Displaying posts categorized under

WORLD NEWS

Evidence that Iran Violated the Nuclear Deal Since Day One? by Majid Rafizadeh

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14910/iran-nuclear-deal-violations

The IAEA first ignored the reports about Iran’s undeclared clandestine nuclear facilities. This should not come as a surprise: the IAEA has a long history of misreporting the Islamic Republic’s compliance with the deal and declining to follow up on credible reports about Iran’s illicit nuclear activities.

New evidence shows that Iran’s theocratic establishment was most likely violating the nuclear agreement since the day that Obama’s administration and Tehran struck the deal in 2015.

The international community would truly do itself a great service to recognize that the nuclear deal was nothing more than a pro-mullah agreement which provided Iran’s ruling clerics with billions of dollars to pursue their anti-American, anti-Semitic, anti-Iranian people and pro-terror activities, while simultaneously providing cover for Iran to pursue its nuclear ambitions.

The Iranian government is advancing its nuclear program at a faster pace. Recently, the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) declared that Tehran took the third step in increasing its nuclear activities by activating advanced centrifuges: 20 IR-4 and 20 IR-6 centrifuges.

Trump’s peace deal – anything in it for Jordan? Jordan’s response to the economic component of the deal was that cash offers cannot replace a political solution. But some Jordanian officials reportedly believe the country could – and should – profit from any plan that promises billions in economic aid.by Neville Teller

https://www.israelhayom.com/2019/09/22/trumps-peace-deal-anything-in-it-for-jordan/

Jordan presents itself to the world as a constitutional monarchy – a state supporting a multiparty political system, an elected parliament, and a prime minister who is the head of government.

Constitutional experts beg to differ. Most maintain that Jordan is an autocracy in which authoritarian power is exercised by the king through legal manipulation, described by the Journal of Democracy as “selective economic reforms, new civil society regulations, and hollow pluralism initiatives.” In fact, the king is the country’s ultimate authority in respect of all three branches of government – executive, legislative, and judicial. He appoints the prime minister and chooses the cabinet. The judges are appointed and dismissed by royal decree. Political parties were legalized in 1992 provided they acknowledge the legitimacy of the monarchy.

These democratically dubious constitutional arrangements do not, however, affect the popularity of the monarchy, and there is no demand within Jordan for constitutional change. However, the usual consequences of autocratic rule – corruption, unemployment, poverty, high taxes, rising food prices, and poor government services – regularly result in outbursts of popular protest. Over the course of 2019, the scale and depth of Jordan’s economic problems have been unprecedented, and massive public demonstrations have been the result.

In May and June, the public took to the streets in great numbers to protest increased taxes and soaring prices. The rebellion was nationwide, uniting all sectors of Jordanian society. In response, King Abdullah dismissed the government, froze prices, and appointed a new prime minister, Omar al-Razzaz, whom he ordered to produce reforms.

The 2019 “Muslim Man Of The Year”, The Antisemitism Envoy, and The Pandemic of Muslim Antisemitism Andrew Bostom

https://www.andrewbostom.org/2019/09/the-2019-muslim-man-of-the-year-the-antisemitism-envoy-and-the-pandemic-of-muslim-antisemitism/

Appositely, Columbia University Jewish students are protesting the slated appearance of “proud” Jew-hating Malaysian Muslim Prime Minister Mahathir ibn Mohamad, Wednesday, September 25th at Columbia’s World Leadership Forum. Their protest petition references a comment this bigoted Muslim head of state made October 16, 2003, at the Putrajaya (Malaysia) summit for the leaders of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (now dubbed Organization of Islamic Cooperation), a de facto Sharia supremacist global Islamintern.

…the Jews rule this world by proxy and get others to fight and die for them.

