Iran: Number of Executions Skyrocket Under Rouhani

Iran executionThe number of executions in Iran has significantly increased since President Hassan Rouhani took over the office from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in August 2013.

According to statistics provided by the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center – which lists those executed by name, date, location and crime — Iran has put to death 529 people this year, 300 alone since Rouhani assumed office in August.

Belying his image painted by the Western as a “moderate,” Rouhani has now catapulted his country into the position of being the world’s leader in executions per capita.

The most common charge garnering the punishment of death was drug trafficking, followed by rape, murder and apostasy.

Reports of the statistics come in conjunction with the first visit in six years by the European Parliament’s delegation for relations with Iran scheduled for December 12-17. During the delegation’s last visit in 2007, Iran publicly executed a number of prisoners while the Europeans were in Tehran.

Read more at Clarion Project

 

Famous Kashmir Vacation Spot Now Teaming With Islamists

Tarek Fatah in KashmirBY TAREK FATAH:

“Death to Israel,” the banner screamed. Next to it was the now-familiar Muslim chant, “Death to America.”

Further down the road, the late Ayatollah Khomeini stared down angrily at the citizenry.

As a large crowd of Sunday shoppers milled around an overflowing open-air bazaar, other banners showed Sayyed Nasrallah of Hezbollah, with former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wearing his familiar sheepish grin.

This banner graces Srinagar’s ‘Laal Chowk’.

No, I was not in Tehran or South Lebanon. This wasn’t an Alawite stronghold in Syria or scenes from Toronto’s infamous annual “Al-Quds” rally staged by Islamists belching disdain towards the West.

I was in Srinagar, the summer capital of the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir.

Flaunting hatred and celebrating jihadi terrorists was once unthinkable in the city referred to by a Mogul king as paradise on earth.

Home to a people of amazing beauty, culture and cuisine, where an Islam once flourished that was bereft of the harshness of the desert.

Where mosques took architectural inspiration from Buddhist pagodas, not from forcibly converted Orthodox Christian churches.

Though the Pakistan-backed insurgency that broke out in 1989-90 has been largely decimated by the Indian Army and the Kashmir government, consequences of the decade-long strife remain.

After all, 40,000 young Kashmiri Muslims died and almost the entire Hindu population of the valley was ethnically cleansed and forced to flee from their ancestral homeland.

The hope of one segment of the population that Kashmir would join Islamic Pakistan seems a forgotten dream.

Read more at Clarion Project

‘Israel Will Stand Alone’: Netanyahu’s UN Speech Highlights Danger of U.S. Getting Duped by Iran

 

 

Full text Netanyahu’s 2013 speech to the UN General Assembly

 

 

netanyahu-irans-rouhani-a-wolf-in-sheeps-clothingBy Bridget Johnson:

If there was any question about America’s current leadership role in the world, it was answered at the United Nations today when Israel laid bare the very real possibility of standing alone against — and protecting the world from — Iran’s nuclear weapons development.

“I want there to be no confusion on this point. Israel will not allow Iran to get nuclear weapons,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said. “If Israel is forced to stand alone, Israel will stand alone — that in standing alone, Israel will know that we will be defending many, many others.”

His speech to close the General Assembly was aimed not as much at calling out the Iranian regime on its sins and deception, but calling out a White House eager to whitewash its new leader in order to avoid confrontation over its nuclear program.

It came a day after Netanayhu and President Obama sat down at the White House behind closed doors, and five days after Obama called Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and declared a bold new era of rapprochement.

Netanyahu detailed the historical amity between the Persians and the Jewish people that was dealt a vicious blow by the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

“As it was busy crushing the Iranian people’s hope for democracy, it also led wild chants of ‘Death to the Jews.’ Now, since that time, presidents of Iran have come and gone. Some presidents were considered moderates, others hardliners, but they’ve all served that same unforgiving creed, that same unforgiving regime, that creed that is espoused and enforced by the real power in Iran, the dictator known as the supreme leader, first Ayatollah Khomeini and now Ayatollah Khamenei,” he said.

“President Rouhani, like the presidents who came before him, is a loyal servant of the regime. He was one of only six candidates the regime permitted to run for office. Nearly 700 other candidates were rejected.”

What made Rouhani “acceptable” to the ayatollah, Netanyahu noted, was his tenure heading Iran’s Supreme National Security Council from 1989 through 2003 — a time period in which attacks included the 1994 bombing of a Jewish center in Buenos Aires and the deaths of 19 American soldiers in the bombing at the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia.

“Are we to believe that Rouhani, the national security advisor of Iran at the time, knew nothing about these attacks? Of course he did,” the prime minister said. “Just as 30 years ago, Iran’s security chiefs knew about the bombings in Beirut that killed 241 American Marines and 58 French paratroopers. Rouhani was also Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator between 2003 and 2005. He masterminded the strategy which enabled Iran to advance its nuclear weapons program behind a smokescreen of diplomatic engagement and very soothing rhetoric.”

