Category: Islam

Mar 09

Top General: At Least One Arab State to Go Nuclear If Iran Does

Commander of U.S. Central Command Gen. James Mattis said Tuesday that ”at least one other nation” has told him “at the leadership level” they will seek nuclear weapons if Iran goes nuclear:

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R., S.C.): If the Iranians develop a nuclear capability, how certain are you that other nations in the region would acquire an equal capability?

MATTIS: At least one other nation has told me they would do that, at a leadership level, they have assured me they would not stay without a nuclear weapon if Iran armed.

GRAHAM: Was that a Sunni-Arab state?

MATTIS: Yes, sir.

GRAHAM: So the likelihood of Sunni-Arab states acquiring nuclear capability to counter the Shia Persians is great, would you not agree with that?

MATTIS: I agree, and also other non-Sunni-Arab states in the general region.

The statements by Mattis contradict the findings of a recent report drafted by former Obama Pentagon official Colin Kahl and produced for the Center for New American Security. That report argues that Saudi Arabia–as well as other states–would be unlikely to develop nuclear weapons if Iran acquired nuclear weapons.


Permanent link to this article:

Feb 14

North Korea and Iran – partners in nuclear and missile programs


There is full awareness in Washington and Jerusalem that the North Korean nuclear test conducted Tuesday, Feb. 12, brings Iran that much closer to conducting a test of its own. A completed bomb or warhead are not necessary for an underground nuclear test; a device which an aircraft or missile can carry is enough.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s boast this week that Iran will soon place a satellite in orbit at an altitude of 36,000 kilometers – and Tehran’s claim on Feb. 4 to have sent a monkey into space – highlight Iran’s role in the division of labor Pyongyang and Tehran have achieved in years of collaboration: the former focusing on a nuclear armament and the latter on long-range missile technology to deliver it. 

Their advances are pooled. Pyongyang maintains a permanent mission of nuclear and missile scientists in Tehran, whereas Iranian experts are in regular attendance at North Korea’s nuclear and missile tests.

Since the detonation of the “miniature atomic bomb” reported by Pyongyang Tuesday – which US President Barack Obama called “a threat to US National security”- Iran must be presumed to have acquired the same “miniature atomic bomb” capabilities – or even assisted in the detonation.
Word of the North Korean atomic test reminded US officials of Ahmadinejad’s boast only a couple of days ago about the forthcoming launch of an Iranian satellite into orbit.  The two events clearly hang together as probably coordinated between Tehran and Pyongyang.
Ahead of the UN Security Council emergency session later Tuesday, Kim Jong Un’s government warned of “stronger actions” after the nuclear test.  Its diplomat warned the UN disarmament forum that his country will “never bow to any resolutions.”
The nuclear threat is not the only unconventional warfare peril looming closer. In Damascus, Syrian rebels are nearer than ever before to crashing through the capital’s last lines of defense. Tuesday, they were only 1.5 kilometers short of the heart of Damascus.
Western and Israeli military sources believe that if the Syrian rebels reach this target, the Syrian ruler Bashar Assad will have no qualms about using chemical weapons for the first time in the two-year civil war to save his regime. Both the US and Israel have warned him that doing so would cross a red line.

debkafile’s military sources report that Syrian rebel forces, spearheaded by an Al Qaeda-allied Islamist brigade, gained entry Tuesday to the 4th Division’s (Republican Guard) main base in the Adra district of eastern Damascus and are fighting the defenders in hand to hand combat for control of the facility.

Other rebel forces are retaking parts of the Damascus ring road in fierce battles, thereby cutting off the Syrian army’s Homs units in the north from their supply lines from the capital.

These two rebel thrusts, if completed, would bring the Syrian army closer than ever before to collapse. Assad is therefore expected to use every means at his disposal to cut his enemies down.

iran missile

Permanent link to this article:

Feb 12


Video suggests John saw Arabic writing in Revelation visions

Published: 22 hours ago

by Michael Carl

Bible and Middle Eastern scholars are noting a similarity between the Arabic name for Allah and the Greek letters naming the Beast of Revelation.

Former PLO operative turned Christian Arabic-language researcher Walid Shoebat affirms there’s evidence that the name of Allah in Arabic is what the apostle John saw in his vision of the Antichrist’s name in the book of Revelation.

Shoebat, author of “God’s War on Terror,” explained that because John didn’t know Arabic, it’s possible he transcribed the name of the Beast as best he could into Greek letters. The Arabic name for “Allah” and its accompanying symbols resembles the ancient Greek script for “666.”

