivers will be issued but won’t be effective until the deal is implemented in the spring.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power said on Friday that the test violated United Nations Security Council resolutions to curb Iran’s ballistic missile activities, and the U.S. would file a report with the UNSC on the matter.

“The Security Council prohibition on Iran’s ballistic missile activities, as well as the arms embargo, remain in place and we will continue to press the Security Council for an appropriate response to Iran’s disregard for its international obligations,” she said.

Administration officials have insisted the launch does not violate the terms of the nuclear deal, which places limits on Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for relief from crippling economic sanctions.

And the administration has sought to assure allies in the region that it would keep a close watch on Iran after the deal was signed and counter its support for terrorism throughout the region.

President Obama just last week cited having an aircraft carrier as a projection of strength in the Middle East, in response to a question about whether U.S. adversaries and allies perceive the U.S. as retreating from the region.

“We have enormous presence in the Middle East. We have bases and we have aircraft carriers, and our pilots are flying through those skies,” Obama said during his interview on CBS “60 Minutes” last Sunday.

While officials say there are plenty of other assets in the region, some argue that an aircraft carrier is critical and its absence is being noticed.

“The most important thing you need a carrier for is for what you don’t know is going to happen next,” Peter Daly, a retired Navy vice admiral and CEO of the U.S. Naval Institute told NBC News.

“The biggest value to those carriers is that they are huge, and you have the capability to go from one stop to another, and we don’t need a permission slip from another nation when we want to fly planes,” he said.

Earlier this year, the Navy’s top officer said he was concerned about the lack of an aircraft carrier’s presence in the Middle East at a time the U.S. is conducting an airstrike campaign in Iraq and Syria.

“Without that carrier, there will be a detriment to our capability there,” the Navy’s Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson told the Senate Armed Services Committee during his July 30 confirmation hearing.

From 2010 through 2013, the U.S. maintained two aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, known as a “2.0 carrier presence,” although it sometimes temporarily dipped below that level.

The heightened presence was to support U.S. operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and also to deter Iran from bad behavior in the region and keep the Strait of Hormuz open.

However, the U.S. stepped away from that in 2013, after steep budget cuts hit the Pentagon, forcing the Defense Department to curtail deployments, defer maintenance, and delay major purchases.

A U.S. official told The Hill in August that the Navy could have an even more reduced presence in the Persian Gulf in coming years, due to budget cuts, but also a prioritization of the Asia-Pacific.

“All I can say is that in the short-term, we need a continuous presence. The demand is out there, the [combatant commander] is asking for it, and the [Pacific Command] commander is asking for it. They’re asking for it. There’s just not enough peanut butter to spread around,” the official said.

“So what are you going to do? You’re going to give what you can. You’re going to prioritize based on what the president wants us to do, what the [Defense] secretary wants us to do and allocate those forces to meet those needs,” the official said.

“Iran last Sunday successfully test-fired the country’s new precision-guided long-range ballistic missile that can be controlled until the moment of impact. Emad carries a conventional warhead.”

Let’s be clear about this: does anyone really think that a long-range ballistic missile carrying a warhead of a few hundred kilograms with an accuracy of half a kilometer is being built for the purposes of carrying conventional explosives? Aim it at a target – an airport, a port, a chemical plant, Israel’s IDF headquarters in Tel Aviv – you name it – and what are the odds that a conventional explosion is actually going to damage the target? ]

Top Security Official Dismisses US Ballyhoos over Iran’s Missile Test as Irrelevant Sun Oct 18, 2015 3:9

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940726000483

TEHRAN (FNA)- Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Ali Shamkhani rejected the US officials’ hues and cries over Tehran’s recent missile test as pointless, stressing that no threat can ever stop the country’s military progress.

“We have never accepted (UN Security Council) Resolution 1929 and I should say that Iran’s missile test was not a violation of Resolution 2231 either,”

Shamkhani told reporters on the sidelines of the preliminary meeting of the Munich Security Conference in Tehran on Saturday.

“Such remarks are a propaganda hype and Iran doesn’t stop (enhancement of) its defensive and deterrent capability under any threat,” he added.

Shamkhani also underscored that Iran’s missile tests shouldn’t affect the implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreed by Iran and the world powers on July 14.