The main difference between Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who regularly made outrageous remarks on his UN trips, and Rouhani, who worked media and politicians into an affectionate frenzy with his charm offensive last week, is “Ahmadinejad was a wolf in wolf’s clothing; Rouhani is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

Netanyahu laid out the “brazen contrast” between Rouhani’s words and Iran’s action by noting its denouncement of terrorism while participating in and propping up terrorism, and its calls for “constructive engagement” while, just three weeks ago, an Iranian agent was arrested trying to collect information for possible attacks against the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv.

“The facts are that Iran’s savage record flatly contradicts Rouhani’s soothing rhetoric,” he added. “…Why would a country that claims to only want peaceful nuclear energy, why would such a country build hidden underground enrichment facilities? Why would a country with vast natural energy reserves invest billions in developing nuclear energy? Why would a country intent on merely civilian nuclear programs continue to defy multiple Security Council resolutions and incur the tremendous cost of crippling sanctions on its economy? And why would a country with a peaceful nuclear program develop intercontinental ballistic missiles whose sole purpose is to deliver nuclear warheads?”

Read more at PJ Media

Nihad Awad’s One Step Up and Two Steps Back

awad_nihadcair_americans_dont_know_anythingby IPT News:

 

What if They Mean What They Say?

wordsby Shoshana Bryen:

Many people thought Hitler’s words were just words. They were wrong. If he’d had nuclear weapons, he would have used them. How is it possible to believe they do not mean what they say?

The U.S. generally makes allowance for verbal excesses from foreign governments, but if expressions of hatred and incitement to violence are actually harbingers of behavior, destruction and murderousness cannot be far behind.

At the UN Alliance of Civilizations [sic], Turkey’s Prime Minister equated Zionism with crimes against humanity. The American response was swift; speaking for himself and the administration, Kerry called the remark “objectionable.” But after expressing dismay, he called for nicer play. “That said,” he commented, “Turkey and Israel are both vital allies. We want to see them work together to go beyond rhetoric and take concrete steps to change their relationship.” A State Department official concurred, saying the comment was “particularly offensive” and “complicates our ability to do all the things we want to do together.”

But what if Ergodan doesn’t want what the U.S. wants him to want — that is to say, he doesn’t want a changed relationship with Israel? What if harsh rhetoric and open political and financial support for Hamas — a U.S. designated terrorist organization — are part of Turkey’s regional Sunni Islamic ambition, which does not include Israel? What if Turkey’s prior cooperation was a phase to allow it to acquire political and military benefits?

In a similar vein, a few weeks ago, a North Korean diplomat told the UN Conference on Disarmament, “As the saying goes, a new-born puppy knows no fear of a tiger. South Korea’s erratic behavior would only herald its final destruction.” He added, “If the U.S. takes a hostile approach toward North Korea to the last, rendering the situation complicated, [we] will be left with no option but to take the second and third stronger steps in succession.” A North Korean general warned of the “miserable destruction” of the United States.

The U.S. Ambassador to the UN Conference on Disarmament called the comments “profoundly disturbing,” and the Spanish ambassador said he was “stupefied.” Why?

Beginning with President Carter, American administrations have treated North Korea’s pursuit of nuclear capability as defensive: designed to keep South Korea and the U.S. from overthrowing the cultish regime of the North. The U.S. tells itself that since it harbors no plans for any such invasion, it can reassure North Korea on that point and thus lessen its determination to have nuclear capability – hence the U.S. offers food, fuel and a light water reactor, thinking those “gifts” will reassure North Korea of America’s benign intentions. But what if North Korea is not defensive, but rather Kim Jong Un, like his predecessors, believes that the unification of the peninsula should happen under governance of the North? How then should we understand the diplomat and the general? And how should we understand North Korea’s latest nuclear test?

The British ambassador said of the North Korean diplomat’s remarks, “It cannot be allowed that we have expressions which refer to the possible destruction of UN member states.” That is, of course, patently untrue. The UN tolerates and sometimes applauds Iranian representatives who have called not for the “possible” destruction of a UN member state, Israel, but for its outright annihilation.

“The Zionist regime and the Zionists are a cancerous tumor,” Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said. “The nations of the region will soon finish off the usurper Zionists in the Palestinian land… In the new Middle East there will be no trace of the Americans and Zionists… Cancer must be eliminated from a body (the region).” For Qods Day last year Ahmadinejad told the Iranians, “Any freedom lover and justice seeker in the world must do its best for the annihilation of the Zionist regime in order to pave the path for the establishment of justice and freedom in the world.”

