General Dunford Said Russia is #1 Threat, Here is Why

Anyone read the book ‘Disinformation’ by Ronald Rychlak and LtG. Ion Pacepa?

General Joseph Dunford is next in line to replace General Dempsey as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. His assessment today about who represented the topic threat to America’s National Security shocked the lawmakers when his response was Russia.

Peeling back some layers, we will come to understand why the General’s alarming conclusions are exactly right. Russia is operating a stealth KGB operation and it has been effective.

Wikileaks Release Indicates Hacking Team Sold To FSB, Russia’s Secret Police

Hacking Team Galileo console

From Forbes:

Now that Wikileaks has released the emails included in the 415GB leaked by the hackers who breached Italian “lawful intercept” provider Hacking Team TISI NaN%, the world has easy access to a trove of information blowing open the inner workings of the private surveillance industry. Amongst the files seen by FORBES so far, emails detailing Hacking Team’s sales to Russia’s secret police, the FSB.

Previous analysis of the leaks had sold its Galileo Remote Control System (RCS) to KVANT, a Russian state-owned military technology company. This inspired questions from  Dutch politician and European Member of Parliament Marietje Shaake about the potential breach of European Union sanctions about the sale of such goods to Russia, which has been put on blacklists for its operations in war-torn Ukraine. Selling to the FSB would likely concern onlookers more, given the agency’s widespread access to communications in Russia. Many more details here.

Going beyond the next layer

Cyber Caliphate Hackers Not Linked to Islamic State

State Department warns IS online threat ‘unmatched’

The hacker group Cyber Caliphate that was thought to be an online arm of the Islamic State has no ties to the terror group despite its cyber attacks in support of the ultra-violent al-Qaeda offshoot, according to a State Department security report.

“Although Cyber Caliphate declares to support ISIL, there are no indications—technical or otherwise—that the groups are tied,” the two-page report from the Overseas Security Advisory Council states. The Islamic State (IS) is also known by the acronyms ISIL or ISIS.

Instead, Russian hackers now appear to be linked to the Cyber Caliphate, a fact discovered by French government authorities after a cyber attack on TV5Monde television in France last April.

In addition to the announcing the lack of a connection between IS and the Cyber Caliphate, the State Department warned that the terrorist group nevertheless continues to have unprecedented online recruitment and propaganda capabilities.

“ISIL’s online presence for propaganda and recruitment purposes continues to be unmatched by other terrorist organizations,” the report said.

The Islamic State uses Internet sites and social media strategies to disseminate and control its Islamist message.

“ISIL’s use of Twitter has been deemed particularly effective; a Brookings study reported at least 46,000 Twitter accounts in use by ISIL supporters during the timeframe of September through December 2014,” the report said.

IS also deftly exploits modern technology and has mastered online propaganda in appealing to young and computer-savvy foreigners, including known hackers who support its ends.

“Although ISIL continues to demonstrate success in using online tools for propaganda, recruitment, and fundraising purposes, the suspected link of Russian hackers to the TV5Monde attack reinforces the assessment that ISIL still lacks the ability to carry out a technically sophisticated cyberattack,” the report concludes.

President Obama on Monday defended the administration strategy against ISIL—despite the group’s expansion from Iraq and Syria to other parts of the world.

Obama said ISIL is “particularly effective” in recruiting foreigners, including Americans, and is using online methods to spread its ideology.

The president said that to defeat ISIL and al Qaeda, “it is going to also require us to discredit their ideology.”

However, the president and his administration continue to play down the Islamist nature of the threat, preferring the non-religious term “violent extremism.”

“Ideologies are not defeated with guns. They’re defeated by better ideas, [a] more attractive and more compelling vision,” Obama said.

“So the United States will continue to do our part by working with partners to counter ISIL’s hateful propaganda, especially online.”

The State Department report, “Who Is Cyber Caliphate? Re-examining the Online ISIL Threat,” was produced by a unit of the Department’s Office of Diplomatic Security, which supports American businesses overseas. It describes Cyber Caliphate as a relatively unsophisticated group that has conducted cyber attacks against perceived enemies of the Islamic State.