In relevant remarks on Saturday, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif underscored that Tehran has not violated the UN Security Council resolution 2231 by testing missiles, reiterating that Tehran would never accept to let the nuclear agreement leave an impact on its defensive measures.

“No reference has been made to the missile issue in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and I seriously believe that our missile tests are no way related to Resolution 2231,” Zarif said in a joint press conference with his German counterpart Frank-Walter Steinmeier in Tehran.

“Resolution 2231 speaks of missiles which have been designed for nuclear capabilities while none of our missiles have been designed for nuclear capabilities and our missile program is aimed at defending our territorial integrity,” he added.

Noting that all involved parties, including the Americans, have admitted that Iran’s missile tests haven’t violated the nuclear agreement between Tehran and the world powers, Zarif said, “The Islamic Republic of Iran has proved and shows again that the nuclear weapons didn’t and don’t have any place in its defensive doctrine and our missiles have not been designed for carrying nuclear warheads since we didn’t and don’t have any plan to have nuclear warheads.”

Some western media outlets have cast doubt about Iran’s recent missile test, saying that it could have violated the nuclear agreement between Tehran and the world powers.

Iran last Sunday successfully test-fired the country’s new precision-guided long-range ballistic missile that can be controlled until the moment of impact. Emad carries a conventional warhead.

“This missile (Emad) which has been fully designed and made by Iranian Defense Ministry’s scientists and experts is the country’ first long-range missile with navigation and strike controlling capability; it is capable of hitting and destroying the targets with high-precision,” Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan told reporters after the successful test of Emad missile.

The Iranian Defense Minister reiterated that the manufacture and successful testing of Emad missile is a technological and operational jump in a strategic field, and said, “We don’t ask for anyone’s permission for boosting our defense and missile power; we resolutely continue our defense programs, specially in the missile field, and Emad missile is a conspicuous example.”

General Dehqan felicitated Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei, Iranian Armed Forces and the Iranian nation on the successful testing, and appreciated the scientists and experts of the Aerospace Industries Organization of the Defense Ministry.

The Iranian Defense Minister reiterated that the mass production and delivery of Emad missile to the country’s Armed Forces will considerably increase their power and tactical capabilities.

The Iranian Armed Forces have recently test-fired different types of newly-developed missiles and torpedoes and tested a large number of home-made weapons, tools and equipment, including submarines, military ships, artillery, choppers, aircrafts, UAVs and air defense and electronic systems, during massive military drills.

Defense analysts and military observers say that Iran’s wargames and its advancements in weapons production have proved as a deterrent factor.

The Iranian officials have always underscored that the country’s defense program cannot be affected by the nuclear deal clinched between Iran and the world powers on July 14.

Obama Teams with Silicon on Syrian Refugees

Posted on by

In part from HuffPo:

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has responded to a petition calling on the U.S. to resettle tens of thousands of Syrian refugees within its borders, inviting the man who started the petition to the White House for a meeting.

George Batah, 23, came from Syria in 2013 and now lives in Chicago. He said he started the petition in late August because he felt the United States has a moral obligation to continue being “the leader in refugee resettlement.”

His petition asked the White House to accept at least 65,000 Syrian refugees by 2016. The administration did not commit to that number in its response Thursday, instead reiterating that it intends to bring at least 10,000.

“Under President Obama, the U.S. is the world’s largest donor of humanitarian aid, having contributed $4 billion in aid to date to help meet urgent needs in the most effective way,” the administration wrote. “The President has also directed his Administration to scale up the number of Syrian refugees we will bring to the U.S. next year to at least 10,000.”

How the White House Got Silicon Valley to Take On the Refugee Crisis
After the president’s request, Silicon Valley code writers went to work at record pace.
White House and Silicon Valley Take On Syria Crisis

