Hillary and Kerry, Stewards of Soros Policy

Posted on May 18, 2014May 18, 2014 by Denise Simon

Money buys influence and Soros has both. While much has been written and exposed on George Soros, at the very top U.S. leadership follows the Soros edict, follow my playbook and you will be rewarded.

Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Kerry have all left a wake of destruction globally as they have been bought by George Soros. Most recently, matters relating to Israel, Russia and the European Union appear to defy logic, when upon a closer look, Soros is at the core of policy.

Quietly, last week, John Kerry welcomed and introduced George Soros at a conference held at the George C. Marshall Center to discuss matters on civil society. When Soros speaks, leadership listens and on the subject of civil society, Soros is dictating society according to his own objectives. None of those objectives are in keeping with America’s best interests. Obama, Hillary and Kerry are complete acolytes of Soros and obey his commands.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry will introduce liberal megadonor George Soros at an open forum on Tuesday, the latest evidence of the billionaire using his political connections to benefit his investments and foreign policy goals, critics say.

Kerry will introduce Soros at the 1:30 p.m. forum on May 13 at the George C. Marshall Center in Washington, D.C., according to a State Department event notice.

Soros will discuss “strengthening civil society, democracy and the world economy” with Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Douglas Frantz following Kerry’s introduction.

Soros, a New York City hedge fund manager who amassed great wealth through his company Soros Fund Management, has used his foundation network—known as the Open Society Foundations (OSF)—to dispense more than $11 billion to groups abroad as well as numerous left-leaning U.S. groups in the last three decades.

He is perhaps the Democratic Party’s most famous donor, contributing almost $24 million to advocacy groups that supported Kerry’s failed presidential bid in 2004, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. He also donated $1 million to the Priorities USA Action Super PAC that helped reelect President Barack Obama in 2012.

Critics say Soros leverages his political connections to increase the returns on his investments.

While Soros has increased his multi-million dollar investments in both U.S. and foreign companies that extract shale oil and gas, the Obama administration has championed natural gas as a less carbon-intensive bridge fuel toward a “clean-energy future.” The administration’s proposal to offer incentives to companies that use trucks powered by natural gas would benefit Westport Innovations, a company that converts diesel engines for natural gas use and is partially owned by Soros’ hedge fund.

Soros’ political advocacy also tends to blend with his investments. He proposed in 2009 that developed countries create a “green fund” to combat climate change in developing countries by directing billions from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) toward forestry, land-use, and agricultural projects. Soros’ fund controls more than a $200 million stake in Adecoagro, a Luxembourg-based company that owns hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland in South America and would benefit from the IMF cash infusion.

Soros told the New Yorker in a 2004 interview that “there are occasionally symbiotic moments between political and business interests” that occur during his efforts to influence American policy.

Michael Rubin, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and former Pentagon adviser in the George W. Bush administration, said in an email that he hopes “Kerry will take a long shower after the event” because hosting Soros is the “diplomatic equivalent of prostitution.”

Rubin said the optics of the event are “horrible” given Soros’ longstanding ties to the administration and his past record of marrying policy advocacy with business.

“If Kerry wants to sponsor a well-deserving guest at a State Department ‘open forum,’ why not someone like Malala Yousefzai, the young school girl whom the Taliban tried to murder?” he said. “Our diplomats could learn a thing or two about moral clarity from her; they certainly won’t from Soros.”

State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf told the Washington Free Beacon that criticisms of Soros’ appearance at the event are “wholly ridiculous and have no basis in fact whatsoever.”

“This is a regular secretary’s open forum event intended to inform and educate department employees,” Harf said in an email. “George Soros was invited to discuss his views on support of civil society.”

Harf noted that the forum has hosted “guests from diverse points of view” in the past, including Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Martin Dempsey, General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt, and Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson.

Soros’ actions abroad have also conflicted with traditional U.S. foreign policy stances, raising questions about his appearance at a State Department-sponsored forum.

The OSF have financially supported groups that support boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaigns against Israel and called it an “apartheid state,” according to a report last May by NGO Monitor.

The OSF network finances groups such as the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, a Gaza-based organization that regularly accuses Israel of being an “apartheid state” and refers to terror attacks on Israeli civilians as “resistance.”

Kerry was widely criticized last month after warning that Israel could become “an apartheid state” if it failed to reach a two-state solution with the Palestinians.

Additionally, Soros has financed opposition groups and media in countries such as Azerbaijan and Armenia, two countries that are still locked in a violent and decades-old territorial dispute over the Nagorno-Karabakh region. Soros’ involvement there prompted leaders to express concerns that he could further stoke tensions and contribute to another outbreak of war.