“It seems that more Bible prophecy students are coming to grips with what we stated years ago in ‘God’s War on Terror,’” Shoebat said. “Skeptics argue that the three Greek letters are Greek and not Arabic, yet none deny that these three Greek letters do read in Arabic. I find that interesting. In other words, we have been telling the truth.

“Some die-hard skeptics will ignore the very symbols given by John, and people will always try to poke holes into any theory,” Shoebat said, “but the evidence is overwhelming.”

Shoebat said the key to the theory connecting the name of Allah to the Beast is understanding the significance of names.

He quotes from Revelation 13:7: “And that no man might buy or sell, save that he had the mark, or the name of the Beast, or the number of the name.”

“Indeed, we have three flavors: mark, name and number,” Shoebat said. “Yet most focus and argue over the mark while they ignore the name.”

In the Bible, he explained,  a name is a title or creed.

“For example, Jesus was called Emmanuel, ‘God with us.’ While His name is not literally Emmanuel, its meaning is,” Shoebat said. “He is God with us. Similarly, the name of the Beast is his title and creed and not a literal name.”

Want to delve deeper into the Islamic connection to the End Times? Be sure to read “The Islamic Antichrist” and “Mideast Beast” by Joel Richardson.

Shoebat said the most compelling case for the similarity between the Greek name for the Beast and the name for Allah is how Muslims wear the name of Allah.

“Any Christian skeptic who would like to argue that the Islamic creed, the name, the title and the declaration of faith is not blasphemous, please step forth,” Shoebat said. “Yet is it not what many Muslims put on their forehead? Or are we still led to believe the mark of the Beast to be a computer chip?”

Permanent link to this article:

Feb 03


WASHINGTON – Iran has watched as Saudi Arabia has incited Sunnis to create instability in neighboring Iraq and Riyadh has launched concerted efforts to overthrow the Iranian-backed Shi’ite Alawite regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, according to report from Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.


Now the chairman of the Iranian joint chiefs of staff, Brig. Gen. Hasan Firouzabadi, says he wants to avoid a sectarian war between Sunnis and Shi’a, but he also issued a veiled threat against Riyadh.

He accused the Saudi kingdom of using jihadists to undermine Shi’ites in the region, given increasingly unsettling events in Iraq and in Syria. Firouzbadi has spoken out given the growing concern that the rising Sunni turmoil in Iraq poses a security threat to Iran.

For some time, however, that has been the strategy of Saudi Arabia, which has decided to undertake an independent course of action from the restraint urged by the United States out of concern that Iran is spreading its influence in the Gulf Arab countries which are controlled by monarchies.

To date, the U.S. has not criticized Saudi Arabia for its support for jihadists in other countries that are attempting to arouse Sunnis in the Middle East. This is due to the close ties the U.S. has with the Saudi kingdom, long considered a key element of cohesion among the Gulf Arab countries on which the U.S. relies to maintain its security interests in the region.

And U.S. support for the Saudis continues despite the knowledge that the Saudis actively are using jihadists as proxies to enforce their own security interests.

According to Ali Akbar Velayati, who is Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s top international affairs adviser, Saudi use of jihadists to press the collapse of the al-Assad regime by Saudi Arabia is considered a “red line.”

“Those remarks were a message to the Saudis that the kingdom is looking at a major regional sectarian conflict if it continues to support the dozens of jihadist militias fighting the Syrian regime,” according to a report in the open intelligence group Strafor.

Velayati then suggested that the best approach was for a negotiated settlement between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

The response from Saudi Prince Saud al-Faisal was telling. He said that a political solution to the Syrian crisis wasn’t going to happen, which Stratfor said was a signal that Riyadh wasn’t interested in negotiations.

This position may be due to Riyadh seeing this being the time to push Iranian influence back now that its previous positions in Iraq and Syria are increasingly tenuous. They want to take advantage of the large blocs of Sunnis in Iraq and in Syria where Sunnis constitute some 60 percent of the population.

Sources believe Saudi use of jihadist proxies is due to the lack of enthusiasm by nationalists and other secular forces to openly fight Iran and the Shi’a who back al-Assad. The jihadists are all too eager to carry the fight against the Shi’ites in Iraq and Syria, especially given the financial and logistical backing from Riyadh.