Read more at Gatestone Institute

Shoshana Bryen is Senior Director of The Jewish Policy Center

See also:

“To Our Great Detriment”: Ignoring What Extremists Say About Jihad by Stephen Coughlin

Egypt: Too Big to Fail?

Mohamed-Morsi-via-AFPBy Adam Turner:

Recently, Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi of Egypt, a supposed “moderate” Islamist, met with Iran’s anti-Semitic, genocidal, President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.  Reportedly, they had a friendly discussion.  Perhaps, in addition to the official topics, they also conversed about their mutual anti-Semitic attitudes.  President Ahmadinejad is already well-known for his hatred of the Jews.  President Morsi’s bigotry, on the other hand, has only publicly come to light this past year.  In 2010, President Morsi delivered a speech urging Egyptians to “nurse our children and our grandchildren on hatred” for Jews. Soon after, Morsi described Jews as “these bloodsuckers who attack the Palestinians, these warmongers, the descendants of apes and pigs.”   When confronted by U.S. Senators on his impolitic language, Morsi implied that this was only a controversy because the American media was controlled by Jews.

But the two Islamist Presidents have much more in common than just their anti-Semitism.  Both lead radical, dictatorial, and anti-American regimes.  Like the radical Iranian government has since 1979, President Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood Party continue to crack down on pro-democracy demonstrations in their country (Egypt), persecute independent members of the media, and actively pursue death sentences against Westerners or Americans engaging in Free Speech IN the West.

Unfortunately, none of this negative behavior by Egypt’s leadership seems to matter much to the U.S. government.  The administration’s immediate response – sending four F-16 fighter jets to Egypt.  A bipartisan Congress voted to support the sale.  This is all part of the $1.5 billion or so U.S. aid, most of it military, which has gone to Egypt annually since 1979.

When questioned about the consistent flow of U.S. aid to Egypt, the same argument is often made by the foreign policy elites – Egypt is the colossus of the Arab world, and it would be irrational and unwise for the U.S. to simply let it become a rogue state, or to collapse, as a failed state.  And so the U.S. money spigot must be kept consistently open, if not cracked a bit wider, regardless of how the Islamist-run Egyptian government acts.  In fact, if you persist in doubting this wisdom, sometimes you are belittled as an ignorant isolationist-like opponent of all foreign aid.

But let’s re-examine that pearl of conventional wisdom regarding U.S. aid to Egypt. It simply isn’t valid, as Egypt under the MB is already a rogue state, and it is also pretty much guaranteed to become a failed state.

The fact that Egypt is a rogue state should be patently obvious at this point.  The Egyptian MB has produced Hamas in Gaza, a well-known terrorist organization.  In fact, the MB and Hamas are so close that thousands of Hamas warriors may have been sent to Egypt to help President Morsi protect his regime by crushing Egyptian democratic protestors.  President Morsi and his MB have already shown their willingness to corrupt the democratic process, kill Egyptian demonstrators, discriminate against the Coptic Christians, allow for the harassment or rape of women, and prevent the exercise of a culture of freedom of speech among ordinary Egyptians and foreigners alike.  For more information, see here, here, here and here.  Even President Obama – in a moment of clarity – revealed that he is unsure whether Egypt’s MB regime is an ally of ours.

Read more at Front Page

Also see:

The Belly Dancing Barometer  by Thomas Friedman

Egypt’s Troubling Iranian Turn

Commander of Iran's Quds Force Qasim Soleimani

Commander of Iran’s Quds Force Qasim Soleimani

IPT: By John Rossomando

The head of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Quds Force met with officials close to Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi during a secret two-day visit to Egypt just after Christmas. The Times of London calls it “another blow to Cairo’s fragile relationship with the West.”

Gen. Qassem Soleimani’s “meeting was intended to send a message to America, which is putting pressure on the Egyptian government, that we be allowed to have other alliances we please,” a source told the Times.

The U.S. State Department designated Soleimeini as a terrorist, and the Quds Force serves as Iran’s primary unit for training and equipping foreign Islamic revolutionary movements. The Quds Force was responsible for setting up Hizballah in the 1980s and has been involved in training Hamas, the Taliban and other terrorist groups.

The Iranian paramilitary leader met with Essam al-Haddad, one of Morsi’s foreign affairs advisers, and Muslim Brotherhood officials, to advise them on building a security and intelligence apparatus independent from the national intelligence services that are controlled by the Egyptian military.

A report in The Australian suggests that the Egyptians invited Soleimani to meet.

“When the Iranian revolutionaries took control they didn’t trust the military, so they setup a parallel system independent of Iran’s army that has been quite successful,” Heritage Foundation Middle East expert James Phillips told the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

Consequently, the Brotherhood likely sees the IRGC/Quds Force as a successful model to copy, Phillips said.