“He pursues his own vision, undisturbed by his effect on other nations or the interests of his own,” wrote Richard Miniter, a contributor to Forbes, in 2011. “It is hard for foreign governments to hold him accountable, and his goals and methods are usually kept secret.”

Soros wrote in his 2006 book, The Age of Fallibility: The Consequences of the War on Terror, that “the main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.”

Soros has an estimated net worth of $20 billion—much of it made through his controversial investment philosophy of making massive, highly leveraged bets on the direction of global financial markets. His involvement in the East Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s drew sharp rebukes from leaders in the region.

He is a major donor to the liberal Center for American Progress and an architect of the Democracy Alliance, a shadowy organization that disburses millions to left-leaning groups but does not disclose its donors.

Additionally, Soros has staked out controversial positions on social issues, calling in 2010 for the full legalization of marijuana in the United States.

Soros’ office did not respond to a request for comment.

When it comes to Russia and Putin’s aggressive missions towards Crimea, Ukraine, the Baltic states, George Soros has his hands all over the policy of the United States and the European Union where the International Monetary Fund plays in the background.

The billionaire financier says in its tepid response to Russia’s Crimea land grab, the EU flubbed a key chance to breathe new life into the stale union.

George Soros, one of the world’s leading investors, has warned that the European Union is in danger of falling apart if it fails to confront Vladimir Putin’s naked aggression in Ukraine.

The billionaire financier told The Daily Beast that European governments should have seized on Russia’s land grab in Crimea to breathe new life into a union that is disintegrating and stumbling towards oblivion. Instead, he argued, squabbling European nations have failed to meet the challenge and continued to act in their own narrow self-interest. “Europe was totally unprepared for this crisis and Putin outmaneuvered Europe with no difficulty,” he said.

Soros, who became known as the Man Who Broke the Bank of England after making $1 billion by betting against Europe’s previous financial union, has long insisted that the Euro was being fatally mismanaged. His latest book, published this week, is entitled The Tragedy of the European Union. A loud supporter at the launch of the Euro currency and a cheerleader for a united Europe, Soros has been confounded by what he calls the “nightmare” reality 15 years after its introduction.

Speaking in London, he said it was heart-breaking to see European governments shrug their shoulders at the precise moment the continent was finally witnessing an unprecedented popular uprising in the name of the European Union. “Ukrainians have effectively proved that they are willing to sacrifice their lives to get closer to a Europe that is, at the same time, in the process of disintegration,” he said.

With Putin’s troops in Crimea and a referendum on joining Russia due to be held over the weekend, Soros said there was still time for Europe to act, and reinvigorate the European Union’s withering soul.

“I would argue passionately that [the European Union] should not be a failed experiment and events in Ukraine are a wake-up call to face that issue,” he said. “It’s a challenge, and I hope that Europe will respond to it and actually really rediscover its original mission because that’s what got lost in this distortion that has occurred.”

Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, indicated that Europe was willing to increase pressure on the Kremlin on Thursday during her most emotional and strident speech since the start of the Ukrainian crisis. She said a referendum orchestrated by Crimea’s pro-Russia parliament would be a “catastrophe,” and indicated that the EU was willing to impose travel bans and asset freezes on people and firms accused of helping to violate Ukraine’s territorial integrity as soon as Monday.

Soros argued that it was more important for Europe to offer positive assistance to the struggling Ukrainian government. “It’s very important to respond and respond the right way, which is not necessarily to impose sanctions on Russia, but to actually help Ukraine financially, and also with technical assistance—something like a European Marshall Plan for Ukraine—that would be the right response,” he said.

In his new book, which asks “Is it too late to save the European Union?” Soros argues that Putin’s attempt to build a new Eastern bloc in Ukraine and beyond could eventually jolt Europe back to life. “We have just witnessed a dramatic test of strength between Russia and the European Union. Russia came out ahead,” he said. “Russia has benefited from the fact that Europe is disunited. But now that Russia is emerging as a threat to Europe, it may once again become a force that brings Europe closer together. I pin my hopes on Chancellor Merkel … one must never give up hope.”

He is hardly holding his breath, however. Soros blames the Germans for eroding Europe’s fragile union by enforcing policies of austerity and allowing southern European nations to build up debts they will never be able to repay. He accused Berlin of doing “just enough” to keep the Euro afloat: “This confirms my worst fears. It’s the nightmare I’ve been talking about and there is little chance we’ll wake up soon.”