Just as Iran has called attempts to overthrow al-Assad a “red line,” sources see Iran bringing in its own insurgents to fight the Sunni jihadists. At the same time, Tehran wants to show how the Saudi kingdom is more prone to use jihadists as opposed to Sunni Turkey or Qatar, who don’t necessarily agree with Riyadh’s use of them.

These countries fear that Riyadh can’t or doesn’t control the jihadists outside the kingdom, making their own governments prone to potential jihadist attacks.

The U.S., however, equally is concerned over the use of jihadists and al-Qaida, especially in Iraq and Syria, due to the geopolitical changes that would sweep the region should they prevail.

“(Washington) will cautiously use the sectarian fault line running through the region to try to maintain a difficult balance of power,” the Stratfor report said. “What this means is that a major, long-term geopolitical conflict along the northern rim of the Middle East is highly likely.”

Permanent link to this article:

Jan 03

Dreams, Visions Moving Muslims to Christ


JERUSALEM, Israel — Several years ago, Ali took the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca known as Hajj.

“Of course when I went to Mecca I was going there in order to pay hommage to the Kabba and to fulfill the requirements in Islam,” he recalled.

But the trip became more of a spiritual journey than he could ever imagine.

“That night I saw Jesus in a dream. First, Jesus touched my forehead with his finger. And after touching me, He said, ‘You belong to me,'” Ali recalled.

“And then He touched me above my heart,” he continued. “‘You have been saved, follow me. You belong to me,’ he said.”

Ali’s story in Mecca was told and dramatized in a DVD called “More Than Dreams.”

“I decided I’m not going to finish the Hajj, the pilgrimage. Whatever it takes, I’m going to follow that voice,” he explained.

The film documents and dramatizes Ali’s story and several other Muslims who came to faith in Jesus through a dream or vision.

“We’re seeing that all around. We’re hearing about people that have never even thought about Jesus as savior,” Tom Doyle, with e3 Ministries, said. “They’re content Muslims and they’re having dreams over and over.”

Doyle and his wife Joanna take the gospel to the Muslim world. He’s also the author of the upcoming book, Dreams and Visions: Is Jesus Awakening the Muslim World?

“I think our God is a fair God, that He’s righteous and just, and people are seeking and they don’t know where to go,” Doyle said.

“Maybe they don’t have a Bible, maybe there’s no missionary in the village,” he said. “He’ll get the message to them somehow.”

The phenomenon of dreams and visions has surfaced throughout the Muslim world, from Indonesia to Morocco.

“In the church if you ask how many people came to Christ, 80 percent will say, ‘I saw Him in a dream,'” one woman in central Asia told CBN News. Her identity is being protected for security reasons.

A Christian friend challenged her to ask God to speak to her personally.

“So I decided to ask Him,” she said. “The next day … in my dream I saw Jesus … I decided to come to Him.” 

Hazem Farraj hosts “Reflections,” a satellite program for Muslims. He said he often gets feedback about dreams and visions. 

“I had one lady write me … she said, ‘I turned on the television and there you were … the words that were coming out of your mouth were so peaceful I fell asleep,'” Farraj recalled.

“She said, ‘When I fell asleep I ended up having a vision of Jesus and I saw the Lord,'” he continued. “She said, ‘As soon as I looked over I knew that Christ was the sacrifice, the son of the God.”

Doyle said the dream or vision is usually the start, not the end, of a Muslim’s conversion.

“Nobody goes to sleep a Muslim and wakes up a Christian, but it knocks down the false barriers that are inherent in Islam,” Doyle explained.

The Doyles said beneath the current revolution in the Middle East, there’s a spiritual earthquake.

“As things heat up politically and spiritually within Islam, man, the Holy Spirit is moving even more powerfully,” Joanna said.

“This is the time when hearts are open, people are desperate, governments are changing,” her husband added. “Everybody’s foundation has massive cracks in it and Jesus is the answer that can come in and fill that need.”

Many veteran missionaries to the Muslim world say dreams and visions, along with satellite television, are introducing Muslims to Jesus in unprecedented numbers.

They add that more Muslims are coming to Jesus than at any other time in the 1,400-year history of Islam.

The Doyles want believers in the West to join this spiritual revolution.

“Not everybody is going to go the Middle East. But they can pray,” Doyle said.

“And no government, no leader can block intercession around the world,” he said. “So we need to pray as believers that God would continue to push the gospel out to the ends of the earth.”