But this isolated remark is completely de-contextualized from Mohamad’s mainstream Muslim worldview, rooted in sacralized Islamic jihadism and Jew-hatred, which these overarching statements from the same 2003 address, elucidate:

To begin with, the governments of all the Muslim countries can close ranks and have a common stand…on Palestine…We need guns and rockets, bombs and warplanes, tanks and warships…We may want to re-create the first century of the Hijrah, the way of life in those times, in order to practice what we think to be the true Islamic way of life. 1.3 billion Muslims cannot be defeated by a few million Jews. There must be a way. And we can only find a way if we stop to think, to assess our weaknesses and our strength, to plan, to strategize and then to counter-attack. As Muslims, we must seek guidance from the Al-Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet (i.e., Muhammad who waged a bloody proto-jihad which slaughtered and subjugated the Medinan Jews). Surely the 23 years’ struggle of the Prophet can provide us with some guidance as to what we can and should do.

 

Moreover the Columbia student protest petition also ignores this baleful reality: Mahathir Mohamad was designated the 2019 Muslim Man Of The Year in the 2019 Muslim 500, a yearly publication of the highly influential, mainstream, moderate Jordanian Muslim think tank, The Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Institute/Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, renowned for its very active role in “interfaith dialogue.”    

China, One World Two Systems? by Francesco Sisci

http://www.settimananews.it/italia-europa-mondo/china-one-world-two-systems/
 
How Hong Kong’s and China’s position in the world is no longer tenable, as it was seen 20 years ago.

In the late 1990s, Beijing decided to adhere to the newly established World Trade Organization (WTO), which was to replace GATT (General Agreement on Tariff and Trade), regulating trade in the free world that had been battling the Soviet empire. The USA, leading those talks and promoting the new organization, had settled on allowing a grace period for China to fully integrate into the global system. This system was not just commercial, but also political.

China had then barely managed to skirt the 1997-1998 Asian financial crisis, which brought down governments and regimes all over Asia and proved in this part of the world that the US was the paramount example of a well-managed economic system. In the previous decade, the US also caused the USSR to disband and later overawed the Europeans, whose monetary system was disrupted by the 1992 financial crisis. The euro, then an objective challenge to dollar dominance, had been approved by the EU but only in return for an eastward expansion of the Union, something that would weaken European ability to easily reach a unified consensus on the moves of the new currency.

Basically, in the late 1990s, the USA and China agreed on establishing a situation parallel to that of Hong Kong. The territory had just in 1997 been returned to Beijing under the principle of “one country, two systems” (一国两制): that is, China and Hong Kong were to be run according to different sets of rules, although both agreed they belonged to one China and eventually they would be united under one rule. Similarly, China was joining the WTO under the provision that we could call new “one world, two systems”, or to be more Chinese: “one heaven, two systems” (一天两制). The two systems were to be run differently although both understood they would eventually merge into one – the free market/free politics one would spread all over the world.

WHY THE OBSESSION WITH ISRAEL AND NOT WITH WEST PAPUA (HALF A MILLION DEAD)? [Note by Tom Gross]

https://madmimi.com/p/3bc55f?pact=527997-154157172-7235361215-a2bf1295d0adda667967478eaacccbfeb5cd35c2

In a short interview I gave yesterday evening, I discuss not only the continuing substantial coverage about Israel in media outlets such as France 24 and the international New York Times, where Israel continues to be the lead story.

I also ask why there has been so little coverage in the western media after the US military admitted killing over 30 innocent Afghan farmers in a drone strike last Thursday:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/afghanistan-dozens-civilians-killed-drone-attack-190919072728303.html

I’m not making a military judgment regarding the Afghan conflict. I’m wondering why the western media does not even want to report and discuss dozens of other conflicts (even those the west is involved in) in anything like the way it scrutinizes the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a conflict where far fewer people have died compared to many of these other conflicts.

This is particularly the case in the New York Times’ international print edition which, day after day, fills much of its news and opinion pages with generally very one-sided pieces seemingly designed to portray Israel in a negative and misleading light.