Germany’s economic strength makes it the Eurozone’s driving force—Britain is not part of the currency union—but the nation’s history has turned it into a reluctant leader. “Germany has emerged as the imperial power, the hegemon of Europe, but the German public does not want to be in that position exactly because of the painful memory of Hitler. It is in denial and is unwilling to live up to the responsibilities,” he said.

Despite its unwillingness to assume a strong leadership role, Soros argues that Berlin’s fiscal rigidity has created a two-tier Europe where debtor countries are at a permanent disadvantage. If that does not change, he said: “We will have a Europe in which Germany is seen not as a leader but as an oppressor and exploiter. It will not be loved and admired by the rest of Europe it will be hated and resisted.”

That resistance has already begun in a swathe of countries where popular anti-European sentiment has been seen on the street and at the ballot box. Europe-wide elections in May are expected to send a record number of politicians to Brussels who are hostile to the very institutions they will be populating. In Britain, the governing Conservative Party has promised a referendum on leaving the European Union altogether. “That would be a big step forward in the disintegration of the European Union,” Soros said. “Britain’s absence would greatly diminish the weight of the EU in the world … The world badly needs Europe’s soft power.”

Rogue and the State Department

Posted on May 13, 2014May 13, 2014 by Denise Simon

It appears that one of the most convoluted processes in Washington DC is the State Department procedure to add to the Terrorism List, FTO (Foreign Terror Organization).

Putting Boko Harem on the FTO took an epic effort to do so after Hillary Clinton refused, even with petitions from those in the intelligence community and from General Carter Ham, commander at AFRICOM. Then, it was not until January 13 of 2013 did John Kerry move to put Ansar al Sharia on the FTO list when more than 20 months ago they attacked both diplomatic posts in Benghazi.

So, what about other terror organizations or rogue nations like Korea? Late in the Bush administration, North Korea was removed from the FTO in an attempt to temper strained talks over DPRK’s nuclear weapons program. It was at that time too, North Korea had a different leader who was not quite as unpredictable as Kim Jung Un is now. That effort by the Bush administration failed, so why no move by Hillary Clinton or John Kerry to add DPRK back to the list? Ah, that is where the convoluted rub and debate begins again.

News of North Korea is dominated right now by Pyongyang’s threats to carry out yet another nuclear test, which would be its fourth since 2006, and its third since President Obama took office. Among the perils, given North Korea’s longtime habit of peddling its weapons to rogue recipients around the globe, is that North Korean nuclear arms could end up in the hands of terrorists. All the more reason, then, to ask why the Obama administration has not put North Korea back on the U.S. blacklist of State Sponsors of Terrorism.

For more than two decades, from 1987-2008, the U.S. — with good reason — listed North Korea as a terror-sponsoring state. That changed in 2008, when the Bush administration, in a desperate attempt to salvage a dissolving 2007 North Korean nuclear freeze deal, offered Pyongyang the gift of taking North Korea off the state terrorism blacklist.

This was part of the Six Party negotiating process with North Korea, which the State Department at the time described as give-and-take: “action for action.” But, as Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen noted in a 2011 congressional hearing, North Korea pocketed the concession and walked away: ”North Korea promised to accept the transparent verification of its denuclearization when it was removed from the list of state sponsors of terrorism by the Bush administration in October of 2008. But Pyongyang reneged on that promise and withdrew from the six-party talks after getting what it wanted.” Since then, Obama has stuck with the Bush folly, failing to restore North Korea to the blacklist.

That may sound like the least of the North Korean outrages that need addressing. But putting Kim Jong Un’s murderous weapons emporium back on the U.S. list of terror-sponsoring states is one of the easiest and least costly moves that Washington could make. Failure to do so not only gives Pyongyang a pass, but sets a terrible example for the current Iran nuclear talks in Vienna. In the Iran case, a senior U.S. administration official has described a nuclear bargaining process similar to the North Korea action-for-action debacle. This time, it is couched as “step by step, in a reciprocal way, matching the actions that Iran commits to take.”

In the State Department’s latest annual roundup of “Country Reports on Terrorism” released April 30, and covering 2013, North Korea was again excused from any state ties to terror. State summarizes the excuse with one blinkered sentence: “The Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) is not known to have sponsored any terrorist acts since the bombing of a Korean Airlines flight in 1987.”

The same State Department report goes on, however, to note that North Korea has yet to resolve the nightmare of Japanese citizens kidnapped by the North Korean government: “The Japanese government continued to seek a full accounting of the fate of 12 Japanese nationals believed to have been abducted by DPRK state entities in the 1970s and 1980s. As of the end of December, 2013, the DPRK had yet to fulfill its commitments to reopen its investigation into the abductions.”