Permanent link to this article:

Dec 13



Iran has infiltrated a team of Quds Force terrorist leaders into the United States to attack from within in 2013, according to a source.

The source within the office of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of the Islamic regime, said the team is to create instability in America through terrorism should the U.S. fail to accept the regime’s illicit nuclear program, increase sanctions, confront Iran militarily or intervene in the Syrian civil war.

Members of the team, no more than 10 Quds Force officers, each lead cells totaling about 50 terrorists already in the U.S.

The source is risking his life not only to reveal the terror operation but to warn that Iran is pursuing its nuclear bomb program around the clock from several secret sites.

Details of the terror plot, meant to disrupt the West, have been passed on to U.S. officials, who are taking countermeasures.

The source said the team members, unlike the alleged Iranian operative Manssor Arbabsiar, who was arrested in a plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington, D.C. in 2011, are highly trained and sophisticated.

The team leaders are all senior Revolutionary Guard officers who were recruited for this specific mission nine years ago on the recommendation of the Quds Force commander, Qassem Soleimani, and with the approval of security advisers to Khamenei.

Some of these individuals held high-level posts before joining the mission. One served as the security officer in the supreme leader’s office, another was a member of the special forces for intelligence and security in charge of protecting regime officials, two were in charge of security of ground and air transportation, another was a commander of recruiting assets, and others had experience in security and intelligence.

Most of the team members have been in America for a year; a few were successfully placed here about five years ago.

The families of the team members are financially supported by the regime, but team members are financially supported through various means as they do not maintain any contact with Iran.

Two wealthy Iranian businessmen in Iran with ties in Europe are used to finance the team; one routinely travels to the U.S.

One well-established Iranian businessman in America who often travels to Iran was approached by the Quds Force for his collaboration in return for incentives in Iran. He acts as the sponsor of the team, transfers cash to team members, hosts meetings at his residence and passes on information from the regime to the team. He also takes care of any legal issues, leases, contracts and such.

Information and pictures of potential targets have been submitted for Khamenei’s approval, the source added. They include high-voltage towers to create blackouts, cell towers, water supplies, public transportation and various other buildings belonging to the Defense Department and military.

The source said the planned attacks could be greater than what happened on 9/11 and that in the last phase of the attack, al-Qaida operatives will also be involved.

After Osama bin Laden’s death, Khamenei has taken a greater role in leadership on the collaboration with al-Qaida, and according to the source, four top al-Qaida commanders visit Khamenei every two months.

The plan is that if by next six months America does not accept Iran’s nuclear program and either increases sanctions or a military confrontation occurs, the assets have been ordered to carry out their mission. The regime feels it must act by then because current sanctions, which have already had a serious effect on Iran’s economy, could spark civilian rioting.

As reported in the Washington Times on Oct. 5, a secret memo by the regime’s Intelligence Ministry warned that deteriorating economic conditions from international sanctions had greatly increased the possibility of an uprising and urged them to take appropriate action.

The United States has set a March deadline for Iran to comply with International Atomic Energy Agency demands on its nuclear program or face much harsher measures.

The regime believes, the source said, that if the U.S. fails to accept Iran’s nuclear program, Israel will be much more likely to attack its nuclear facilities and military installations.

Previously an exclusive report in WND revealed that terror cells of the Islamic regime were on high alert to attack targets in America. Gen. Massoud Jazayeri, deputy head of Iran’s armed forces, stated that, “In the face of any attack, we will have a crushing response. In that case, we will not only act in the boundaries of the Middle East and the Persian Gulf, no place in America will be safe from our attacks.”

Iranian officials also see the possible overthrow of Syrian President Bashar Assad as a red line, and with the looming confrontation over their nuclear program, they have taken several measures, one of which is to retaliate against Israel through several fronts and in coordination with their proxies, such as Hezbollah. As reported in WND, 170 ballistic missiles have been pre-targeted on Tel Aviv alone, some with biological warheads. And an attack on America from within would create economic havoc on the fragile U.S. economy.

The source warned that the IAEA has no idea that the Islamic regime is actively working on its nuclear bomb program at secret sites, that it has even enriched uranium to over 90 percent – weaponization grade – and that with the help of North Korea, it is working on a plutonium bomb.

The assumption that Iran is far from accomplishing its goals is a hoax, the source warned. The regime next year will make operational intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of reaching the U.S. Armed with nuclear weapons, it would be too late for the world, he said.