Interior Minister Ahmed Gamal al-Din was forced out of the government after he objected to the meeting, Al-Arabiyah reported Thursday.

In addition, Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi arrived in Cairo Wednesday for talks that Iran hopes could lead to expanded ties with Egypt. The two countries have not had diplomatic ties since Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1970 and granted asylum to the shah after he was overthrown.

Relations between Iran and Egypt have steadily improved since Morsi, a longtime Muslim Brotherhood figure, was inaugurated in July. Morsi also met with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during his late August visit to Tehran for the Non-Aligned Movement summit.

Syria will be high on the agenda during Salehi’s visit, according to Iran’s Fars News Agency.

Iran and Egypt have competing interests in Syria, with the Iranians backing the Assad regime and the Egyptians supporting their Muslim Brotherhood brethren in their rebellion.

The meetings between the Brotherhood and Iran send the message that Egypt will move closer to Iran if the United States and other Western nations cut off aid, an unnamed Egyptian official told the Times.

“It is another sign that the Muslim Brotherhood is distancing itself from the U.S.,” he said. “It is wishful thinking the State Department, the CIA and other agencies that they can count on the Muslim Brotherhood as an ally against the more extremist Islamists.”

Poll Reveals Chilling View of Post-Revolution Egypt

A new poll taken to gauge the views of the Egyptian people shows a telling — and chilling view – of the Egyptian population post-revolution. For those who envisioned the Arab Spring bringing with it a favorable view democracy in the Arab world, with its values of peace and tolerance, the results of this recent survey prove that view dead wrong.

Three years ago, 41 % of Egyptians said they wanted their country to acquire a nuclear bomb. Now, 87% of Egyptians said they “would be happy” if Egypt acquired the bomb.

Even though Shi’ite Muslims are viewed unfavorably by Egypt’s Sunni Muslims (68% according this poll), 62% of Egyptians said that “Iran and its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, are friends of Egypt,” despite Iran’s hard-line Shi’ite affiliation.  In addition, 65% expressed a desire to restore diplomatic relations with Iran, and 61% supported the Iranian nuclear program.

Egypt’s recently elected Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Morsi broke three decades of a freeze in Egyptian-Iranian relations (the result of the Islamic revolution in Iran and Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel) when he visited Iran last month. At the time, Iran’s deputy defense minister proclaimed, “We are ready to help Egypt to build nuclear reactors and satellites.”

A dramatic change in the Egyptian population’s view of Israel was also prominent in the results of the poll. Just three years ago, less than 25 percent of Egyptians favored breaking Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel. Now, 77 percent agreed that “The peace treaty with Israel is no longer useful and should be dissolved.”

Read more at Radical Islam

Related articles

Defecting Iranian cameraman brings CIA priceless film of secret nuclear sites

Debkafile reveals one of the CIA’s most dramatic scoops in many years, and epic disaster for Iran. Our most exclusive Iranian and intelligence sources disclose that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s personal cameraman, Hassan Golkhanban, who defected from his UN entourage in New York on Oct. 1, brought with him an intelligence treasure trove of up-to-date photographs and videos of top Iranian leaders visiting their most sensitive and secret nuclear and missile sites. The cameraman, who is in his 40s, is staying at an undisclosed address, presumably a CIA safe house under close guard. He stayed behind when Ahmadinejad, after his UN speech, departed New York with his 140-strong entourage. For some years, Golkhanban worked not just as a news cameraman but personally recorded visits by the Iranian president and supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei of top-secret nuclear facilities and Revolutionary Guards installations. When he left Tehran in the president’s party, his luggage was not searched and so he was able to bring out two suitcases packed with precious film and deliver it safely into waiting hands in New York. The Iranian cameraman has given US intelligence the most complete and updated footage it has ever obtained of the interiors of Iran’s top secret military facilities and various nuclear installations, including some never revealed to nuclear watchdog inspectors. Among them are exclusive interior shots of the Natanz nuclear complex, the Fordo underground enrichment plant, the Parchin military complex and the small Amir-Abad research reactor in Tehran. Some of the film depicts Revolutionary Guards and military industry chiefs explaining in detail to the president or supreme leader the working of secret equipment on view. Golkhanban recorded their voices. Our sources also disclose that, in late September, he took the precaution of sending his wife and two children out of Iran on the pretext of a family visit to Turkey. They are most likely on their way to the United States by now.

more…

 

Violence Breaks Out in Iran as Economy Falters

Protest march in Tehran’s main bazaar

Don’t mistake the quieting of the Green Revolution as a sign of popular support for the Iranian regime. Those that risked their lives to protest in the summer of 2009 aren’t going to be won over by their oppressors. Since then, the economic situation has only gotten worse and with it, the anger of the Iranian people. All that is needed for Round Two is a trigger and the collapse of the Iranian currency over the past week might just be it.