For Washington bureaucrats, this brand of terrorism may seem a distant matter. For the families of those kidnapped, and quite likely for any surviving victims trapped for decades in totalitarian North Korea, it is an act of terror that does not quit. Right now the Obama administration is deploring the kidnapping of Nigerian schoolgirls by members of the terrorist group Boko Haram — and rightly so. State-authored kidnapping by North Korea deserves no lesser outrage. Nor does it warrant any statute of limitations, especially given North Korea’s refusal to fully account for, or render up, its human plunder.

Nor did North Korea confine its abductions to Japan. As recently as 2005, the State Department included a note which has since dropped out of its annual summaries: “There are also credible reports that other nationals were abducted from locations abroad” — including an estimated 485 civilians from South Korea since the 1950-53 Korean War. A 2011 report from the Washington-based Committee for Human Rights in North Korea gave an even more damning account of North Korean abductions, alleging that North Korea’s abductions were more numerous than officially described, and included people of at least 14 different nationalities, kidnapped not only from Japan and South Korea, but from countries such as China, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Malaysia and Thailand. To this list it would be reasonable to add American citizen Kenneth Bae, arrested while touring North Korea in 2012, and sentenced there to 15 years of hard labor.

As for the argument that North Korea is not known to have sponsored any recent terrorist acts, therefore it does not belong on the state terrorism list — this is disingenuous. Yes, it’s been a while since North Korea was caught red-handed carrying out terrorist acts as spectacular as its 1987 inflight bombing of a South Korean airliner over the Andaman Sea — which killed all 115 people on board. But, as a 2010 Congressional Research Service (CRS) report spells out, the criteria which the Secretary of State is expected to consider also include “supplying a terrorist organization with planning, training, logistics , and lethal material support…or providing other types of assistance that could provide material support for the terrorist organization’s activities.”

By that standard, North Korea qualifies as a geyser of terror-linked activity. The State Department currently lists four countries as state sponsors of terrorism: Iran, Syria, Cuba and Sudan. Since North Korea was removed from the terror-sponsoring list in 2008, it has been caught in illicit weapons trafficking with all of the first three — Iran, Syria and Cuba.

A Wiki-leaked secret U.S. government cable dated 2009, and signed by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, points to North Korean dealings with the fourth state on the terror-sponsoring list, Sudan. The cable states: “The U.S. government has information that in 2008, Sudan was negotiating a weapons deal with with the North Korean government that included purchasing North Korean medium-range ballistic missiles, short-range missiles, and anti-tank missiles.” The cable goes on to express U.S. concern about “information indicating that Sudanese entities or individuals might be engaging in missile cooperation with North Korea.”

The U.S. government has been sparing in its public release of details regarding North Korean weapons traffic. But more can be gleaned from media dispatches and other accounts, including the annual reports of the United Nations Panel of Experts on North Korea sanctions.

The most recent UN panel report, released this past March, notes that North Korea, in violation of UN sanctions, “has been, and remains actively engaged in trade in arms and related materiel,” and as part of this weapons traffic “also exports services or assistance.” As it happens, many of the recent examples cited in these UN reports involve North Korean dealings with terror-sponsoring states. For instance, this latest UN report lists, among other North Korean infractions, the export in 2012 of missile parts, shipped aboard a Chinese vessel enroute to Syria. The shipment was seized when the vessel made a stop in South Korea.

The same UN report goes into considerable detail about the arms cargo from Cuba, seized by Panama last year aboard a North Korean ship, the Chong Chon Gang. According to the manifest, the ship was carrying sugar. Hidden under the bags of sugar was a weapons stash including ammunition, surface-to-air missile system components, and two disassembled MiG-21 jet fighters, plus an additional 15 MiG-21 engines. Confronted with the evidence, Cuban authorities said the arms were being shipped to North Korea to be repaired and returned.

The 2014 UN report also describes rocket parts, “highly likely” to have been made in North Korea, found in a 500 ton weapons shipment interdicted by the Israeli Navy in 2009 about the vessel Francop, enroute to Syria from from North Korea’s longtime weapons customer, Iran. Earlier UN panel reports, going back to 2010, describe such instances as South Korea’s seizure of a shipment of “protective garments…deemed to have utility for chemical protection,” which had been loaded aboard a container ship enroute to Syria from the North Korean port of Nampo. In 2009, Thai authorities interdicted 35 tons of arms and related materiel, listed as “mechanical parts,” aboard an Ilyushin-76 aircraft coming from North Korea, which had landed at the Bangkok airport to refuel. The illicit cargo included 240 mm rockets, rocket-propelled grenades and man-portable surface-to-air missiles. The consignee was an outfit called Top Energy Institute, in Iran.