“This included targeting various media outlets, issuing threats against U.S. military spouses, and the highly publicized hacking of U.S. Central Command’s Twitter account and YouTube channel,” the report said.

Most of the group’s technical activities involved website defacements and hacking of Twitter accounts. The cyber vandalism seems to have beeen intended to spread IS propaganda and to build notoriety for the group.

However, the TV5Monde cyber attack that disrupted live broadcasts, staff email accounts, and the station’s web page for some 20 hours demonstrated new capabilities, the report said.

“The methodology employed in the attack was atypical of previous Cyber Caliphate activity, and further investigation by French authorities and U.S. private cyber security companies instead pointed to nation-state actors,” the report said.

Among the information said to have been compromised during the TV5Monde attack were personal information about relatives of French soldiers fighting IS. France is among the coalition of nations engaged in military operations against IS.

According to the report, IP addresses traced to the TV5Monde attack were traced to the Russian hacker group known as APT28.

“The [APT28] hacking group was formerly observed targeting the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, entities in Eastern Europe, security companies, and journalists,” the report said.

“APT28 is assessed to conduct operations to benefit the Russian government, and was not previously seen using hacktivists or terrorist organizations as cover.”

The origin of Cyber Caliphate and its members remains unclear. Initially, it was believed by security authorities that the group started by a British hacker, 20-year-old Junaid Hussain, who was linked to a hack against former British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Hussain then was said to have moved from Britain to Syria where he sought to recruit hackers.

The Cyber Caliphate has not been officially endorsed by IS but it has gained from the free publicity its hacker attacks have generated.

The group’s attack on TV5Monde was described in the report as an anomaly for the hackers. Several theories are under consideration by experts regarding the nature of the group’s actions.

Some analysts believe the group was testing its cyber capabilities in preparation for expanded strikes on new targets.

Other analysts said the television station cyber attack was retaliation based on strained ties between Moscow and Paris.

Russia was angered by France’s recent decision to cancel a $1.3 billion deal for two Mistral-class helicopter carriers for the Russian Navy after Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine.

According to the report, the cyber security firm iSight Partners has assessed the Cyber Caliphate as a “false front for anti-western Russian actors.”

Another theory is that Cyber Caliphate is part of a Russian disinformation operation used by Moscow’s hackers as cover for their cyber attacks. The report noted “Russia’s long history of disinformation campaigns.”

The Size and Scope of Anonymous, Hacktivists

Now that we are beginning to understand how big the hacker network is, what is the real agenda and mission of those inside the group? One cannot estimate yet it appears to have many variances. Anonymous does get involved in policy issues and members and or sympathizers participate.

Anonymous marchers
Masked Anonymous supporters march away from the U.S. Capitol during a 2013 demonstration. Reuters/Jim Bourg
  • Anonymous holding baby
    A woman wearing an Anonymous mask holds up a baby during a Brazil demonstration in 2013. Reuters/Nacho Doce

 

 

There is a documentary on ‘We Are Legion’,

How big is Anonymous? Maybe bigger than you thought

By: CS Monitor An analysis from a University of Copenhagen graduate student suggests the online-phenomenon-turned-protest movement is more globally connected on the Web than previously thought.

  • close
    Protesters wearing Guy Fawkes masks held signs that read “Anonymous is here for our countrymen” during an April rally against a political corruption in Guatemala City.
     

The actual size and reach of the shadowy hacktivist collective Anonymous has long been the fodder of online squabbles. It’s diminished by detractors and puffed up by ardent devotees.

So, a University of Copenhagen graduate student set out to determine the actual extent of Anonymous’ influence around the world. And, it turns out that Anonymous appears to have a wider scope and is more international than previously imagined.

Even academics who study Anonymous were surprised. “The Anonymous network is larger than many of us thought,” said Gabriella Coleman, an anthropology professor at McGill University and author of “Hacker, Hoaxer, Whistleblower, Spy: The Many Faces of Anonymous.”