Permanent link to this article:

Dec 12

Tracking Pakistan’s nukes to Saudi Arabia


Report says weapons may have been transferred as early as 2004

Pakistan may have transferred nuclear weapons to the chief bankroller of its development program, Saudi Arabia, as far back as 2004, according to a then-U.S. government official who received the revelation in a Pakistani intelligence briefing at the time, says a report from Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.

Larry Werline, in a little-noticed report in Blackwater Tactical Weekly last June, said the transfer was revealed in a briefing that Pakistani Inter-Service Directorate, or ISI, officials gave him and other U.S. experts when relations between the United States and Pakistan were on a far better political and diplomatic footing.

Werline said that it was unusual that the intelligence service would oversee Pakistan’s nuclear program. Nonetheless, the high-ranking ISI briefers told of the increasing cooperation Pakistan was receiving at the time from China.

Chinese assistance included advanced production of lighter plutonium warheads for miniaturization to fit on Chinese missiles, based on technology, Werline said, that was stolen from U.S. and British work.

Essentially, the result of such work is weapons, with plutonium, that are lighter and have a higher explosive yield than weapons based on enriched uranium.

Sources have told WND/G2Bulletin that Saudi Arabia financed Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program and that even now, given the increasing Islamist threat in Pakistan, Islamabad may have decided to store some of its nuclear weapons in Saudi Arabia for safe keeping.

The ISI briefings took place in Pakistan in November 2004. The series of briefings over a three-day period were by ISI officials who at one time were senior Pakistani military officers.

Attending the briefings were scientists from the U.S. and Britain. One of the scientists, Werline said, was from the U.S. Department of Energy.

The briefings pointed out that ISI was in exclusive control of the country’s nuclear arsenal, and security forces were “recklessly moving nuclear warheads” around the country, Werline said.

Pakistan’s ISI is known for having created the Afghanistan Taliban and other Islamist militant jihadist groups, such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba, or LeT, among others, to act as proxies for the Pakistani military to launch attacks against India, which is Pakistan’s arch-enemy even until this day.

The LeT was responsible for a series of attacks in Mumbai, India, on Nov. 28, 2008, that killed 164 people and wounded some 308.

The briefing also included details of a Pakistani nuclear scientist’s visit to Afghanistan to brief then-al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden in the late 1990s when the Afghan government then was under the control of the Taliban.

The briefing to bin Laden “was orchestrated, planned and executed by Pakistan’s ISI,” Werline said.

iran missile

Permanent link to this article:

Nov 27

Russian expert warns of possibility of large-scale war in Middle East

In an interview with the Voice of Russia, Russian analyst Konstantin Sivkov said: “Deploying these missiles in Turkey will be dangerous for Syrian military planes – this is obvious. A lesser obvious thing is that Turkey is getting ready for a war against Syria. If an attack on Syria from the territory of Turkey does take place, this will most likely be an attack not of the Turkish army, but of NATO’s forces.”

“The Middle East is getting ready for a large-sale battle which will very likely affect the Russian part of the Caucasus, and this, in its turn, will be reflected on the entire Russia,” Mr. Sivkov added.

The planned deployment by NATO countries of Patriot air defence systems on Turkey’s Syria border will actually amount to the imposition of a no-fly zone for Syrian aircraft in circumvention of the UN Security Council.

The opinion has been voiced by the leading research fellow of the Russian Institute for Oriental Studies, Vladimir Kudelev.

He feels that Patriot systems may drastically influence the fighting between the government troops and the opposition in the north of Syria, since the militants will thus get a 200 kilometre – to 250 kilometre-wide “umbrella” all along the Syrian-Turkish border.

The deployment of Patriots would also undermine the role of the UN Security Council, which, experts feel, would hardly authorize any proposal to impose a no-fly zone for Syrian aircraft.

Plans for the deployment of the Patriot Missile Air-Defence Systems on the Turkish-Syrian border are defensive in character, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said in a telephone talk with Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. Earlier Moscow voiced its concern over the militarization of that region.

The above-mentioned telephone talk was held on the initiative of the NATO Secretary General. Moscow says that Rasmussen wanted to clarify the situation with the deployment of the Patriot Missile Air-Defence Systems on the Turkish territory. Ankara filed a relevant request to NATO on November 21st. The information that appeared in the press more than once last month said that Turkey was making preparations for appealing to Brussels. Possibly, acting in this way Ankara wanted to indirectly put pressure on its NATO allies. As you know, till recently NATO was strongly against getting involved in a conflict between Turkey and Syria, a political analyst, Stanislav Tarasov, says.