The value of the rial has dropped by 40 percent in just one week, causing a panic that is sure to keep the downslide going. The country’s currency has fallen over 80% over the past year. The hysteria is causing Iranians to hold onto foreign currencies like the dollar and to get rid of their rials before they lose even more value.

Hundreds spontaneously protested in Tehran. The number may not be a jaw-dropper but it’s very meaningful. For every protester, there were many more that were too afraid to protest or were unable to join before the crackdown began. Some merchants in the Grand Bazaar went on strike and protesters put the blame for their misery where it belongs: On the regime.

The protesters didn’t burn American flags. They didn’t declare their devotion to jihad in retaliation for the economic warfare of the imperialist West. They spoke out against their own government. Slogans of the demonstrators included “Leave Syria Alone, Think of Us Instead” and even, “We Do Not Want Nuclear Energy.” The Iranian people are keenly aware that every rial spent on slaughtering Syrians, supporting terrorism and building a nuclear program is a rial that could alleviate their pain.

The security forces dispersed the crowd by firing tear gas and several protesters were arrested. They also stopped a march towards the central bank. Riot police arrested illegal money changers and closed shops. The regime has reportedly blocked access to Gmail and BBC’s Persian Service and additional measures to impose an information blockade are undoubtedly being implemented as you read this.

Shortly before the protests, it was reported that a petition to the regime signed by about 10,000 workers had been drawn up. A worker’s strike could prove fatal to the regime.

According to the regime’s own assessment, the situation is going to quickly get worse for the mullahs. An alleged classified intelligence report was leaked in early September that warned of a coming upheaval that will include riots in the border areas.

Within three months, the report says, the government won’t be able to pay the salaries of its employees. Starvation will become commonplace. The output of factories is only half of what it should be and foreign currency reserves will be used up within six months.

Another problem facing the regime is the rising domestic consumption of oil; oil it needs to sell abroad to survive. Oil exports account for about 85% of its budget.  Two studies concluded that Iran won’t have any oil to sell by 2015. Sanctions on Iran mean it will be exporting less oil, leaving more available to cope with this problem, but the fact is that this problem becomes greater for the regime every single day.

Read more at Radical Islam

Iran. 3.Oct 2012. Anti-regime Bazar protest. “if you have dignity then close your shops” 

 

Go to Freedom Messenger’s You Tube channel to see many more videos of the Iranian protests

Scores of U.S. Visas for Ahmadinejad’s Bulging Entourage

By Claudia Rosett:

When Iran’s pro-genocide president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, attends the United Nations General Assembly annual opening in New York this coming week, how many Iranian officials will he bring in his entourage?

Far too many, if the numbers reported today by Iran’s Fars News Agency are to be believed. As Fars describes it, the U.S. has denied entry visas to 20 Iranian officials, but that’s out of “the 160 people for whom the Iranian government had demanded entry visas two months ago.”

Let’s do the math. 160 visas demanded, minus 20 denied = a whopping total of 140 visas issued for the Ahmadinejad delegation to the UN General Assembly.

That would be 140 visas allowing entry for officials and affiliates of a regime under UN and U.S. sanctions — a nuclear-bomb-seeking regime implicated just last fall in an alleged terror plot to murder the Saudi ambassador to the U.S. by bombing a restaurant in Washington, D.C.; a regime whose terror-based rule, networks and ambitions violate the UN’s own charter and threaten America and America’s allies.

That’s 140 visas for a regime that continues to dodge sanctions with shifting, globe-girdling networks of front companies and illicit procurement operations for its missile and nuclear programs. Presumably, U.S. authorities — at considerable expense to U.S. taxpayers — will not only protect Ahmadinejad and his retinue while they are in New York, but also keep an eye on the doings of members of this massive Tehran roadshow, while they enjoy the amenities of Manhattan. But U.S. officialdom didn’t manage to prevent Ahmadinejad himself from recruiting the services of an Iranian-American sanctions violator, Ali Amirnazmi, during one of his previous trips to UN headquarters in New York. Instead, U.S. taxpayers got to foot the bill, rather later, for prosecuting this fellow, once law enforcement eventually caught up with him.

For the U.S. State Department, it is apparently routine to issue scores of U.S. visas for Iran’s massive delegations.  In 2010, when Ahmadinejad made an extra trip to the UN in New York, to attend a summit on nonproliferation (no, I’m not kidding), the U.S. State Department apparently issued 80 visas for that delegation – a number that became public because Iran had apparently requested a total of 81 visas, and when State denied just one of them, Iran wrote to the UN to complain about the lone denial. For State, it’s business as usual to admit scores of Iranian officials to New York every time they fancy a visit to a UN summit. As for New York’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg, he’s on record as shrugging off these huge Iranian delegations as distasteful, but an unavoidable part of hosting the UN, which he regards as a boon to New York City’s economy. (Surely New York could more profitably put its resources into welcoming tax-paying honest commerce, rather than gloating Iranian envoys?)