Recommended: Revealing Anonymous and its web of contradictions

The analysis looks at Facebook pages connected with Anonymous to gain insight into its international prowess. Yevgeniy Golovchenko, a graduate student in the school’s sociology department, examined 2,770 Anonymous Facebook pages that generated a collective 22.2 million “likes.” This is just the “absolute minimal size” of the entire global Anonymous network, Mr. Golovchenko explained in an interview.

The point of the study was to “show the enormity and connectivity of the Anonymous movement at a global level,” he said. The end result revealed a network greater than he expected. It was even “a lot bigger than my Anon informants thought it would be,” said Golovchenko.

Professor Coleman, considered the leading expert on Anonymous, says the data reveals “a parallel world, or really worlds, that live on Facebook” instead of other social media sites such as Twitter and Internet Relay Chat services.

It is far more likely there are more Anonymous Facebook pages than the ones in Golovchenko’s study. Facebook pages belonging to Anonymous included in his analysis had to meet at least one of the following criteria: Pages directly identified as Anonymous (“we are Anonymous”), shared or organized “operations,” or used Anonymous symbols beyond the Guy Fawkes mask.

“The [Anonymous’ network is also dynamic,” he noted, since when “some pages die out, others are born.” The average Anonymous page was connected to 18 other Anonymous pages. Golovchenko used Facebook “likes” as a way to establish connections, because a “like” acts as an “acknowledgement,” and shows the admin of one page is aware of another Anonymous contingent, in most cases in a different country. The “Offiziell Anonymous Page” had the most connections with 517 likes. It should be noted that “Offiziell Anonymous Page” hasn’t updated since December 2014.

Golovchenko was drawn to Anonymous’ Facebook pages given these pages are a public and easily accessible aspect of the relatively secretive hacktivist collective. These Facebook pages exist to either share information, or promote and help organize projects, and if they were harder to access, they’d alienate the average person.

Looking at all this Facebook data reveals several patterns. The position of the “node groupings was done by an algorithm, but it magically describes the realities of where people live in the world, to some extent,” said Golovchenko. An example of this are the German Anonymous Facebook pages, like the Anonymous Deutschland node, which are shown as blue dots:

German Anonymous Facebook pages. Yevgeniy Golovchenko

Another example of this regional breakdown is the Anonymous Unified Korea node, which is primarily focused in West Asia, except for that one supportive Belgian Facebook page:

Anonymous Unified Korea node, which is primarily focused in West Asia, except for one supportive Belgian Facebook page. Yevgeniy Golovchenko

Looking at the Anonymous Angola node reveals an even smaller network comprised of only a few African countries with the exception being Brazil (see below). Anonymous Hacker Brazil has a much larger international network.

Through this visualization, it is easy to identify allies of certain sects, or regional Anonymous crews. For example, quite a few Brazilian Anonymous pages are connected to Anonymous in Iceland, of all countries. The Occupy Brazil node is connected to various Anonymous Facebook pages in Canada, which could explain why so much traffic during a recent operation against Canadian government websites came from Brazil.

Yevgeniy Golovchenko

All these networks within networks reveal an incredibly complicated communication stratus. “Even if only one-third of the likes represent actual Facebook users,” noted Golovchenko, “the network is surprisingly immense … . Only few mainstream media can match the movement’s enormous internet infrastructure.”

When Ignoring the Enforcement of Law Becomes a Wider Threat

There are an estimated 18,000 law enforcement agencies in the United States and some you would never imagine existed. For a sampling click here.

Further, click here for the evidence of organizations, missions and the functional manuals all justice and enforcement components.

If you would like to understand justice and enforcement statistics, click here. Indeed, there is a great argument that should happen that there are too many laws to be enforced much less those that are not prosecuted. All the while, when those that are omitted or discretion is used, the damage which speaks to the psyche of the criminal has yet to be fully understood as a threat to security and lawlessness.

Enter Victor Davis Hanson, where he authored a cogent piece on the threat of more lawlessness and anarchy.