Bloomberg: Even Jason Goldman, a former senior technology executive at

companies including Twitter, Medium, and Google, was surprised by how quickly some of his former Silicon Valley colleagues were able to answer the call.
Goldman, now sitting in Washington as the first-ever White House chief digital officer, and his colleague Joshua Miller, a former Facebook employee overseeing the Obama administration’s digital products, had gone to work lining up allies for a push to aid the waves of Syrian refugees flooding out of the country a little over a week prior. Now they were staring at donation platforms, crafted from scratch, that were ready to roll out.
“That’s a pretty fast turnaround time to actually build and ship code out into the wild,” Goldman says.
“That’s a pretty fast turnaround time to actually build and ship code out into the wild.”
Jason Goldman, White House chief digital officer
The response—and the equivalent of millions of dollars in donations that resulted—from Kickstarter, Twitter, Airbnb, and Instacart marked a new approach to address what many in the U.S. government view as an intractable crisis. Nearly 12 million Syrians have been displaced by the civil war raging in their country, according to the UN Refugee Agency. Thousands per day are flooding into European nations unequipped to handle the surge.
The White House has directed more than $4.5 billion to aid refugees, and pledged last month to allow and additional 10,000 into the U.S. next year. Still, the metastasizing crisis has up to this point far outweighed the global response. The U.N. Refugee Agency estimates the awareness level in the U.S. sits at 4 percent.


“We don’t have refugees in our backyard, we don’t have camps, we don’t have refugee camps on our soil so a lot of the American public doesn’t have a full understanding of what is going on,” says Jennifer Patterson, USA for UNHCR, the UN non-profit arm tasked with raising money and awareness for refugees. “The scope is really enormous right now.”
That was part of the calculation behind a few lines in President Barack Obama’s September speech to the United Nations General Assembly—a call not just to world leaders to address the crisis, but also private industry. Goldman and his team were looped into the call by National Security Council staff in the lead up to the remarks and went to work.
Within a week of Obama’s speech, Kickstarter had partnered with UNHCR to launch a first-of-its-kind non-profit campaign on the platform. Obama and Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, kicked in videos to help. More than $1 million was raised in less than 24 hours. Instacart linked up with UNHCR to create an option for its online shoppers to also purchase meals for refugee families. Airbnb pledged housing credits to aid workers in the region and matched any donations from its online community. Twitter launched its donation product early to ease the fundraising process on the platform for non-governmental organizations.
White House officials acknowledge that the start-up driven campaigns are far from the, or even a major piece of the, solution to the crisis. But along with driving donations and awareness, there are plans to make the idea a permanent model going forward. Other companies are preparing to launch similar initiatives, Patterson says.
“Really what we were doing here was just using the White House convening power to say, look, this is a real problem out in the world,” Goldman says. “Here’s how to think about it, here’s organizations you can work with, find the right fit for your product and you and your users and really step up and be involved.”

Finally Arrest Warrants Issued on Hezbollah

Posted on by

Argentine court seeks arrest of Hezbollah man for ’92 bombing Hussein Suleiman wanted by country’s Supreme Court for attack on Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires that killed 22

TimesofIsrael: Argentina’s Supreme Court of Justice issued an international arrest warrant against Hussein Mohamad Ibrahim Suleiman, a Hezbollah member who is being investigated for his involvement in the 1992 attack against the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires.
The attack, which came two years before the bombing of Jewish organization AMIA in Buenos Aires, killed 22 people and injured more than 200. The court on Thursday also reiterated the warrant to arrest Jose Salman El Reda Reda, also as a suspect in the deadly attack.

Suleiman was arrested in Jordan in 2001 and confessed that in 1991 he traveled to Sao Paulo, Brazil, later transporting to Buenos Aires the explosives used in the deadly blast.
The ruling from Argentina’s highest court said, “Since 2005, this Court has been investigating Hussein Mohamad Ibrahim Suleiman as an operative agent of the Hezbollah terrorist organization and a member of the Islamic Jihad.”
The ruling added that: “Recently, in September, 2015, the Israel Embassy in Buenos Aires, through the Foreign Affairs Ministry, confirmed the information and thus the international arrest warrant was issued on the named.”
On Friday, Israeli officials welcomed the ruling and confirmed its role in the investigation.
A statement issued by the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires said: “Israel sees with satisfaction all the advances in the search for truth and justice in the cause against our embassy in Buenos Aires.”

Perspective, two years later:

19 Years Since AMIA Argentina Bombing and Hezbollah Terror Threat Growing

From the Israeli Defense Force: On this date in 1994, the Lebanese terrorist organization attacked a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, killing 85 and wounding hundreds. Today, Hezbollah has an extensive terror network around the globe, making it one of the largest and most violent terrorist organizations in the world.