Is anyone in American officialdom counting the real cost to the U.S. of permitting Iran’s president to roll into Manhattan with an entourage that this year looks likely to surpass the size of the U.S. Senate? Even beyond the costs of security and surveillance, such U.S. kow-towing to Iran’s visa demands allows Iran to saturate the UN summit with Iranian officials, and sends Iran the message that it is welcome to exploit access to the UN. Further abuse of such access is sure to follow, especially with Iran serving these next three years as head of the 120-member Non-Aligned Movement, which includes well over half the members of the UN General Assembly.

Will Ahmadinejad’s delegation to New York this coming week actually include, as the Fars dispatch implies, 140 members?  Who are these people? There is no simple way to check. The U.S. State Department does not release lists of visas issued for UN meetings in New York — though it should. What’s to hide? And while the UN does post lists of delegation members, these lists tend not to appear until weeks after the General Assembly has concluded its opening business. When these lists do appear, they can be incomplete — based on information submitted by the member states. Iran’s record is not one of full disclosure.

There’s a powerful argument for banning Iran’s envoys wholesale from entry to the U.S., no matter what the UN, or the U.S. State Department, or Mayor Bloomberg might prefer. America could actually do the UN a favor in this regard, by holding it to the terms of its own charter — something that could potentially bring a big boost to the tenor and behavior of an organization that is open, in theory, only to peace-loving nations dedicated to such worthy goals as upholding human dignity. When Iran’s officials threaten to wipe Israel off the map, the UN response should be to eject Iran from the UN. If the UN won’t do that, and the U.S. State Department insists on allowing the president of Iran to come to New York to strut the stage of the UN General Assembly, the very least the State Department could do is refuse visas to the rest of his entourage. Let them, in all their massive numbers, tune in by webcast from Tehran. It would be cheaper and safer for New York, for America, and ultimately for that “international community” now descending on Manhattan.

published at PJMedia

U.S. Hands Ahmadinejad a Global Microphone

by: Anne Bayefsky:

Just a few days after the anniversary of the September 11 terror attacks, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will travel to New York City. Once he arrives he will be handed a platform to incite violence and hostility from the center of the UN universe, just a few miles from Ground Zero.

This is a man who openly advocates genocide, brazenly endeavors to commit terrorist attacks on American soil, kills and kidnaps Americans abroad, brutalizes his own people, sponsors terrorism around the world, and is on the verge of acquiring a nuclear bomb.

Today, on 9/11, we need to ask why. Why is he being given this global megaphone?

In September of 2010 Ahmadinejad used the podium of the United Nations General Assembly to make this claim about the 9/11 terror attacks: “Some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining American economy…”

In September of 2011 he complained that “Colonial powers … threaten anyone who questions the Holocaust.”

It is a moral outrage that the Obama administration is facilitating Ahmadinejad’s return to the United States in September of 2012.

Many argue that the 1947 Headquarters Agreement between the UN and the U.S. leaves no room for the White House to maneuver on this point. The deal that was struck states that the U.S. government “shall not impose any impediments to transit to or from the headquarters district” (a defined area in New York City’s east side) to a representative of a UN member state.

But the same agreement also says the following:  “It is agreed that no form of racial or religious discrimination shall be permitted within the headquarters district.”

Ahmadinejad is the quintessential bigot.  In 2008, he told the General Assembly “a small but deceitful number of people called Zionists … have been dominating an important portion of the financial and monetary centers as well as the political decision-making centers of some Europeans countries and the US in a deceitful, complex and furtive manner.”  If the agreement were applied as it should be, “no form of racial or religious discrimination” would mean no President Ahmadinejad in New York.

In 1988 Yassir Arafat, then Head of the Palestine Liberation Organization was denied a visa and unimpeded transit when he tried to address the General Assembly, despite the objections of UN legal counsel. The State Department pointed to the “security reservation” that Congress had attached to the resolution which brought the Headquarters Agreement into force. Congress had stipulated that nothing in the agreement diminished or weakened “the right of the United States to safeguard its own security…”

Surely, the security threat posed by aiding and abetting Ahmadinejad is as great or greater than the threat posed by Arafat.

Denying Ahmadinejad a New York launching pad also meets the expectations of the UN Charter itself, since all UN members have “resolved” “to reaffirm faith … in the dignity and worth of the human person,” “to establish conditions under which justice … can be maintained,” and “to employ international machinery for the promotion of … advancement of all peoples.”