At the same time, there is almost no coverage of, for example, West Papua where up to half a million people have been killed (and thousands raped) since it was illegally occupied by the Indonesian militarily in 1963.

https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/West-Papua-the-forgotten-people-481450

https://thediplomat.com/2014/01/the-human-tragedy-of-west-papua/

https://www.ipwp.org/about-west-papua/

India: Modi’s Welcome Move on Kashmir by Lawrence A. Franklin

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14908/india-mod-kashmir

Since the partition of India in 1947, which established the two independent states of India and Pakistan, Pakistan has infiltrated soldiers into Indian Kashmir, assisted anti-Indian Muslim terrorists in Jammu-Kashmir and sponsored many murderous operations inside India proper.

India is determined to safeguard its standing as the world’s most populous democracy, particularly in the shadow of the rising power of totalitarian China, which enjoys a close relationship with Pakistan. Revoking Article 370 sends a clear signal to both Pakistan and China that India will resolutely defend its territory against efforts by Islamabad or Beijing to whittle away at Indian sovereignty in any portion of its territory.

India may therefore consider a strategic alliance with the U.S. to protect the Indo-Pacific region from Chinese territorial aggression and acquisitive claims of sovereignty in the South and East China Seas.

“Pakistan has threatened to use nuclear arms. Pakistan is somewhere where terrorists have been able to plan bloody terrorist attacks in Europe without mentioning tremendous human rights violation in Pakistan.” — Fulvio Martusciello, Italian MEP, speaking at the European Parliament, September 18, 2019.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently responded to the heavy criticism he has been receiving — and to violent protests that erupted — over his controversial decision to revoke Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, which granted a certain degree of autonomy to Jammu and Kashmir, by calling for “hugging each Kashmiri” and for the creation of a “new paradise” in the valley.

Modi accused elements “from across the border” in Pakistan of spurring the protests that have been taking place since August 5, when New Delhi announced the revoking of Article 370 – a move he said “is going to be the medium for fulfilling the aspirations and dreams of the people of Jammu and Kashmir.”

Modi insisted that what the “youth, mothers and sisters in Jammu and Kashmir” want is “development and new job opportunities.”

The previously autonomous region of Jammu-Kashmir is an 86,000-square-mile Muslim-majority area in the north of India Proper, nearly half of which is controlled by India and the rest is divided between Pakistan and China. Territorial control of the area has been the prime cause of wars in 1947 and 1965, and of many deadly skirmishes between India and Pakistan.

When Negotiation Is Impossible and War Is Unnecessary by Amir Taheri

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14903/iran-negotiation-war

It is likely that whoever planned the attacks was more interested in testing the waters, seeing how far it was possible to go in provocation…

What the mullahs did not realize was that the new status quo came at no cost to the Americans, who could thus afford to prolong it as far as needed. All that Trump did was announce that anyone trading with the Islamic Republic could not trade with the US, and that the US would no longer allow the mullahs to use American global banking and trade facilities.

In every case, the tyranny of the underdog worked and the mullahs managed to continue crushing their opponents at home and fattening their cohorts abroad while casting themselves as champions of the downtrodden resisting the diktats of the “Great Satan.”

Khamenei’s best hope is for Trump to go for a pin-prick operation that would shake but not topple the Khomeinist regime while mobilizing Iranian and international opinion in its support as a victim, thus forcing the easing of sanctions that are beginning to break the bones of his regime.

Will the attacks on Saudi oil installations last week upset the status quo that has taken shape in the past 17 months, that is to say, since President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the “Iran nuke deal” concocted by Barack Obama?

“Convert, Marry Me, or Die”: Persecution of Christians, July 2019 by Raymond Ibrahim

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14904/persecution-of-christians-july

“How ready is the government to go up against certain groups that try to impose their own will on others.” — Reverend Timotheus Halim, head of the Family of God Church ucanews.com, July 25, 2019, Indonesia.

Fatemeh Azad, a 58-year-old Muslim woman who had converted to Christianity against her Muslim husband’s will and fled to Germany, was denied asylum there and deported back to Iran. There she was immediately arrested by authorities waiting for her plane to land…. “When Fatemeh made her asylum appeal, her lawyers argued that apostasy (conversion away from Islam) is punishable by the death penalty in Iran.” This, however, was insufficient for Germany…. — Persecution.org; July 25, 2019.

Finally, a 14-year-old Christian girl was abducted, forcibly converted to Islam, forced to marry a Muslim man, and then taken before a Muslim judge to sign a statement saying she had acted on her own free will….”[G]irls often give such statements because they are already living with their kidnappers,” and “death threats are made towards their family, and therefore the victims have no choice but to say what their kidnapper wants them to say in court…..” — Lawyer, AsiaNews.it; July 26, 2019; Pakistan.

Slaughter of Christians

Syria: Islamic jihadis gang-raped a 60-year-old Christian woman before stoning her to death. When no one in Yaqoubiya, a small Christian village in Idlib governorate, saw Susan Grigor (or “Gregory”) on July 9, the worried priest sent parishioners to search for her. They eventually found her mangled and bloodied corpse on the ground of a field adjacent to her home.

The autopsy revealed that Susan had been repeatedly raped and tortured over the course of nine hours before finally being murdered by stoning. The men responsible are believed to be members of the al-Qaeda-linked jihadi group, al-Nusra. Described as a pious Christian, Susan had never married and lived her entire life as a virgin. Although she never children, Susan reportedly loved them and, after retiring, volunteered much of her time helping educate the youths of her local church.

Merkel’s Germany: an antisemitic terrorist state By Dogan Akman

https://www.israpundit.org/merkels-germany-an-antisemitic-terrorist-state/

It is time to call a spade a spade.

Some or a good number of the readers may or will find the heading to be an outrageous and gratuitous one.

Yet, facts speak for themselves.

It is my intention to demonstrate that the heading is indeed a timely one that must be addressed and that Merkel is indeed a homicidal anti-Semite while Germany is a terrorist state.

A general principle of the Canadian criminal law

A person can be criminally responsible as a member of a party acting together in the commission of an offence. In terms of guilt, there is no difference between an aider, abettor or principle to an offence. They are all equally culpable. More specifically, section 21 of the Criminal Code of Canada provides:

Parties to offence

s.21 (1) Every one is a party to an offence who

(a) actually commits it;

(b) does or omits to do anything for the purpose of aiding any person to commit it; or

(c) abets any person in committing it.

(2) Where two or more persons form an intention in common to carry out an unlawful purpose and to assist each other therein and any one of them, in carrying out the common purpose, commits an offence, each of them who knew or ought to have known that the commission of the offence would be a probable consequence of carrying out the common purpose is a party to that offence.

I am sure that this principle and similar provisions are operative in most, if not all, of the western countries, including Germany.

Antisemitism

Jeremy Corbyn’s Incoherent Brexit Politics By Michael Brendan Dougherty

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/09/jeremy-corbyns-incoherent-brexit-politics/

The Labour party leader continues to try to stake out the empty middle ground between Remain and Leave, apparently unaware that it’s empty for good reason.

Well, now it is official. Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the United Kingdom’s Labour party, has finally outlined his party’s new position on Brexit in an editorial in the Guardian. Spoiler alert: It is completely daft.

Just a refresher. Three years ago, citizens of the U.K. voted in simple referendum. The choices were “Remain a member of the European Union” and “Leave the European Union.” Leave won by a small percentage. The Leave and Remain causes are more passionately felt than party attachments for many Brits.

Two years ago, Jeremy Corbyn was able to have it both ways on Brexit. He said his party was committed to implementing the referendum’s result. But in fact, Labour benefited from a surge of Remain voters wishing to stick it to Theresa May, who had started to negotiate Brexit and who denounced Remainers as “citizens of nowhere.” That convergence nearly brought May down. At the time I predicted that the tectonic plates of Brexit underneath British politics would begin to grind Corbyn the way they had May. Now it is happening.