The list goes on. Citing dispatches from the French, Israeli and South Korean media, as well as the London-based Arabic newspaper Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, the 2010 CRS report (“North Korea: Back on the Terrorism List?”) summarizes a web of North Korean training, help and weapons provision to the Iranian-backed Lebanon-based terrorist group Hezbollah. The same report goes on to summarize accounts of North Korean ties to the terrorist Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, and North Korea’s cozy relationship with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which in turn has a “close relationship” with Hezbollah.

Pages: 1 2

Black Flag tops the Eiffel Tower

Posted on May 13, 2014May 13, 2014 by Denise Simon

Out of every crisis, more lessons are learned and side debates begin. Sadly, due to the Boko Harem kidnapping of hundreds of Christian girl is one event that is causing another look at a topic few have wanted to investigate and reveal, that is Islam and the flight of Christians worldwide to safer destinations.

While we know that Europe is in real trouble with regard to the infiltration of Islam into the every day culture, Britain is on a path that is following France and France is toast.

For America, there is a lesson to be learned and then eventual action to be taken. Read up here people and pay close attention to the details.

Polls show that more than 70% of the French… expect that France will become a country under submission to Islam.

Last month, between April 18-21, the Union of Islamic Organizations of France [UOIF], the French branch of the European Council for Fatwa and Research (presided over by Yusuf al Qaradawi) held its thirty-first annual conference in Le Bourget, north of Paris. As usual, jihadist and anti-Semitic books, which are banned in French bookstores but tolerated there, were offered in several booths.

As usual also, speakers were invited to deliver fiery speeches. In 2012, the keynote speaker was supposed to be Qaradawi himself, but faced with protests from the Jewish community, France denied Qaradawi a visa to enter French territory, and he was replaced by Tariq Ramadan, a Muslim Brotherhood operative who works with Qaradawi in Doha, Qatar, at the Center for Islamic Legislation and Ethics.

Tariq Ramadan was again the keynote speaker in 2013. This year, Tariq gave way to his brother, Hani, Director of the Islamic Center of Geneva, founded in 1961 by their father, Said Ramadan, son-in-law and senior disciple of Hassan al Banna, who founded the Muslim Brotherhood.

If Tariq Ramadan knows how to hide his extremism, his brother is more explicit and direct. His speech was devoted to “global threats” facing Islam; he described them as having a single source: “the Jews and Zionist barbarism,” an octopus “hiding in the shadows,” a “power that holds the global finance and the media.” He called on young French Muslims to “fight for Islam” and to go to Syria, where several hundred French youths have already joined jihadist groups.

If UOIF had only a marginal influence, such statements would be already worrying. But UOIF is the leading French Muslim organization, and Hani Ramadan’s speech, like Tariq Ramadan’s speeches in 2012 and 2013, was listened to by an audience of 150,000 enthusiastic people, and viewed by hundred of thousands of others on UOIF-TV, the digital television channel established by the UOIF.

More than 8,000,000 Muslims live in France, most of whom are French citizens, and the Muslim population in France continues to grow. France is now the main Muslim country in Europe. Successive French governments can decide to expel a Muslim preacher or a recruiter of jihadist fighters; they can deny visas, but they seem unable to do more.

Although the French government denies it, it seems clear that substantial ransoms were paid to Islamist groups for the release of French hostages: $28,000,000 to al Qaeda in Niger in October 2013 and $18,000,000 to Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant in Syria, on April 19.

The creation, on April 25, by French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve, of a counseling center, website and telephone hotline to “advise” parents whose children are in the process of radicalization seems almost ridiculous. Entire neighborhoods are controlled by Islamist preachers and Bernard Cazeneuve knows it: officially, administrative authorities call these neighborhoods “Sensitive Urban Zones,” presumably because at any time they can explode. Unofficially, the police call them “Sharia Zones”, and have been ordered by the Department of the Interior to keep out.

Political leaders of all parties know that most elections cannot be won if the Muslim vote is neglected, and the leaders of the National Front are no exception: Marine Le Pen has long ceased to incriminate Islam and now attacks “crime” and “immigration” without providing details. Sometimes she may denounce “calls to jihad” and “fundamentalism”, but takes care not to go beyond that. Although she criticizes Qatar or Saudi Arabia, she says that France should become an “ally” of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and asks her “fellow Muslims” to join her fight against “American globalism and its Islamist allies“.