“They started asking NATO to interfere in the conflict, using the Alliance’s Clause No.5 – the defence of territories. Which means that they wanted to drag NATO into the conflict and thus, to ensure its military presence in the region. NATO said “No”. Then they resorted to Clause No. 4 – the provision of help”.

NATO said that it would consider Turkey’s request without any delay. And Germany’s Foreign Ministry said that Turkey’s request should be met without any delay. Media reports even said that Berlin was ready not only to provide the Patriot Missile Air-Defence Systems to Turkey but also to send 120 Bundeswehr soldiers to the region. Turkey has not only moved its forces to its border with Syria but has also approved a law enabling it to bring its troops into the territory of its neighbor in case of a military threat. The reason for such a large- scale militarization was firing missiles into the Syrian territory, which official Damascus called an accident. Any escalation of this conflict is inadmissible, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on November 23rd. Moscow is well aware of Turkey’s concern as well as of NATO’s arguments but what is important in this case is the potential, not intentions – that is why any militarization on the Turkish-Syrian border may lead to an uncontrollable turn of events, the Russian minister said.

“Any accumulation of arms creates certain risks and urges all those who would like like to resort to the exterior factor of force to finally use it. We believe that this will not happen, and that all outside players will display maximum responsibility in assessing the on-going developments in the region’.

In the diplomatic language this means that the events in Syria may start developing according to the Libyan Scenario, experts say. As you know, the opposition is losing its support, and Assad has a military superiority in Syria now, an Oriental studies expert, Azhdar Kurtov, says.

“The Syrian-Turkish border has a sophisticated mountain relief. Under such conditions, combat aviation is a very effective method of fighting against the rebels. Thus, if Turkey deploys the Patriot Missile Air-Defence Systems on its territory, it will be able to block Syria using its own aviation in the border regions on its own territory, which may change the turn of military developments in the region. When the overthrowing of the Gaddafi regime was under way, a no-fly zone was established over Libya. Something like that may be created near the Turkish-Syrian border”.

Moscow’s fears may also be caused by something that is not directly linked with the crisis in Syria, a Turkish political analyst, Barysh Adybelli, says.

“Moscow believes that in case the Patriot Misslile Air-Defence Systems are deployed in Turkey, they can be used as one of the elements of the early warning system – that is, as one of the elements of the European missile defence system which the USA is ardently defending by now”.

Official Ankara reacted to Moscow’s statements on November 23rd. Turkey’s Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan called Moscow’s reaction to a possible deployment of the Patriot Missile Air-Defence systems erroneous, adding that Russia is trying to present Turkey’s domestic issue as its own problem. Fears remain though.

NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen assured Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov that plans of the alliance to deploy Patriot air defense missiles in Turkey are of purely defensive.

Mr. Rasmussen and Mr. Lavrov had a phone conversation on Friday initiated by NATO chief.

A statement released by the Russian Foreign Ministry after the talks says that Mr. Lavrov expressed his concerns over NATO`s plans to place Patriot air missiles on the Turkish-Syrian border.

He mentioned Russia’s initiative to help Ankara and Damascus be able to discuss all differences directly amid the increasing military potential in the region in order to avoid incidents.

Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said that Russia’s reaction to the deployment of the Patriot air defense systems on the border with Syria, which Ankara requested from the NATO on Wednesday, was “erroneous”.

Answering the question about the Moscow’s reaction to Turkey’s request to NATO, the official representative of the Foreign Ministry of the Russian Federation Alexander Lukashevich noted on Thursday that Russia considered the militarization of the Syrian-Turkish border to be an alarm signal. “I believe Russia’s statement to be very erroneous”, – the Turkish Prime Minister said in this regard to accompanying journalists on his return from Pakistan from the summit of the “Islamic group of eight”.

Russia has expressed its concern over the militarization of the Turkish-Syrian border, the VoR correspondent Polina Chernitsa has cited the Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich who commented on Turkey’s request to deploy Patriot missiles on the Syrian border.

Moscow would like Turkey to contribute to the beginning of the inter-Syria dialogue rather than flex its military muscles, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said on Thursday.

“The militarization of the Syrian-Turkish border is a dismal signal,” Lukashevich said, referring to Turkey’s recent request to deploy Patriot anti-missile systems to protect its border with Syria.