Why disregard of law is America’s greatest threat

Citizens may ask why they should obey the rules when illegals go scot-free

Barbarians at the gate usually don’t bring down once-successful civilizations. Nor does climate change. Even mass epidemics like the plague that decimated sixth-century Byzantium do not necessarily destroy a culture.

Far more dangerous are institutionalized corruption, a lack of transparency and creeping neglect of existing laws. All the German euros in the world will not save Greece if Greeks continue to dodge taxes, featherbed government and see corruption as a business model.

Even obeying so-called minor laws counts. It is no coincidence that a country where drivers routinely flout traffic laws and throw trash out the window is also a country that cooks its books and lies to its creditors. Everything from littering to speeding seems negotiable in Athens in a way not true of Munich, Zurich or London.

Mexico is a naturally richer country than Greece. It is blessed with oil, precious minerals, fertile soils, long coastlines and warm weather. Hundreds of thousands of Mexican citizens should not be voting with their feet to reject their homeland for the United States.

But Mexico also continues to be a mess because police expect bribes, property rights are iffy, and government works only for those who pay kickbacks. The result is that only north, not south, of the U.S.-Mexico border can people expect upward mobility, clean water, adequate public safety and reliable power.

In much of the Middle East and Africa, tribalism and bribery, not meritocracy, determine who gets hired and fired, wins or loses a contract, or receives or goes without public services.

Americans, too, should worry about these age-old symptoms of internal decay.

The frightening thing about disgraced Internal Revenue Service bureaucrat Lois Lerner’s knowledge of selective audits of groups on the basis of their politics is not just that she seemed to ignore it, but that she seemingly assumed no one would find out, or perhaps even mind. And she may well have been right. So far, no one at the IRS has shown much remorse for corrupting an honor-based system of tax compliance.

Illegal immigration has been a prominent subject in the news lately, between Donald Trump’s politically incorrect, imprecise and crass stereotyping of illegal immigrants and the shocking murder of a young San Francisco woman gratuitously gunned down in public by a Mexican citizen who had been convicted of seven felonies in the United States and had been deported five times. But the subject of illegal immigration is, above all, a matter of law enforcement.

Ultimately, no nation can continue to thrive if its government refuses to enforce its own laws. Liberal “sanctuary cities” such as San Francisco choose to ignore immigration laws. Imagine the outcry if a town in Utah or Montana arbitrarily declared that federal affirmative action or gay marriage laws were null and void within its municipal borders.

Once an immigrant has successfully broken the law by entering and residing in the United States illegally, there is little incentive for him to obey other laws. Increasing percentages of unnaturalized immigrants are not showing up for their immigration hearings — and those percentages are higher still for foreign nationals who have been charged with crimes.

The general public wonders why some are selectively exempt from following the law, but others are not. If federal immigration law does not apply to foreign nationals, why should building codes, zoning laws or traffic statutes apply to U.S. citizens?

Consider the immigration activists’ argument that immigration authorities should focus only on known felons and not those who only broke immigration law. This is akin to arguing that the IRS shouldn’t worry about whether everyday Americans pay their income taxes and should enforce the tax laws only against those with past instances of tax avoidance.

But why single out the poor and foreign-born? Presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton once pocketed a $100,000 cattle-futures profit from a $1,000 investment, with help from an insider crony. A group of economists calculated the odds of such an unlikely return at one in 31 trillion. Mrs. Clinton then trumped that windfall by failing to fully pay taxes on her commodities profits, only addressing that oversight years later.

Why did Mrs. Clinton, during her tenure as secretary of state, snub government protocols by using a private email account and a private server, and then permanently deleting any emails she felt were not government-related? Mrs. Clinton long ago concluded that laws in her case were to be negotiated, not obeyed.

President Obama called for higher taxes on the wealthy. But before doing so, could he at least have asked his frequent adviser on racial matters, Al Sharpton, to pay millions in back taxes and penalties?

Might the government ask that its own employees pay the more than $3 billion in collective federal back taxes they owe, since they expect other taxpayers to keep paying their salaries?