Nineteen years ago today – at 9:53 a.m. on July 18, 1994 – a shock wave ripped through the city of Buenos Aires, the capital of Argentina. A Hezbollah terrorist had detonated a car bomb with more than 400 kg of explosives outside the building of the Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina (AMIA, a Jewish community center and headquarters of the Jewish community of Argentina). The vast amount of explosives caused the building to collapse, killing 85 people and wounding more than 300.

This was one of Hezbollah’s bloodiest acts of terror. The attack was perpetrated in the heart of Buenos Aires and caused damage to surrounding buildings, including a school. Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, had been quoted in the Al-Watan al-Arabi newspaper a month before the attack, saying: “One thousand suicide commandos are ready to strike Israel across the entire globe.”

Khader Tleis, a member of the Lebanese parliament on behalf of Hezbollah, said that Israel knew that the terrorist organization could “do a lot even outside Lebanon,” and threatened that Israel would be hit “in and outside of Lebanon.” These public expressions reflect the clear objectives of the terrorist organization: to eradicate Israel and to impose radical Islamist Shiite theology.

The Iran-Hezbollah Connection

“Diplomats at the Iranian embassy in Buenos Aires who collaborated with the planners of the attack knew that the explosion would injure and kill many Argentines. Iranians knew, Hezbollah terrorists knew, those who assisted in the attack knew – knew and planned,” former Israeli Minister of Public Security Avi Dichter later stated. “Diplomats, neighbors and passersby who just went out there at the wrong time were executed.”

At a press conference on October 25, 2006, Argentine prosecutors Dr. Alberto Nisman and Marcelo Martínez Burgos revealed the primary findings of the Argentine investigation into the attack. Among their main points: The investigation unequivocally determined that the decision to bomb the AMIA building had been made by the leadership of the Iranian regime and carried out by Hezbollah, Iran’s proxy for implementing its policies.

In light of the report, the Argentine prosecution asked Judge Rodolfo Canicoba Corral to issue international arrest warrants for seven high-ranking members of the Iranian regime and one senior Hezbollah terrorist operative, all involved in the terrorist attack. One of the seven was Ahmad Vahidi, who currently serves as the Iranian minister of defense and was commander of the Iranian regime’s Quds Force at the time of the 1994 attack.

Next up, Normalizing Relations with North Korea

Posted on by

Sheesh, this blogger has been predicting this….. THE MADNESS CONTINUES:

North Korea reportedly willing to sign peace treaty with US to end conflict

FNC: North Korea reportedly rejected the idea of resuming talks to abandon its nuclear program on Saturday, but said it would welcome negotiations for a peace treaty with Washington.

North Korea’s foreign ministry made the statement one day after President Obama and South Korean President Park Geun-hye said they were ready to open talks with Pyongyang on sanctions if they were serious about dissolving its nuclear program, according to Reuters.

“If the United States insists on taking a different path, the Korean peninsula will only see our unlimited nuclear deterrent being strengthened further,” the North said in a statement.

North and South Korea are still technically at war after signing a truce in 1953 to temporarily end their conflict. The U.S. also signed the deal after backing the South.

Obama, while meeting with Park on Friday, said Iran had been prepared to have a “serious conversation” about the possibility of giving up the pursuit of nuclear weapons. He said there’s no indication of that in North Korea’s case.

“At the point where Pyongyang says, `We’re interested in seeing relief from sanctions and improved relations, and we are prepared to have a serious conversation about denuclearization,’ it’s fair to say we’ll be right there at the table,” Obama told a joint news conference.

In a joint statement after Friday’s meeting, the U.S. and South Korea said that if North Korea decides to launch another rocket into space or test a nuclear explosion, “it will face consequences, including seeking further significant measures by the U.N. Security Council.” The statement also said they would never accept North Korea as a nuclear weapons state.

North Korea had walked away from talks involving the U.S. and four other countries in 2008 and continued to conduct nuclear tests. It claims the only way to end conflict with Washington is to sign a peace treaty.

Park’s visit Friday further strengthened South Korea’s ties with the U.S.

U.S. retains 28,500 troops in South Korea, a legacy of the 1950-53 Korean War, and nearly 50,000 troops in Japan. Obama called the U.S.-South Korean alliance “unbreakable.” Park called it a “lynchpin” of regional security.

In August, the two Koreas threatened each other with war after two South Korean soldiers were wounded by land mines Seoul says were planted by the North. The tensions have since eased, and the two sides have agreed to resume next week reunions of Korean families divided by the Korean War.