He urged Turkey to interact more with the Syrian opposition so as to help start the inter-Syria dialogue as soon as possible.

Turkey already hosted the complex twice. in 1991 and 2003 during the two Iraqi campaigns but never used it.

Permanent link to this article:

Nov 03

UN Representative Calls For Establishing A ‘World Capital’–In Islamic Istanbul

The world needs a global capital and it should be the capital of Islamic Turkey, Istanbul, according to a UN special representative. Richard Falk, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights, wrote a Nov. 1, 2012, opinion piece for the controversial al Jazeera English site calling for a “global capital” because of integration “by markets, by globally constituted battlefields, by changing geopolitical patterns.”

While Turkey is a longstanding U.S. ally and a member of NATO, its nearly 80 million population is 99.8 percent Muslim, according to the CIA Factbook. Its Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has had several run-ins with Israel over access to Gaza. In March, he urged Israel to “stop the brutal attack against Palestinians and stop the massacre and bloodshed.”

The U.S. Embassy in Turkey sent out an “emergency message” for U.S. citizens in September warning of “a planned anti-American march/protest” in Istanbul. The march was tied to protests against the YouTube video claimed by critics to be anti-Islamic. “The Department of State strongly recommends avoiding the march/protest location as well as any other large crowds that may gather in Istanbul to protest against the controversial video that has created other demonstrations throughout the world,” explained the warning.

Falk recommended what al Jazeera called a “modest proposal” that should move the world past “the persisting tendency is to view the hierarchy of global cities from a West-centric perspective: London, New York, Paris, Los Angeles placed in the first rank.” Along with his UN duties, he is the Albert G. Milbank Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University and Visiting Distinguished Professor in Global and International Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Falk said there were two sides on where to locate such a capital – hard and soft power dynamics. He defined hard power as a view “that history is principally made by those who prevail in warfare, and little else.”

His description of soft power included “culture, political vitality, religious identity and ethics shapes and forms what unfolds.” He listed “several factors” why to choose Istanbul. Those included the city as a tourist destination, it has “also become a secure and acceptable place to hold the most delicate diplomatic discussions,” it is convenient, and Turkey has “gained economic and political credibility at a time when so many important states have either been treading water so as to remain afloat.”

He credited Turkey for “achieving a stable interface between secular principles and religious freedom” and for “moving away from the ‘over-secularizsation.'” Falk said choosing Istanbul as a world capital would be good because Turkey could provide the “satisfactions of a post-Western world civilization.”

Permanent link to this article:

Oct 28

Turkey: An Aggressive Emerging Islamist Autocracy That May Soon Become ‘The Greatest Threat To Israel’

“Bernard Lewis, one of the world’s greatest experts on the Islamic world, told me a few years ago that the emerging younger Iranian generation and the alienated middle class would bring about regime change. However, he also predicted that Turkey would evolve into an aggressive Islamist dictatorship and could become the greatest threat to Israel.

Alas, his prediction about Turkey is being realized.

When, 12 years ago, Recep Tayyip Erdogan assumed the reins of leadership in Turkey, many expressed concern that beneath the veneer of moderation and commitment to a fusion of moderate Islam and democracy, the real Erdogan was a fanatical Muslim whose objective was to transform Turkey into an authoritarian Islamic state. They were vindicated.

The military, which controlled the nation since Kemal Ataturk created a secular Turkish Republic in 1923, undoubtedly displayed autocratic tendencies in the course of its relentless determination to suppress Muslim extremism. Yet in terms of freedom of speech and democratic process, the situation today is significantly worse than before Erdogan.

Erdogan imprisoned thousands of Turkish citizens on spurious grounds without adequate trials; one in four former Turkish generals is currently languishing in prison; journalists, nonconforming academics and politicians have been summarily arrested; dissenting newspapers were closed down.

To some extent, leaders can be judged by their associates.

Erdogan proudly accepted a ‘human rights award’ from the late Libyan tyrant Muammar Gaddafi and welcomed as his guest Omar Bashir, the genocidal leader of Sudan, a certified war criminal responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of his own citizens.

Erdogan denies that Hamas is a terrorist organization, referring to its adherents as heroic liberation fighters and treating visiting Hamas head Ismail Haniyeh virtually like a head of state. Last month he invited the other Hamas leader, Khaled Mashaal, to be his personal guest of honor at a state Iftar dinner to mark the end of Ramadan.