A “Collective Against Islamophobia in France” is gaining ground: it handles complaints against any critical remarks about Islam, and it can rely on the courts to punish offenders. A “League of Judicial Defense of Muslims” was also created in 2013 by Karim Achoui, a lawyer disbarred because of his links with organized crime. No anti-racist organization dares denounce Muslim anti-Semitism, and none of them criticizes speeches such as the one given by Hani Ramadan in Le Bourget.

Jewish institutions do not denounce Muslim anti-Semitism, either: they speak of an “unhealthy climate”. When, on April 28, during a tribute ceremony to the Jews deported from France to Auschwitz, Arno Klarsfeld, a member of the Council of State and son of Nazi hunters Serge and Beate Klarsfeld, said that “some of the suburban youth are anti-Semitic,” he was immediately summoned to appear before a judge.

NGOs fighting the Islamization of France are now marginalized. Their leaders are persecuted by the justice system and severely punished. The mainstream media demonize them. The main one, Riposte Laique, organized a demonstration on March 9. About four hundred people came. Three or four years ago, Riposte Laique could gather several thousand people.

The anti-Semitic and pro-Islamic standup comedian Dieudonné continues to give performances to packed theaters. On June 21, he will host a ceremony to honor people who posed with the best “quenelles” — the inverted Nazi salute he invented. More than ten thousand tickets have already been sold. On his website, Dieudosphere.com, pictures of “quenelles” are still present. Dieudosphere.com sells a comic book called Yacht People. The cover shows a fat rich man with a hooked nose rubbing his hands together and flashing a greedy smile. The resemblance to the caricatures of Jews published during the Nazi era is evident. Manuel Valls fought Dieudonné when he was Interior minister. Since he became Prime Minister, fighting Dieudonné is no longer one of his priorities.

During an interview with Alexandre Arcady, the director of Twenty Four Days, a film about the assassination seven years ago of Ilan Halimi, a young French Jew who was taken hostage and killed by young Muslims from Paris suburbs, TV journalist Aymeric Caron tried to explain that the growth of anti-Jewish hatred in France was logical because “Israeli soldiers kill Palestinian children.” These remarks did not offend anyone except a few Jewish journalists, so they were cut from the edited version of the show. Aymeric Caron explained that he was not an anti-Semite, but only “anti-Zionist.” He has recently published a book called, Incorrect: in which almost all his targets have one thing in common: They are Jews. He is invited onto many talk shows to speak about his book. Whoever looks for books about Israel will easily find books called Israel, the New Apartheid or The Invention of the Land of Israel, by Shlomo Sand. Books offering less-biased viewpoints are unavailable. Dozens of books by Tariq Ramadan are on the shelves of all main bookstores.

The number of Jews leaving France is steadily increasing. French people who have the financial means also leave the country. Most others expect the worst. Polls show that the French are now the most pessimistic people in Europe. They also show that more than 70% of the French are afraid of the rise of Islam in France: they expect that France will become a country under submission to Islam.

Iran Declares Victory for Assad in Syria

Posted on May 11, 2014May 11, 2014 by Denise Simon

Well John Kerry and Barack Obama delivered a nuclear weapons program victory for Iran so it stands to reason that Iran is doing the same and declaring victory for el Assad of Syria. Regardless of the foreign weapons, MRE’s and non-lethal assistance the White House and the State Department have provided to the wrong rebel factions in Syria, it is a waste of millions upon millions of U.S. dollars which is the least of the matter given the growing larger terror threat in the region. Only last week did Israel have to close off parts of the Golan Heights to mounting threats but now it seems the barrel bombs and TOW missiles provided to Assad opposition forces of all kinds of militia descriptions have been defeated in many districts in Syria.

So enter Iran and officially declaring victory. Sure this can be a public relations ploy but they DO often work and given the recent captures of many cities and bombings of a historical treasures and buildings, Assad is winning with the long help of Iran, Russia and even Kuwaiti millionaires.

Iran and its close ally President Bashar al-Assad have won the war in Syria, and the US-orchestrated campaign in support of the opposition’s attempt to topple the Syrian regime has failed, senior Iranian officials have told the Guardian.

In a series of interviews in Tehran, top figures who shape Iranian foreign policy said the west’s strategy in Syria had merely encouraged radicals, caused chaos and ultimately backfired, with government forces now on the front foot.

“We have won in Syria,” said Alaeddin Borujerdi, chairman of the Iranian parliament’s national security and foreign policy committee and an influential government insider. “The regime will stay. The Americans have lost it.”

Terrorism perpetrated by al-Qaida-linked jihadist groups and individuals armed and funded by Sunni Muslim Arab countries was now the main threat facing the Syrian people, Borujerdi said. Many foreign fighters who had travelled to Syria from Britain and other European countries could soon return. “We are worried about the future security of Europe,” he said.