But the Obama administration is not enabling Ahmadinejad’s warmongering hate speech just because today’s state department lawyers assert that their hands are tied.  Legitimizing the presence of the Iranian president in the United States on the world stage is a key tenet of  President Obama’s foreign policy. It goes by various lofty names like “diplomacy” or “engagement.”

Monday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Bloomberg Radio, when asked about setting “red lines” to prevent an Iranian nuclear weapon: “We’re not setting deadlines … [W]e have more time … to do everything we can to bring Iran to a good faith negotiation.”

Read more at Fox News

Related articles

President Lists Anti-Israel Activists Among ‘Rabbis for Obama’

Rabbi Chava Bahle

by Jeff Dunetz

Earlier this week the Obama campaign announced the formation of “Rabbis For Obama,” featuring over 600 rabbis from across the country and across all Jewish denominations dedicated to four more years of big government and anti-Israel policies.

The campaign didn’t bother to check the list ,or simply didn’t care who was on it ,because at least seven of the Rabbis on the list are members of the Rabbinical Council of The Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP)–an organization named by the Anti-Defamation League as one of the 10 most anti-Israel organizations in America (I am sure their mothers are proud).

The Rabbis include:

  • Rabbi Chava Bahle, Suttons Bay, MI
  • Rabbi Rachel Evelyne Barenblat, Lanesboro, MA
  • Rabbi Haim Beliak, Los Angeles, CA
  • Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb, Berkeley, CA
  • Rabbi Linda Holtzman, Philadelphia, PA
  • Rabbi Rebecca Lillian, Chicago, IL
  • Rabbi Brant Rosen, Evanston, IL

According to the ADL analysis JVP, the organization with which these Rabbis are involved:

…calls for an end to U.S. aid to Israel, accuses Israel of “apartheid” policies, and supports divestment campaigns against Israel. Like other Jewish anti-Zionist groups, JVP uses its Jewish identity to shield the anti-Israel movement from allegations of anti-Semitism and provide a greater degree of credibility to the anti-Israel movement. JVP recognizes its role as such, specifically noting that the group’s Jewish nature gives it a “particular legitimacy in voicing an alternative view of American and Israeli actions and policies” and the ability to distinguish “between real anti-Semitism and the cynical manipulation of that issue.” JVP activists regularly attend anti-Israel events wearing t-shirts and holding signs proudly broadcasting their Jewish identity. In March-April 2010, leaders of JVP unsuccessfully lobbied for the passage of a divestment resolution at the University of California, Berkeley, targeting companies that do business with Israel.

Some of the members of Obama’s anti-Israel Jew-crew can be considered “standouts.”

For example, Rabbi Chava Bahle is also a member of an organization called 14 Friends of Palestine, which advocated condemning Israel for the Gaza flotilla incident, in which a boat from Turkey filled with terrorists and weapons was stopped by Israel 2010, resulting in several deaths.  Bahle and the group also advocates the false meme that Israel is preventing food and medical supplies from reaching Gaza.

In his book Wrestling in the Daylight: A Rabbi’s Path to Palestinian Solidarity, Rabbi Brant Rosen wrote this about Operation Cast Lead, Israel’s response to thousands of rockets fired into her civilian areas:

I remember reading this news with utter anguish. At the same time, oddly enough, I realized that I was finally observing this issue with something approaching true clarity: This is not about security at all — this is about bringing the Palestinian people to their knees.

Once I admitted this to myself, I realized how utterly tired I had become. Tired of trying to excuse the inexcusable. Tired of using torturous, exhausting rationalizations to explain away what I knew in my heart was sheer and simple oppression.

Rosen is also an advocate of the BDS movement that calls for boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel.

Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb’s history includes dining with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and being the first American rabbi to visit Tehran.  And through her organization, Shomer Shalom Network for Jewish Nonviolence, Gottlieb (as well as other rabbis on Obama’s list) thanked South African Judge Goldstone for his now discredited report on Operation Cast Lead that accused Israel of war crimes:

Judge Goldstone, we want to offer you our deepest thanks for upholding the principles of justice, compassion and truth that are the heart of Jewish religion and without which our claims to Jewishness are empty of meaning. We regret that your findings have led to controversy and caused you not to feel welcome at your own grandson’s Bar Mitzvah. We believe your report is a clarion call to Israel and the Jewish people to awaken from the slumber of denial and return to the path of peace.

These seven rabbis were easy to find because they were all part of the same anti-Israel organization.  If each of the 600+ Rabbis were looked into I am confident there would be similar cases to report.

Read more at Breitbart

Israel, America Bashed at Iranian-Inspired DC Rally

Abdul Alim Musa

IPT News August 20, 2012

Claims of Jewish control of the media and American politics and alleged war-mongering by Israel and America dominated speeches Friday at an Iranian-inspired rally in Washington, D.C.