Civilizations unwind insidiously not with a loud, explosive bang, but with a lawless whimper.

 

 

Iran Gets GOLD

An Iran nuclear czar? Zarif and Kerry today, Friday said a deal was never closer.

Iran has had 13 tons of their gold stored in South Africa for at least 2 years and due to lifted sanctions, the gold has been released and delivery in a handful of shipments under high security is complete. The gold was delivered to the central bank.

Since 2013 under the Obama White House agreement, Iran has received $4.2 billion in unfrozen assets and was awarded another $2.8 billion by Obama just to stay at the table and committing to continued talks.

Iran Violations:

Iran has been found in non-compliance with its International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards agreement, and accordingly is in non-compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).1 Iran is continuing its uranium enrichment program and heavy water-related activities in defiance of Security Council resolutions calling for their suspension. The IAEA is trying to resolve a number of matters indicating a possible military dimension to Iran’s nuclear program, but Iran is not cooperating with the IAEA’s investigations. There are well-founded concerns that the Iranian enrichment and heavy water programs have a military objective – to give Iran the capability to produce nuclear weapons if it decides to do so. What is not clear is how far Iran intends to proceed down this path – will it cross the nuclear weapon threshold, or if not, how far short will it stop?

Amongst other issues, this paper addresses the commonly held belief that Iran is entitled to undertake uranium enrichment, and the closely related question whether nuclear hedging – establishing a nuclear weapon break-out capability in the guise of a civilian program – is a legitimate activity under the NPT. If a negotiated solution with Iran is achieved that allows for continued enrichment, this must also adequately address international concerns that Iran’s nuclear program has a military purpose. A “solution” that allows continued development of a military dimension would be pointless. Many more details in this report.

Going back a decade, it has been well known that Iran has been using the black market to skirt sanctions.  The audio discussion on the black market and violations is here. Additionally, you would be stunned at who does business with Iran and the value of that commerce.

What about the secret low enriched uranium? Glad you asked.

The controversy over the status of Iran’s newly produced low enriched uranium (LEU) hexafluoride under the Joint Plan of Action (JPA) initially surprised us at ISIS. We have been monitoring the various provisions of the JPA since its inception, including Iran’s pledge to convert its newly produced LEU hexafluoride stocks into uranium dioxide form during the JPA term and its extensions. We would have expected the public controversy to center on other issues, including the near 20 percent LEU stocks in Iran. These stocks are far too large, and if left in place, will undermine the administration’s central case that Iran would need 12 months to break out, if it reneged on a long term deal. Yet, upon reflection, this issue of the newly produced LEU is a microcosm of the legal, technical, and political challenges in the on-going negotiations with Iran. It is also another indication that U.S. secrecy is excessive and contributing to problems on its own. Finally, it is necessary to state that this case is a lesson in how difficult it is to understand all the issues in these negotiations, even for those of us who spend enormous amount of time following and assessing provisions in these negotiations.

Concessions

From CNN:

Concessions checklist

So what has the U.S. ceded so far? And what has it gotten in return? Supporters and opponents of the Iran talks are both keeping their checklists ready. They’re tallying the wins and losses and keeping a close eye on the remaining sticking points.

Breakout time

Breakout time is the amount of time it takes to amass enough weapons-grade uranium for one nuclear bomb. In the event of a final deal, if Iran were to dash toward weaponization, it would take 12 months to build a nuclear bomb, according to U.S. calculations.

That figure is a considerable improvement over the two- to three-month breakout time that Iran currently has.

Some worry, however, that one year is not enough to guarantee the U.S. and other countries could actually prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon should Iran decide to race toward one, given the number of diplomatic and verification steps that would precede the use of military force.

Centrifuges

Iran will be allowed to keep 6,104 centrifuges, and just over 5,000 of those will continue enriching uranium, based on the preliminary agreement.

That’s a far ways from where American officials initially said they wanted to end up, first demanding Iran cut its centrifuges to between 500 and 1,500 and then floating 4,000.

The agreement still cuts down most of the nearly 19,000 currently installed — about 10,000 of which are now used for enrichment — but even the additional centrifuges won’t be scrapped entirely. They’ll remain in Iran under the control of the UN’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and will be freed up at the end of the period of constraints on its program.

Enrichment activity

Under the framework for negotiations, Iran has already significantly reduced the level to which it enriches uranium, capping those levels far below what is needed for a nuclear weapon.

Iran has agreed to restrict all of its enrichment activity to one reactor site — Natanz. This is reassuring to the U.S. and Israel because it would be easier for them to take effective military action to degrade Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

Furthermore, Iran will only use its first-generation centrifuges, which are slow to enrich uranium and are unreliable.

Duration of the deal

The restrictions that will keep Iran to a one-year breakout time will expire after 10 years.

President Barack Obama has conceded that “in year 13, 14, 15 … the breakout times would have shrunk almost down to zero.”

After the 10th year, Iran would be able to start upping its uranium enrichment. And after 15 years, the program would be completely unbridled.

There was always going to be a sunset — it’s inconceivable that Iran would accept restrictions and inspections on its nuclear program indefinitely — but the Obama administration’s starting ask was for restrictions lasting 20 to 25 years.

Even if political change doesn’t come to Iran in that period — which he hopes it will — Obama insisted this spring that the U.S. will have “much more insight into their capabilities” as a result of the rigorous inspections, and 10 to 15 years improves considerably upon the status quo.

But the sunset provision has experts like Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies worried that Iran will simply “go back to what they were doing before” — and without the limitations of sanctions.

“We think 10 to 15 years is a long time,” he said. “They think it’s a blip in history.”

Revealing past Iranian military activities

For years the United States and the rest of the international community has demanded that Iran come clean about suspected past efforts to militarize its nuclear program.

Tehran even pledged to the IAEA in 2007 that it would do so, and the fact that it hasn’t raises questions about the reliability of its commitments.

When Kerry was asked by PBS in April about Iran’s obligation to answer such questions, he said bluntly, “They have to do it. It will be done. If there’s going to be a deal, it will be done.”

Kerry, though, recently indicated such a “confession” was no longer essential to a deal.

“We’re not fixated on Iran specifically accounting for what they did at one point in time or another. We know what they did,” Kerry said last month.

Underground nuclear sites

Under an eventual deal, Iran would stop enriching uranium at Fordow, its fortified, underground nuclear site, for 15 years and only use the facility for research with some inactive centrifuges remaining onsite. It also won’t be able to store any fissile material at the site.

Though the West had originally called for Fordow to be shut down entirely, cutting off enrichment at the site is a relief not just for the U.S. but also for Israel, which was concerned its military arsenal would not be able to reach the site — buried deep in the side of a mountain.

The U.S. has a more powerful bunker-busting bomb than Israel, one that may be able to penetrate the site, though not with total certainty.

Heavy water reactor

Iran will significantly modify its heavy water reactor so it can no longer produce weapons-grade plutonium, a possible component for a nuclear bomb.

Iran has already begun redesigning the reactor to limit its capacity — a key change for a country that has repeatedly defended the reactor’s medical and scientific applications.

Israel had previously called for the reactor’s total dismantlement, but serious modifications have quelled many concerns about Iran’s ability to use the reactor for non-peaceful purposes.

Outstanding issues

Officials still have to determine whether Iran will dilute or export its eight-ton stockpile of highly enriched uranium and determine the parameters for Iran to use more highly enriched uranium for scientific research purposes.

But it’s the two other remaining issues that are the most contentious, and will ultimately determine for most experts whether they have confidence that the deal will keep Iran from getting a nuclear bomb.

Inspections

The West is insisting that Iran give inspectors unfettered access to any site they suspect of nuclear activity — military sites included. Without that, officials fear that Iran could try to sneak its way to a bomb by using a secret facility, especially given its history of cheating and concealing its nuclear work.

“The most likely form of cheating would be at undeclared or secret facilities, and so you’ve got to have strong inspections,” said Gary Samore, who previously served as Obama’s top arms control adviser.

Iranian officials, though, have insisted that they won’t relent on that point, certainly not when it comes to military facilities.

Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken insisted Thursday on CNN that the U.S. will “walk away” if Iran doesn’t agree to the rigorous inspections and verification regime the U.S. is seeking.

Negotiators have floated the idea of a commission of countries that would hear Iran’s objections to inspections requests. But if Iran still refuses to allow inspections at the site, international sanctions would be reimposed.

Ilan Berman, a skeptic of the deal, said that type of “managed access” could give the Iranians the chance to scrub evidence from a site while they stall for time.

“You want to do snap inspections, not ones where they can move things around,” said Berman, vice president of the American Foreign Policy Council.

Sanctions relief

Western officials have insisted that sanctions won’t be removed until Iran holds up its end of the bargain by reining in its nuclear activity as agreed.

Iran, on the other hand, at first demanded sanctions be lifted as soon as a final agreement is signed and sealed. Iranian officials now appear to be relenting somewhat and agreeing that sanctions could fall at a later date, after they make the necessary changes to their nuclear program.

Negotiators are now looking to iron out the details of the sequence for the removal of those sanctions.

But once those sanctions come off, it’s unclear how effectively the international community could snap them back into place — if it’s even willing to. While Iran’s economy has suffered because of the restrictions, so have many companies based in the countries that have imposed them.

 

 

ISIS New Targets Include Sphinx and Pyramids

ISIS has been destroying antiquities for more than a year. Some were more than 2000 years old. They include Palmyra, the Mosul Museum and Nineveh, the site of Nimrud.

Just this week, did ISIS launch a deadly attack in the Sinai. Islamic State is on the move and Egypt is in their sights for destruction.

For security measures in place and some historical perspective, click here.

Islamic State threatens pyramids, sphinx, as it begins attack on Egypt

ISLAMIC State has launched a bold new attack — this time in Sinai against Egypt. Are the Pryamids and Great Sphinx — along with countless other treasures — next on their hit list?

“When Egypt comes under the auspices of the Khalifa (Caliphate), there will be no more Pyramids, no more Sphinx, no more idolatry. This will be just”.

These are the chilling words recently spoken to presenter Dan Cruickshank by British Muslim activist Anjem Choudary.

Just days after his show, Civilisation Under Attack, went to air in the UK, Islamic State has taken steps to turn them into reality.

Egyptian warplanes are launching air strikes and troops going house-to-house in the troubled Sinai Peninsula as the jihadist militants conduct an unprecedented, coordinated attack.

It’s just the latest action in a chain of events that threatens to topple the cradle of civilisation into internal chaos on a scale similar to that of Syria and Iraq.

And Islamic State is ready to seize the moment.

New wave of unrest

The combat in Sinai, described as “war” by Egyptian media and officials, has heightened tensions across the country.

Since the popular “Arab Spring” uprising against the 30-year rule of President Hosni Mubarak, Egypt has gradually been sliding towards chaos.

Today the troubled nation marks the second anniversary of the military’s overthrow of democratically elected Islamist President Mohammed Morsi.

It was a move that fanned dissent throughout Egypt and the insurgency in north Sinai.

It also follows the dramatic assassination this week of the country’s chief prosecutor in a car bombing in Cairo, prompting general-turned-politician President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi to press for even harsher anti-terrorism laws targeting Islamic militants.

A special forces raid yesterday on a Cairo apartment killed nine members of Morsi’s outlawed Muslim Brotherhood.

The Brotherhood responded by calling for a “rebellion.”

It’s fertile ground for the Islamic State. It’s attempting to initiate exactly that.

The coordinated assault by scores of extremists on Wednesday focused on the town of Sheikh Zuweid. It included suicide bombings and an attack on its main police station, which also was shelled by mortars and rocket-propelled grenades in a firefight with police that lasted most of the day, the officials said.

The army said 17 troops and more than 100 militants were killed in the fighting.

It expects it to be just the start of a new military campaign.

Enormous heritage at stake

Islamic State has already telegraphed its attitude to Egypt’s rich cultural heritage.

They should be destroyed.

The dogma is simple: No object should be the subject of idolisation or worship.

According to a statement by preacher Ibrahim Al Kandari, as reported in the Egyptian Al-Watan daily, it is irrelevant that most of Egypt’s ancient monuments are cultural, not religious.

“The fact that early Muslims who were among prophet Mohammed’s followers did not destroy the pharaohs’ monuments upon entering Egypt does not mean that we shouldn’t do it now,” Al Kandari told the paper earlier this year.

Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has reportedly stated the demolition of historic monuments is a “religious duty”.

The jihadist extremists have already demonstrated its attitude towards relics of cultures other than its own. They point to Islamic prohibitions against depicting “living beings”: They are supposed to promote idolatry.

It has smashed statues in the museum of Mosul. It has brutally demolished the ancient cities of Hatra and Nimrud, and looted the city of Dur Sharrukin. It’s an extremist philospy reflected in the destruction of the enormous Bamiyan Buddhas in 2001 by Afghanistan’s Taliban.

But Islamic State recently moderated its stance, promising to protect the Roman ruins of the city of Palmyra. It has since blown up several medieval mausoleums in the area.

It’s not the first time Egypt’s Great Pyramids and Sphinx have been threatened.

While often attributed Napoleon, the destruction of the Great Sphinx’s nose is believed by many to have been caused by Muhammad Sa’im al-Dahar in the 14th century. He believed local peasants may have been worshipping the ancient monument.

In 2012 a cleric of Egypt’s radical Salafi movement declared a fatwa against the World Heritage site — citing the Prophet Mohammed’s destruction of idols in Mecca as precedent.

Egypt’s tourism industry was akin to “prostitution and debauchery”, he said.

Egypt’s military response

Air raids yesterday killed 23 extremists just south of Rafah, a key Sinai border town near the Gaza strip, Sinai Egyptian security officials said.

They added that the army was searching for militants in the town of Sheikh Zuweid, where a string of army checkpoints were attacked a day earlier.

Soldiers were de-mining roads in and around the area that had been booby trapped with mines and improvised explosive devices, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorised to talk to the media.

The army also raided a house in Rafah, killing six armed Isanuc State militants wearing military uniforms, the officials said, adding that it had cleared the area around the Sheikh Zuweid police station of mines and IEDs.

A newspaper close to the Egyptian government said Thursday the militants behind the Sinai attacks used sophisticated weaponry, including Russian-made Kornet antitank missiles. The el-Watan daily also said they also used mortars, anti-aircraft guns and other guided missiles.

The main insurgent organisation operating in Sinai, which calls itself the Sinai Province of the Islamic State group, claimed its fighters struck 15 army and police positions and staged three suicide bombings, two against checkpoints and one that hit an officers’ club in nearby el-Arish, the area’s largest city. The authenticity of the claim could not be immediately verified but it was posted on a Facebook page associated with the group.

Militants in northern Sinai have battled security forces for years, but they stepped up their attacks after Morsi’s ouster on July 3, 2013, which followed mass demonstrations against his rule. El-Sissi led the ouster and was elected president last year.

Political opposition blamed

Egyptian authorities and pro-government media have blamed much of the recent violence on the Muslim Brotherhood, which has been branded a terrorist group.

The Brotherhood denies involvement, although it and other President Morsi supporters have faced a sweeping crackdown that has led to thousands of arrests, mass convictions and death sentences.

The democratically elected Preisdent is among those condemned to die, but he has appealed.

The Brotherhood has called for a “rebellion” and described the special forces killings as “a turning point that will have its own repercussions.”

“It will not be possible to control the anger of the oppressed,” the Brotherhood said in a statement.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned of the growing threat to the region from Islamic State militants and expressed condolences to Egypt over the deadly IS-linked attacks in Sinai.

“We see in front of our eyes IS acting with extraordinary cruelty both in our northern border and at our southern border,” he said. “Our hearts are with the Egyptian people, we send our condolences to the Egyptian government and the families of those who were killed in battle with the cruel terror.”