Amir Mohebbian, a conservative strategist and government adviser, said: “We won the game in Syria easily. The US does not understand Syria. The Americans wanted to replace Assad, but what was the alternative? All they have done is encourage radical groups and made the borders less safe.

“We accept the need for change in Syria – but gradually. Otherwise, there is chaos.”

Shia Muslim Iran is Assad’s main regional backer and has reportedly spent billions of dollars propping up the regime since the first revolt against the president broke out in March 2011. Along with Russia, the regime’s principal arms supplier, it has consistently bolstered Assad in the teeth of attempts to force him to step down.

Western analysts say Iran is engaged in a region-wide power struggle or proxy war, extending beyond Syria, with the Sunni Arab states of the Gulf, principally Saudi Arabia.

Tehran thus has an obvious interest in claiming victory for the Alawite Syrian regime, which is fighting mostly Sunni rebels, they say. Iranian officials and regional experts deny that is their motive.

Majid Takht-Ravanchi, deputy Iranian foreign minister, said the priority was to accept the rebellion had failed and to restore stability in Syria before next month’s presidential elections. “Extremism and turmoil in Syria must be tackled seriously by the international community. Those countries that are supplying extremist forces must stop helping them,” he said.”Iran has good relations with the Syrian government, though that does not mean they listen to us,” Ravanchi said. He denied Iran had supplied weapons and Revolutionary Guards combatants to help defeat the rebels, as western intelligence agencies have claimed. “Iran has a diplomatic presence there. There is no unusual presence. We have no need to arm the Syrian government,” he said.

Despite its influence with Damascus and Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shia militia fighting alongside government forces, Iran has been largely excluded from international talks to forge a peace settlement owing to US and British objections that Tehran does not accept the need for Assad to quit .

But following last week’s rebel retreat from the strategic city of Homs, the so-called capital of the revolution, some western politicians and commentators have also reached the conclusion that Assad has won.

The US and its Gulf Arab allies have supplied funding, equipment and arms to the Syrian rebels. Last year, the US president, Barack Obama, appeared on the point of launching air and missile attacks over the Assad government’s use of chemical weapons, but Obama’s last-minute decision to pull back was interpreted in Tehran and Damascus as a sign the US was having second thoughts and was not wholly committed to winning the war.

“I think the Americans made a big mistake in Syria and I think they know it, though they would never say so,” said Mohammad Marandi, a Tehran university professor. “If they had accepted the Annan plan in 2012 [which would have left Assad in place pending a ceasefire and internationally monitored elections] we could have avoided all this.”

“Iran sincerely believed it had no other option but to support the Assad government. Anything else would have resulted in the collapse of Syria and it falling into the hands of extremists,” he said.

More than 150,000 people are believed to have died in the Syrian conflict and at least 9 million have been displaced.

So Breaker 19 to John Kerry, this is HQ, what is your 20? Rather what is the 20 of your failed foreign policy, diplomatic efforts and saving Christian lives at least in ANY country in the Middle East? We have lost count on the policy failures and by the way terrorists don’t become terrorist due to being poor and indigent…….stop using Barack Obama’s failed rhetoric….oh never mind….

DoJ, DHS has a Terrorists Hands off List

Posted on May 11, 2014May 11, 2014 by Denise Simon

While Prime Minister Cameron of Great Britain has performed an investigation on Islamists in his country, Cameron put out a rather weak statement revealing his concern for an emerging threat. Better late than never Cameron. Only a few months ago, Saudi Arabia listed the Muslim Brotherhood on their terror list and we currently know how aggressive Egypt is getting with the Muslim Brotherhood.

As of yet however the United States, that is all areas beyond the DC beltway need to put out an Amber Alert to locate the real Barack Obama policy on the Muslim Brotherhood as he has given an edict to the Department of Justice, the Military and the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as well as Customs and Border Patrol that there in fact a hands off list, at least for some ‘key’ terrorists belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood operating in the United States.

Need more proof? Our stellar friends over at Judicial Watch have struck again and are doing yeoman’s work to wade to the bottom of the matter.

Quote in part “The Obama administration appears to have a terrorist “hands off” list that permits individuals with extremist ties to enter the country, according to internal Department of Homeland Security (DHS) documents obtained by a United States Senator.

It’s unimaginable that any government would do this, but it seems like the Obama administration is constantly breaking new ground. The disturbing details of this secret initiative were made public this week by Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley, who has obtained DHS electronic mail discussing what could be a terrorist “hands off” list. The exchange includes a 2012 email chain between U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) asking whether to admit an individual with ties to various terrorist groups. The individual had scheduled an upcoming flight into the U.S., according to an announcement issued by the senator.