Iran Courts Latin America

by Ilan Berman

Middle East Quarterly
Summer 2012, pp. 63-69 (view PDF)

In October 2011, U.S. attorney general Eric Holder and FBI director Robert Mueller revealed the thwarting of an elaborate plot by elements in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington at a posh D.C. eatery, utilizing members of the Los Zetas Mexican drug cartel.[1]

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (left) hosted an Iftar (fast breaking) ceremony on Ramadan in Tehran, September 3, 2009, which was attended by Bolivian president Evo Morales (right) during a two-day official visit. Tehran is now believed to be extracting uranium from as many as eleven different sites in Bolivia close to the country’s industrial capital of Santa Cruz.

The foiled terrorist plot, with its Latin American connections, focused new attention on what had until then been a largely overlooked political phenomenon: the intrusion of the Islamic Republic of Iran into the Western Hemisphere. An examination of Tehran’s behavioral pattern in the region over the past several years reveals four distinct strategic objectives: loosening the U.S.-led international noose to prevent it from building nuclear weapons; obtaining vital resources for its nuclear project; creating informal networks for influence projection and sanctions evasion; and establishing a terror infrastructure that could target the U.S. homeland.

Building Western Hemisphere Alliances

Outreach to Latin America is seen by the Iranian regime first and foremost as a means to lessen its deepening international isolation. Since 2003, when its previously clandestine nuclear program became a pressing international issue, Tehran has sought to mitigate the mounting political and economic restrictions levied against it by the United States and its allies through intensified diplomatic outreach abroad.

Due to its favorable geopolitical climate—typified by vast ungoverned areas and widespread anti-Americanism—Latin America has become an important focus of this effort. Over the past decade, the regime has nearly doubled the number of embassies in the region (from six in 2005 to ten in 2010) and has devoted considerable energy to forging economic bonds with sympathetic regional governments.[2]

Far and away the most prominent such partnership has been with Venezuela. Since Hugo Chavez became president in 1999, alignment with Tehran has emerged as a cardinal tenet of Caracas’s foreign policy. The subsequent election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the Iranian presidency in 2005 kicked cooperation into high gear with dramatic results. Today, the two countries enjoy an extensive and vibrant strategic partnership. Venezuela has emerged as an important source of material assistance for Tehran’s sprawling nuclear program as well as a vocal diplomatic backer of its right to atomic power.[3] The Chavez regime also has become a safe haven and source of financial support for Hezbollah, Iran’s most powerful terrorist proxy.[4] In turn, Tehran’s feared Revolutionary Guard has become involved in training Venezuela’s secret services and police.[5] Economic contacts between Caracas and Tehran likewise have exploded—expanding from virtually nil in the early 2000s to more than $20 billion in total trade and cooperation agreements today.[6]

Just as significantly, Venezuela has served as Iran’s gateway for further economic and diplomatic expansion into the region. Aided by its partnership with Caracas and bolstered by a shared anti-American outlook, Tehran has succeeded in forging significant strategic, economic, and political links with the regime of Evo Morales in Bolivia and Rafael Correa in Ecuador. Even Iran’s relations with Argentina, where Iranian-supported terrorists carried out major bombings in 1992 and 1994, have improved in recent times, as the government of President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner has hewed a more conciliatory line toward Tehran.[7]

It would be a mistake, however, to view these contacts as simply pragmatic—or strictly defensive. The Iranian regime’s sustained systematic outreach to regional states suggests that it sees the Western Hemisphere as a crucial strategic theater for expanding its own influence and reducing that of the United States. Indeed, a 2009 dossier prepared by Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs noted that “since Ahmadinejad’s rise to power, Tehran has been promoting an aggressive policy aimed at bolstering its ties with Latin American countries with the declared goal of ‘bringing America to its knees.’”[8] This view is increasingly shared by the U.S. military: In its 2010 report on Iranian military power, the Office of the Secretary of Defense noted that “Iran seeks to increase its stature by countering U.S. influence and expanding ties with regional actors” in Latin America.[9]

To this end, Tehran is ramping up its strategic messaging to the region. In late January, on the heels of Ahmadinejad’s very public four-country tour of Latin America, the Iranian regime formally launched HispanTV, a Spanish-language analogue to its English-language Press TV channel.[10] The television outlet has been depicted by Ahmadinejad as part of his government’s efforts to “limit the ground for supremacy of dominance seekers”—a thinly-veiled reference to U.S. influence in the Western Hemisphere.[11]

As Ahmadinejad’s statement indicates, Tehran is pursuing a strategy that promotes its own ideology and influence in Latin America at Washington’s expense. In this endeavor, it has been greatly aided by Chavez, who himself has worked diligently to diminish U.S. political and economic presence in the region under the banner of a new “Bolivarian” revolution.

Read more