The Obama administration has faced criticism from hawks and doves alike for a lack of high-level attention on North Korea, which estimated to have enough fissile material for between 10 and 16 nuclear weapons. More details here.

From McClatchy:

Obama said the U.S. would be willing to talk with North Korea about sanctions relief and improved relations if it agreed to give up nuclear weapons. He said there’s no indication that the government in Pyongyang can “foresee a future in which they did not possess or were not pursuing nuclear weapons.”

Citing the U.S. outreach to Cuba and the agreement to limit Iran’s ability to build nuclear weapons in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions, Obama said the U.S. is “prepared to engage nations with which we have had troubled histories.” He stressed that he and Park reaffirmed that neither country would accept North Korea as a nuclear weapon state and will insist that Pyongyang abide by its obligations.

“These are both countries that have a long history of antagonism towards the United States,” he said of Iran and North Korea. “But we were prepared to have a serious conversation with the Iranians once they showed that they were serious about the possibility of giving up the pursuit of nuclear weapons.”

Saying nothing of human rights violations, the official White House statement is here:

2015 United States-Republic of Korea Joint Statement on North Korea

On October 16, 2015, President Barack Obama of the United States of America and President Park Geun-hye of the Republic of Korea committed to the following.

The United States-Republic of Korea alliance remains committed to countering the threat to peace and security posed by North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs as well as other provocations. We will maintain our robust deterrence posture and continue to modernize our alliance and enhance our close collaboration to better respond to all forms of North Korean provocations.

The United States and the Republic of Korea share deep concern about the continued advancement of North Korea’s UN-proscribed nuclear and missile capabilities and commit to address the North Korean nuclear problem with utmost urgency and determination.

We reaffirm our commitment to our common goal, shared by the international community, to achieve the complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization of North Korea in a peaceful manner. North Korea’s continuing development of its nuclear and ballistic missile programs is an ongoing violation of multiple UN Security Council resolutions and is contrary to North Korea’s commitments under the 2005 Joint Statement of the Six-Party Talks. We strongly urge North Korea to immediately and fully comply with its international obligations and commitments.

We oppose any actions by North Korea that raise tensions or violate UN Security Council resolutions. In particular, if North Korea carries out a launch using ballistic missile technology or a nuclear test, it will face consequences, including seeking further significant measures by the UN Security Council.  In this regard, we are committed to working with the international community to ensure the effective and transparent implementation of all UN Security Council resolutions, including sanctions measures, concerning North Korea, and we encourage all states to exercise strict vigilance against North Korea’s prohibited activities.

The United States and the Republic of Korea maintain no hostile policy towards North Korea and remain open to dialogue with North Korea to achieve our shared goal of denuclearization. Recognizing the common interests of our Six-Party Talks partners in the denuclearization of North Korea, we will continue to strengthen our coordination with China and the other parties in order to bring North Korea, which has refused all offers of denuclearization dialogue, back to credible and meaningful talks as soon as possible.

We reaffirm that we will never accept North Korea as a nuclear-weapon state, and that its continued pursuit of nuclear weapons is incompatible with its economic development goals. Along with the rest of the international community, we stand ready to offer a brighter future to North Korea, if North Korea demonstrates a genuine willingness to completely abandon its nuclear and ballistic missile programs, and agrees to abide by its international obligations and commitments.

The United States appreciates President Park’s tireless efforts to improve inter-Korean relations, including through repeated overtures to North Korea, and welcomes President Park’s principled approach that resulted in a peaceful resolution of the August tensions.  The United States will continue to strongly support her vision of a peacefully unified Korean Peninsula, as envisaged in her Dresden address. We will intensify high-level strategic consultations to create a favorable environment for the peaceful unification of the Korean Peninsula.

The Republic of Korea and the United States join the international community in condemning the deplorable human rights situation in North Korea as documented in the 2014 UN Commission of Inquiry report. We look forward to supporting the work of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (Seoul). We remain dedicated to working with the international community to improve the human rights situation in North Korea and ensure accountability for human rights violations, as well as to improve the livelihood of the people in North Korea.

Who is Advising Ben Carson Exactly?

Posted on by

Carson Comms Director Gave Big Bucks To Democrats

By Neff at DailyCaller: A top aide to Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson gave thousands of dollars to Democrats and none to national Republicans in the last few years.

Doug Watts works as Carson’s communications director, and statements from him can be found in countless of stories about the candidate, Politico reports. But in recent years, when Watts gave money to politicians, it has been to California Democrats. He gave $1,000 to Jerry Brown in 2006 when he ran for attorney general, then another $2,210 when he ran for governor in 2010. Also in 2010, he gave $1,000 to help Barbara Boxer defeat Carly Fiorina, now one of Carson’s rivals for the Republican nomination. In 2004, he gave $1,000 to Democratic Rep. Jim Costa.

It’s not simply a case of Watts being a dyed-in-the-wool Dem his whole life, though. Early in his career, he worked extensively in California GOP politics, helping run Ronald Reagan’s 1984 presidential campaign in the state and also working for Republican Gov. George Deukmejian. In 1998, he gave $250 to the campaign of Republican Al D’Amato, a senator from New York.

Watts’ donations could be identified because donations under that name included his affiliation with Urban Media Group, a company he’s been president of since 2004.

Top Carson Aide Wants Taxpayers To Fund Farrakhan

By: Evan Gahr at Daily Caller:

Ben Carson says a Muslim should not be president.

But his key adviser, Armstrong Williams, has, unbeknownst to the good doctor’s supporters, been praising Louis Farrakhan — even urging Chicago to hire Nation of Islam security guards to fight crime.

Quite the Farrakhan aficionado, Williams had promised to broadcast his radio show live from the hate monger’s 20th anniversary Million Man March last Saturday, recalling to the Washington Times that, “It was a moving experience [in 1995], so I want to be there again.”

In a little-noticed Times column the day after the march, “To Curb Chicago Violence Bring in Nation of Islam,” Williams argued that only NOI toughs can help stem the tide of killings there and temper other inner-city pathologies by fostering greater self-respect among residents.

The Hill published Williams’s piece on October 6 under the headline, “The Nation of Islam Could Be Chicago’s Savior.”

If taxpayers foot the bill, of course.

Williams, apparently a big fan of government contracts since he received $240,000 from the George W. Bush Department of Education to promote “No Child Left Behind,” argued that the “NOI brings to the table things other private security firms and the police don’t — credibility within the community. The NOI is one of the few community-based organizations that actually recruit in prisons and also offer transitional services to ex-offenders.”

Williams opined that starting in the late 1980s NOI guards, known as the “Fruit of Islam,” successfully patrolled housing projects in New York, Chicago and Washington. The Department of Housing and Urban Development awarded the Fruit multi-million dollar contracts but they were eventually nixed after a nationwide controversy and congressional hearings in the mid-1990s.

In 1995, “HUD abruptly canceled an NOI-affiliated firm’s contract to secure Baltimore public housing buildings — citing bidding irregularities and other violations that were widely viewed as a smoke screen for a political battle over the group’s anti-Semitic rhetoric.”

Uh, yeah, Armstrong, what about all that hateful NOI rhetoric? Never mind Chicago residents. It seems that journalists, whites and cops are the ones who need guards—to protect against Farrakhan.

The hatemonger famously tried to incite his followers to kill the Washington Post reporter who exposed Jesse Jackson’s “Hymietown” slur in the 1980s. More recently, Farrakhan urged blacks to “rise up and kill those who kill us” unless the federal government intercedes on their behalf.

In a rhetorical sleight of hand, Williams writes that, “Extremist elements of the NOI should be sternly and unequivocally condemned.On the other hand, more moderate Muslims have made it a point of standing up for their communities”

OK. Sounds plausible at first. Williams is probably the most deft practitioner of sophistry on the political scene since the US-born Soviet Union spokesman Vladmir Pozner, who famously went on television and made the USSR downing a Korean civilian jetliner with hundreds aboard in 1983 sound justifiable.

And Williams contention, if read quickly, also seems reasonable. Just stay away from the Nation of Islam “extremists elements” and stick with the moderates. But are there any other “elements” in the Nation of Islam besides “extremists?”

For Williams, what counts as non-extremist elements of the Nation of Islam? Do the moderates disagree with the late Farrakhan aide Khalid Muhammad that Jews are “blood suckers?”

They just think Jews get too many transfusions? Centrist members of Farrakhan’s quasi-cult disagree with their leader that Hitler was a “great man?” They just think he was an o.k. guy?

In his column, Williams cites as an example of a moderate the Nation of Islam member David Muhammad who received nationwide media attention by filming drug dealers and customers in Chicago. Muhammad could not immediately be reached for comment but there is nothing online to indicate he ever condemned Farrakhan’s anti-Semitism or incitement to violence.

Regardless, any money the Nation of Islam were to receive from contracts would be controlled by Farrakhan, not the so-called moderates.

Williams — who has sparred with this reporter and deemed his description of Carson in a freelance piece for The Daily Beast as “conservatives’ great black hope” highly “offensive” — did not respond to repeated emails. He was asked to provide the names of Nation of Islam moderates and whether Carson supports his proposal to have Farrakhan feed at the public trough.

But Zionist Organization of America president Morton Klein called for Carson to disassociate himself from Williams’s proposal and possibly send him packing.

“I am really surprised that somebody as respected as Armstrong Williams would urge the government to use a racist, anti-Semitic and anti-white group for anything”, he told the Washington Gadfly. “Ben Carson should condemn these remarks and say he should say nothing to do with this. Ben Carson should denounce this ludicrous policy and make sure he has nothing to do it. [Carson] should reconsider whether Armstrong has the type of judgment that he wants around him.”

There is yet another matter regarding Ben Carson that where alarm bells should be sounding:

Ben Carson Jumps Shark: Open to Federal Control Over State Elections

By J. Christian Adams, PJMedia: Ben Carson is a good guy. He’d make a great secretary of Health and Human Services.  But after what he told CNN today, no constitutional conservative should support him for president.

For a change Jeb Bush was right and Ben Carson was dead wrong.

Carson told CNN that he is open to reviving federal control over state elections through the Voting Rights Act. CNN:
Ben Carson said Thursday that he wants the Voting Rights Act protected, adding he’d like to hear Jeb Bush explain why he does not support its reauthorization. “Of course I want the Voting Rights Act to be protected. Whether we still need it or not or whether we’ve outgrown the need for it is questionable,” he told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “Maybe we have, maybe we haven’t. But I wouldn’t jeopardize it.”
This is precisely what the racial-interest groups and the Democrats want — giving an attorney general like Eric Holder revived power to block state election laws by edict, as they did to Texas and South Carolina voter ID and citizenship verification in Florida and Georgia.

Carson and Sharpton
To recap, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 forced 16 states to obtain federal approval for every election law change no matter how big or how small.  When a polling placed moved from a school library to a school gym, Washington, D.C., had to approve.  The Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder in 2013 ruled that such federal oversight upset the constitutional balance by using  circumstances from 50 years ago to justify federal intrusion into state power, and the Court extinguished the oversight.
Since then, the institutional left has sought to reassert federal power because it helps Democrats win elections.  For example, prior to the 2012 presidential race, the Justice Department stopped Florida from checking for noncitizens on the rolls.  In 2009, the DOJ blocked Kinston, North Carolina, from having non-partisan elections because, as the DOJ said, if the word “Democrat” is not next to the name of the candidate, black voters won’t know for whom to vote.
This is the madness that Carson is open to resurrecting.
Perhaps he doesn’t know that the entire Voting Rights Act is still in force, save for the federal pre-approval rule struck down by the Supreme Court.  I’d wager that Jeb Bush and the other top-tier candidates know that.
Carson was already suspiciously naive about the role and agenda of racial-interest groups regarding electoral issues. Earlier this year Carson appeared at Al Sharpton’s National Action Network convention.

The National Action Network is a racial-interest group of the first order, routinely stoking racial tensions and dividing Americans along color lines.  Some have indicated that Carson sought to sway minds, but that explanation only exacerbates the questions surrounding Carson’s understanding of these issues.  Anyone familiar with the National Action Network knows how immune it is to being swayed by opposing viewpoints.

Carson said he “has the same goal” as Sharpton.  Really? Either Carson is frightfully naive, or conservatives should be very concerned about Ben Carson.

Perhaps Carson will walk his comment back about federal control over state elections.  Perhaps he will explain that he didn’t fully understand the issue.  That’s precisely the problem.  Being receptive to empowering bureaucrats to block state election laws is a nonstarter for constitutional conservatives, especially ones who have been paying attention to the abuses of Eric Holder’s Justice Department.