Erdogan also expanded Turkish diplomatic ties to the most radical Muslim terrorist regimes and organizations, including until recently the Syrians and the Iranian ayatollahs who he continues to insist are entitled to become a nuclear power. Now having parted ways with Assad, he has closely allied himself with Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Clearly his objective is to emerge as the popular leader of a neo-Ottoman Sunni Muslim arc.

To promote this objective, he has consciously exploited popular hatred of Israel as a vehicle by which to gain widespread support from the Arab masses.

To this end, he has transformed Turkey’s former close alliance with Israel into one of aggressive confrontation and demonization, emerging as one of the leading Arab states directing hostility against the Jewish state.

The first public display of this behavior was his bitter and contrived confrontation of President Shimon Peres at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 2009. Millions of television viewers saw him excoriating Peres over alleged Israeli war crimes and then dramatically storming out of the conference.

The deterioration in Turkish-Israel relations climaxed in 2010 when nine members of the IHH, a Turkish government-sanctioned jihadist terrorist group, were killed on board the Mavi Marmara, a Turkish boat in the Gaza ‘peace’ flotilla, after having attacked the IDF boarding party with metal bars, clubs and knives.

An independent Israeli commission of inquiry vindicated the IDF actions as self-defense. A separate UN commission ruled that while there may have been excessive violence, the Israeli action was entirely consistent with international law.

However, Erdogan exploited this incident to intensify the confrontation with Israel. He demanded that the Israeli government apologize, pay restitution to families and unconditionally lift the blockade on Gaza.

Seeking to ease tensions, the Israelis expressed regret at the loss of lives and, without accepting blame, sought to reach an accommodation including a rumored offer to pay $6 million to families of the victims.

But it soon became clear that Erdogan was seeking confrontation rather than compromise.

The Turkish government downgraded its diplomatic representation and intensified its global campaign to demonize Israel, seeking to have it barred from participating at all international gatherings.

Last month, on the second anniversary of the flotilla, the Turkish High Court issued indictments against Israeli military officers for their alleged involvement in the incident, pronouncing life sentences on the former IDF chief of staff Gabi Ashkenazi and other military leaders.

Campaigns against Israel were accompanied by intensification of anti-Semitic propaganda in the government- controlled media which included ghoulish television dramas (Valley of the Wolves) portraying Israelis as dealers in body parts, murderers of innocent children and other foul criminal activity. Not surprisingly, Turkish opinion polls reflect a 76 percent negative attitude towards Jews.

Erdogan has been especially viral in his denunciation of Israel’s targeted assassinations of terrorists. Yet when a number of Syrian shells errantly crossed his border, he had no hesitation in launching a brutal military attack, in stark contrast to Israel’s reluctance to maximize its deterrent capabilities in response to missiles continuously being launched against Israeli civilians from Gaza.

Nor does Erdogan display any scruples in employing the fiercest means to suppress protests or efforts by the Kurdish minority to achieve greater autonomy or independence.

One of the most disconcerting aspects of this confrontation is that despite his concerted campaign to delegitimize Israel, Erdogan has successfully forged a close alliance with President Barack Obama, who describes him as ‘an outstanding partner and an outstanding friend on a wide range of issues.’ Erdogan reciprocates, stating ‘from the moment Barack became president, we upgraded the status of our relations from a strategic partnership to a model partnership, on which he also placed a lot of importance.’

Indeed, following pressure from Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Obama agreed to bar Israel – a NATO partner country and member of NATO’s Mediterranean dialogue – from participating in a NATO summit which took place in Chicago.

Turkey also demanded that NATO intelligence information be denied to Israel.

Likewise, Turkey succeeded in excluding Israel from a special meeting of the World Economic Forum. More outrageously, Obama caved in to Turkey’s demand that Israel – the Western country which has suffered more terrorism than any other – be barred from a global forum on counterterrorism.

Israel can do little to lessen the tension. Those who suggest that by prostrating and groveling towards Turkey Israel would overcome this enmity are naïve and misguided. In the context of an aggressive Islamist government such behavior conveys weakness and surrender and would only further embolden Erdogan into making even greater demands. If we cannot generate friendship it is far better that we command respect.

However, the Turks would hesitate to demonize and delegitimize us if they believed that they would be penalized. We could surely expect our principal ally, the United States, to stand firm and not kowtow to Turkish efforts to isolate or demean us.” Source – The Jerusalem Post.

Permanent link to this article: