RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20784/iran-president-moderate-hardliner

[Rafael Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN-sponsored body that is responsible for monitoring the mullahs’ nuclear programme] also warned that it could take Iran just a month or so for the Iranians to assemble a nuclear warhead, given the progress they have made in recent months in their enrichment programme.

The acknowledgement by an internationally respected body such as the IAEA that Iran has now acquired sufficient material to build several nuclear warheads, which could be assembled within the space of a month, is a devastating indictment of the Biden administration’s policy of appeasement towards Iran since US President Joe Biden took office.

Biden’s refusal to hold Iran accountable for its actions has resulted in the Iranian regime receiving billions of dollars in added revenue because of Washington’s decision not to enforce oil sanctions against Iran. As a result, the extra funds received by Iran have been used to fund the regime’s terrorist networks across the globe, including Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

As a senior official with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps admitted to The Telegraph, in the wake of the election, that Pezeshkian had only been allowed to compete in the election to “legitimise the vote”.

It is vital, therefore, that the Biden administration fully understands the cynicism shown by Iran’s hardliners in seeking to legitimise their brutal regime before making any further overtures to the country’s so-called moderate president.

In the uncompromising world of Iran’s autocratic Islamic republic, there is no such thing as a moderate Iranian president — a fact that Iran’s long-suffering people know only too well.

Before the Biden administration gets too carried away celebrating the election of Iran’s so-called moderate president, it should understand that Masoud Pezeshkian’s victory is nothing more than a ploy to distract world attention away from Iran’s nuclear weapons programme.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/07/in_france_it_s_left_vs_left.html

The right-leaning media and pundits are excited: Marine Le Pen’s party gained twice as many seats in recent French elections.  The left-leaning media and commentariat are thrilled, too: Le Pen’s right-wing party won the popular vote but landed only third place in the French National Assembly.  If both sides of the political spectrum are so enthusiastic, it could mean only one thing: something is missing here.

The answer lies most likely in conflating two different political spectra: absolute and relative.  Since Stalin proposed the modern relative political spectrum, it garnered popularity, and members of the Frankfurt School of socialism brought it to American soil.

As it is known, in the 1930s, Joseph Stalin altered the game’s rules: he decided to utilize the pre-existing left-right conceptual dichotomy (in a pretty narrow setting) to crush any opposition to his dictatorial rule.  Any aberration from the orthodox communist party line — no matter how small — had to be labeled.  Thus, the “Right-deviationists” and “Left-deviationists” were born.

The “Left-deviationists” were deemed “too orthodox,” “too revolutionary,” as strange as it may seem, for the taste of bloodthirsty revolutionary Bolsheviks.  In contrast, the “Right-deviationists” were considered traitors to the idea of the planet-wide socialist revolution because they dared to consider building a workers’ paradise by cleverly exploiting the mechanisms of state capitalism.  Unquestionably, the word “capitalism” was anathema to communists.  The “Left-deviationists” were to the left of Stalin, and the “Right-deviationists” were to his right.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/dont-be-fooled-by-irans-bogus-election-of-a-puppet-president/

As Robert Spencer stated earlier on Jihad Watch: “No one can run for the presidency of Iran without Khamenei’s approval.”  Iran’s constitutional body, the Guardian Council, has confirmed the victory of so-called “reformist” Masoud Pezeshkian, who will now succeed the late hardline President Ebrahim Raisi, but expect little change.

Elections in Iran are hardly democratic. The Supreme Leader, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the Guardian Council disqualify any contender for the presidency who may be deemed a threat to the regime.

The outcome of a presidential election reveals Iran’s strategic direction. Pezeshkian serves to potentially pacify domestic and international threats via his diplomatic demeanor. The Iranian regime faces international disapproval of its brazen hardline approach as it moves toward developing a nuclear bomb; Western scrutiny over its ongoing war against the State of Israel by means of its proxies; and the ongoing threat of a potential uprising by fierce anti-regime dissidents, even as the Iranian government dismisses such a threat.

The Associated Press describes Pezeshkian as a “reformist politician within Iran’s Shiite theocracy — always pushing for change but never radically challenging the system overseen by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.” That’s because Pezeshkian is a pawn of the regime and has its approval.

https://www.jns.org/uk-election-sees-rise-of-anti-israel-independents/

Labour Party’s landslide in last week’s elections in the United Kingdom was no surprise. What came as a jolt was the success of the ‘pro-Gaza independents.’ All ran on the issue of “Palestine” and Gaza in heavily Muslim districts.

The winning independent candidates were Shockat Adam, Adnan Hussain, Ayoub Khan and Iqbal Hussain Mohamed.

They unseated four Labour members of parliament. As one British headline blared: “Pro-Palestinian MPs become ‘sixth largest’ party in shock Labour defeats.”

The ‘Gaza bloc’ capitalized on anger toward the Labour Party among Muslim voters, who believed Labour hadn’t done enough against Israel and for “Palestine” in the current conflict.

Though Labour performed well overall, it did poorly in areas with high Muslim populations.

Labour Party leader and incoming prime minister, Keir Starmer, and wife Victoria greet supporters as they enter 10 Downing Street in London following a landslide election victory in the United Kingdom on July 5, 2024. Photo by Dan Kitwood/Getty Images.

https://apnews.com/article/nato-summit-biden-trump-europe-russia-ukraine-6c24773349aa1a9f6592a15268f98169

WASHINGTON (AP) — NATO leaders meet this week for a summit commemorating the 75th anniversary of the military alliance, which has never been larger and more focused but is also facing potentially existential threats from outside and within.

If Russia’s war in Ukraine, challenges posed by an increasingly aggressive China, and the Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza weren’t enough, some key members’ commitment to defend their allies is coming under question.

There is deep uncertainty over President Joe Biden’s ability to beat his predecessor, NATO skeptic Donald Trump, in November to lead the most powerful member of the alliance.

While Biden’s political troubles are stirring concerns at home and abroad, countries in Europe are facing their own issues with a rise of far-right populism, particularly in France and Hungary, threatening what had been a bedrock pillar of post-World War II security and stability.

Here’s what to watch for at the three-day summit:

All eyes on Biden

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20768/arab-league-whitewashing-hezbollah

By removing Hezbollah from its terror list, the Arab League has sent a message to Iran and its terror proxies that they have a green light to pursue their terrorist attackers not only against Israel, but also against some of the Arab countries, especially the Gulf states.

Many Lebanese citizens and politicians are convinced that Hezbollah, together with the mullahs in Iran, are determined to destroy Lebanon by dragging it into war with Israel

Every child in Lebanon and the rest of the Middle East knows that the Lebanese army along with UNIFUL forces have failed to secure the border with Israel and combat terrorism.

“What Americans do not know is that there was actually an agreement signed [for energy deals with Lebanon for its sub-sea gas fields] between international companies, including American and European companies, under the umbrella of the ‘Iran Deal.’ All these capitalists who want to make money do not want a war. They want to maintain the status quo [in Lebanon]. … If you put pressure on the Israelis not to take action [against Hezbollah], Hezbollah will reinforce and they will pull another October 7 attack against the north [of Israel]. As for the Lebanese, once Hezbollah is protected from Israel, Hezbollah will go and finish the Christians, Druze, [and] Sunnis who oppose Hezbollah.” – Walid Phares, Middle East expert, X.com, July 2, 2024

In a surprise and controversial move, the Arab League, which has 22 member states, announced last month that it no longer classifies the Iran-backed Hezbollah militia in Lebanon as a terrorist organization. The announcement was made by Assistant Secretary-General of the Arab League, Hossam Zaki, who recently visited the Lebanese capital of Beirut.

Zaki explained that previous decisions of the Arab League to label Hezbollah a terrorist organization “led to cutting off communication with it.”

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20745/iran-hitler-nuclear-bombs

The Iranian regime is rapidly pursuing acquiring nuclear weapons. This breakout must be prevented.

Iran is already supplying terror groups — Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Houthis — with ballistic missiles. Presumably to hide behind “plausible deniability,” Iran’s regime does not seem particularly shy about arming these militias abroad with advanced weaponry. Why wouldn’t it equip these groups with nuclear weapons as well?

Iran’s regime has made no secret of its desire to annihilate Israel (“Death to Israel!”) on the way to annihilating the United States (“Death to America!”). The mullahs doubtless just see Israel as standing in the way.

From Iran’s perspective, Israel, smaller than New Jersey, is, as former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani indicated, a “one-bomb” country: “[T]he employment of even one atomic bomb inside Israel will wipe it off the face of the earth, but [such a bomb] would only do damage to the Islamic World.”

Consider the scenario where not just Iran’s proxies, but other allies of Iran — such as Venezuela or Cuba — are equipped with nuclear weapons.

Does anyone imagine if Hamas had possessed nuclear weapons when they sent a “huge barrage of rockets” and bulldozed their way into Israel on October 7, 2023, that they would have hesitated to use them?

The proliferation of nuclear weapons poses an existential threat not only to Israel but, of course, creates a broader, more unpredictable global security crisis.

Immediate action is needed to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons… It is an intervention that should have been undertaken many years ago, but was unfortunately thwarted by the Obama administration. Any further delay can only lead to catastrophic consequences for international stability.

The Iranian regime is rapidly pursuing acquiring nuclear weapons. This breakout must be prevented. Iran’s regime poses a danger at least as dangerous as Hitler’s if he had possessed them. Given the Iranian leadership’s ideological extremism, combined with its strategic ambitions and regional influence, the potential for regional and global instability that could result cannot be overstated. Allowing Iran to obtain nuclear weapons will simply increase the risk of a Middle Eastern nuclear arms race and devastating global conflicts.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/07/05/the-true-story-of-this-election-populism-is-here-to-stay/

There has been an earthquake in British politics, reporters say. Everyone from the Guardian to the Sun to CNN is reaching for the metaphor of shifting tectonic plates to describe Labour’s victory over the Tories in the General Election. And in a sense they’re right. The political ground has shaken. Rumblings have been felt. But it wasn’t drab, grey Labour that did it – it was the millions of voters who rejected both Labour and the Tories and in the process delivered one of the most devastating sucker punches to the political duopoly in decades.

To see the true quake, you need to look beyond Labour’s mirage-like landslide. As is now becoming clear, Labour has not been swept to power on anything like a wave of public enthusiasm. On the contrary, it won its 412 seats on the second lowest electoral turnout since 1885, and more as a result of people’s exhaustion with the Tories than their love for Sir Keir. No, it is those who refused to vote Labour who have brilliantly unsettled British politics. It is those who took a punt on Nigel Farage’s Reform party who have planted a bomb in the political landscape that will not be easily defused.

For me, the most fascinating stat of the election is the share of the vote received by Labour and the Tories. Labour won around 34 per cent of vote, the Tories around 24 per cent. Let’s leave to one side what a lame landslide it is if only 34 per cent of the people who could be bothered to vote put an X in your box. More striking is the fact that the combined vote share of Labour and the Tories, the parties that have dominated British politics for a century, was 58 per cent. That is staggeringly – and, if you will allow me, hilariously – low.

To put it in historical context: at the last General Election, in 2019, their combined vote share was 75.8 per cent. In 2017 it was even higher: 82.4 per cent. In the elections of the 2000s it hovered around 70 per cent. Why has it now dropped to less than 60 per cent, giving rise to the possibility that in the next few years the two parties that have run this country for decades might see their combined vote drop to less than half of all votes cast? Largely, because of Reform. And a few independents, too. Reform’s vote share is around 14 per cent, enough to shatter the Labour / Tory duopoly and to unravel the two big parties’ arrogant belief that they and they alone have a right to rule.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20742/uganda-islamic-militants-isis

In recent years, Uganda has faced a growing threat from radical Islamic groups, notably “Allied Democratic Forces — National Army for the Liberation of Uganda” (ADF-NALU) and the Islamic State (ISIS) — which have targeted Christians and escalated security concerns.

“ADF-NALU has pledged allegiance to the Islamic State. Meanwhile, ISIS has also claimed responsibility for various attacks.” – Uganda: full country dossier, Open Doors, March 2024.

Uganda and other African nations — especially Sudan, Nigeria, Algeria, Tunisia, Burkina Faso, Chad, Ivory Coast, Mali, Madagascar, Mozambique, Mauritania, Cameroon, Kenya, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic, Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea and Tanzania — are increasingly suffering at the hands of radical Islamists. They are proof of how much even majority non-Muslim, secular nations are vulnerable at the hands of jihadist groups. To prevent jihadists from massacring, abusing or enslaving non-Muslims, and taking over the continent, countries need immediately to crack down on all extremist groups. Do not grant them space to operate.

June 16 marked the one-year anniversary of a sickening terror attack at a Christian boarding school in western Uganda, in which Islamist terrorists murdered 42 people.

On June 16, 2023, the Islamist “Allied Democratic Forces” (ADF), based in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), invaded the compound of the private Mpondwe Lhubiriha Secondary School in Uganda’s Kasese District.

Islamic militants firebombed student dormitories; students fleeing the fire were either gunned down or hacked to death with machetes. Students trapped in the dormitories burned to death as the terrorists shouted “Allahu akbar!” (“Allah is the greatest!”). Some of the victims’ bodies, burnt beyond recognition, required DNA testing to identify them. Six students were kidnapped.