The person was believed to be a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and a close associate and supporter Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, according to the mail exchange obtained by Grassley’s office. The terrorist suspect had also been in secondary inspection “several dozen times of the past several years,” the agency emails reveal, but had not undergone a secondary inspection since 2010. This seems to imply that the suspect has been on the U.S. government’s radar for some time.”

Now remember we do have border states the join foreign countries, BUT, given the notion that anyone can fly into the United States with the ‘looking the other way’ approach by the State Department, DHS and the FBI, all 50 states are border states.

So Senator Grassley is still waiting for someone to come up with the goods, meaning some real answers to his letter broaching several issues and questions.

For Immediate Release May 6, 2014

Grassley Inquires About Terrorist “Hands Off” list; CBP Promises to Brief

            WASHINGTON – Senator Chuck Grassley today released internal Department of Homeland Security emails discussing an alleged terrorist “hands off” list allowing individuals with potential terrorist ties into the United States. The emails were attached to a letter he sent to the Department of Homeland Security inquiring about the “hands off” list and an individual who DHS may have admitted into the United States as a result. Senator Grassley also released the response from Customs and Border Protection, in which it committed to provide a detailed briefing on the particular case.
Grassley made his initial inquiry on February 3, 2014, after receiving the internal Department of Homeland Security emails regarding the admittance of individuals into the United States with potential terrorist ties.   One of the emails says that an individual “has sued CBP twice in the past and that he’s one of the several hands off passengers nationwide.” According to the emails, the individual was allegedly a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and a “close associate” of a supporter of “Hamas, Hizbollah, and (Palestinian) Islamic Jihad.”
Grassley recently received the response from Customs and Border Protection. Grassley said he looks forward to his staff receiving the detailed briefing promised in its letter.
Here’s the text of Grassley’s February 3, 2014 letter. A signed copy can be found here. The response from Customs and Border Protection can be found here.
February 3, 2014
VIA ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION
The Honorable Jeh Johnson Secretary Department of Homeland Security 3801 Nebraska Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20528
Dear Secretary Johnson:
My office recently received copies of disturbing internal Department of Homeland Security (DHS) e-mails regarding the admittance of individuals into the United States with potential ties to terrorism.
The May 2012 e-mail chain between U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) surrounds the question of whether to admit someone who had scheduled an upcoming flight into the U.S. Allegedly, the individual was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and a “close associate” of a supporter of “Hamas, Hizbollah, and (Palestinian) Islamic Jihad.” According to the same e-mail, the individual had been in secondary inspection “several dozen times of the past several years,” but had not had a secondary inspection since 2010.
One of the responses to the initial e-mail states: “The [CBP National Targeting Center (NTC)] Watch Commander advised that the subject has sued CBP twice in the past and that he’s one of the several hands off passengers nationwide. . . . Apparently his records were removed in December 2010 and the DHS Secretary was involved in the matter.”   The e-mail continues:
I’m puzzled how someone could be a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, be an associate of [redacted], say that the US is staging car bombings in Iraq and that [it] is ok for men to beat their wives, question who was behind the 9/11 attacks, and be afforded the luxury of a visitor visa and de-watchlisted. It doesn’t appear that we’ll be successful with denying him entry tomorrow but maybe we could re-evaluate the matter in the future since the decision to de[-]watchlist him was made 17 months ago.
In order to understand the events described in these e-mails, please provide the Committee with answers to the following questions:
1)    Why was this individual removed from the watchlist in December 2010?
2)    Please describe the nature, extent, and reasons for the involvement of the DHS Secretary or her staff in the removal of the individual from the watchlist.
3)    What is the current watchlist status of this individual?
4)    How many people are on the “hands off” list mentioned in the email?
5)    What qualifies someone to receive the “hands off” designation?
6)    Does filing a lawsuit result in being designated “hands off” and thus avoiding secondary security screenings?
7)    Who makes the determination that an individual should be considered “hands off”?
I would appreciate receiving answers to these questions by March 3, 2014. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Tristan Leavitt of my staff at (202) 224-5225. I look forward to your prompt response.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Grassley Ranking Member
cc: The Honorable Thomas Carper, Chairman U.S. Senate, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
The Honorable Tom A. Coburn, Ranking Member U.S. Senate, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Carlton I. Mann, Acting Inspector General U.S. Department of Homeland Security

1. Attachment at 2. 2. Id. at 1. 3. Id.

Sure with American citizens that obey the law received the same kinds of generosity and grace from the very government agencies that work for us. Where is the outrage people?