Turkey's Muslims Racism

• The U.S. Department of State needs to analyze the Kurdish issue more closely and carefully. When they do, they will see that the problem should not be called "the Kurdish Issue;" it would be more just to call it "the Turkish Racism Problem."
• Kurds in Turkey have always been brutally oppressed, even when there was no organization called the PKK.
• Kurds are not the ones who started the war in Kurdistan. Kurdish leaders have openly and frequently made it clear that despite all of the state terror, mass murders and oppression they have been exposed to, they wish to live in peace with their Turkish, Arab and Persian neighbors. There is a war imposed on Kurds.

Turkey's authorities keep saying that the Turkish "security" forces do what they do -- arrest or kill Kurds -- only when Kurds carry out "terrorist" activities, or only when the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) attacks targets in Turkey. Nothing, however, could be farther from the truth. Turkey's attacks against Kurds have always been intense, even when the PKK declared unilateral ceasefires.

Regarding 2014, when there were no clashes between the Turkish military and the PKK, Faysal Sariyildiz, a Kurdish MP for the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP), said, "During the last year, regarding the Kurdish issue, 3,490 people have been taken into custody, 880 people have been arrested and 25 people have been killed with police bullets."

"These attacks," said Mark Toner, spokesman for the U.S. Department of State, "are only exacerbating the continuation and the cycle of violence here. We want to see these attacks cease. We want to see the PKK renounce violence and re-engage in talks with the government of Turkey."

What Mr. Toner fails to understand -- although of course both sides should renounce violence and try to resolve the issue through dialogue, without bloodshed -- is that the cycle of violence intensified only after the Turkish military started a recent all-out assault on Qandil in Iraqi Kurdistan.

What the AKP government refers to as "the resolution process" started in 2012, when talks were allegedly held between the Turkey's National Intelligence Organization (MIT) and the leader of the PKK, Abdullah Ocalan, who has been imprisoned in Turkey since 1999.

Abdullah Ocalan, leader of the PKK, after his capture by Turkish special forces in 1999.

But since then, in terms of liberties and rights, what has changed for Kurds?

Before that, about eight or nine talks between the PKK and the MIT were held in Oslo, Norway between 2008 to 2011, a PKK authority said. During the talks, the PKK -- through the protocols Ocalan prepared -- demanded a constitutional resolution, peace, and the establishment of a "Commission on Investigation of Truth" that would investigate murders committed in the past. "But in June 2011, after the elections, the government saw itself as powerful again, so it stopped participating in the talks and stopped taking them seriously," the PKK authority said.

Again, during this process, no legal step was taken for recognition of Kurdish national rights.

Just this May, Turkey's president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan said in a public speech:

They [the HDP party] say that "When we come to power, we will abolish the Diyanet [Presidency of Religious Affairs]." Why? Because they have nothing to do with religion. They go as far as saying that Jerusalem belongs to Jews; they [the PKK] give education on Zoroastrianism at the camps on the mountains.[1]
The TRT [state-run Turkish Radio and Television Corporation] has a Kurdish TV channel. There are Kurdish language courses at universities. Our country does not have a Kurdish issue any more. But our Kurdish citizens have some issues. Those who want to make the resolution process all about the Kurdish issue are on about something else. They say 'We are the representatives of the Kurds.' No way! If you really are their representatives, clear up the dirt in the sidestreets."

Is this the language that someone who genuinely aims to achieve peace and provide democracy would use? First of all, Erdogan and his AKP party do not see the Kurdish issue as an ethnic or national problem. They seem to think that a Kurdish TV channel and a few courses at universities should be enough to resolve the issue. This shows that the root of the problem is not the Kurds' demands or violence. The root of the problem is traditional Turkish supremacism. The Turkish government evidently expects the indigenous Kurds to settle for whatever crumbs the government offers.

It is this supremacist mentality of Turkey that started and inflamed this problem, and created countless grievances in Kurdistan. The Turkish state wants to be the one to name the issue; to start and end it; to choose the way to resolve it or make it go on forever; to determine how Kurds will live and die; what Kurds can want and when they should stop; what language they can speak, and where and when.

Then, when Kurds resist, and say they want to be free and have a say in their own affairs in Kurdistan, Turkey dismisses them or blames them for being "terrorists" or "traitors."

The Kurdish PKK is an armed organization; and just like all armed organizations or groups, it uses violence as a tactic. But it does not aim to destroy Turkey or the Turkish people. It has declared several times that it is open to dialogue, negotiation and peaceful coexistence.

The Turkish government could also embrace a similar purpose: peace based on political equality and mutual respect. Turkey could abandon its destructive militaristic ways and start an open, transparent, genuine peace process that does not aim to destroy and annihilate Kurds and their militia. Killings will only bring more killings and more hatred. It is high time that Turkey stopped attacking Kurds and used the only method it has not used in its history: respecting the indigenous peoples of Anatolia and Mesopotamia.

Turkish state authorities seem to wish to make Kurds surrender without gaining any national rights or political status, and they call this "a peace process." That is not an oversimplification: The AKP has ruled Turkey since 2002 but has done nothing to recognize Kurdish self-rule. All the AKP did was to provide a few small changes, such as permitting a Kurdish TV channel, TRT-6. But even those are not legal reforms. Turkey is still ruled with the same constitution that the Turkish military drafted after the 1980 coup d'état.

In this fight, Kurds are the "rape victims." On their own ancestral lands, they have no national rights and no political status, and they do not even have the right to be fully educated in Kurdish. They are randomly murdered and arrested. Apparently, their lives have no value in the eyes of the Turkish state.

Turkey has a huge national problem because it does not see Kurds as an equal nation. This is how many Turks see the conflict:

• Turks are to have their own state -- a supreme one that has power over international politics -- but Kurds are not to have even autonomy.
• Turkish is to be a rich and respected language worldwide, but Kurds are not to have a single school where they can be educated fully in Kurdish.
• Turks are to have a powerful army; Kurds are to disarm their militia and are to just serve in the great army of Turks.

But even integration in the military does not seem to work. Many soldiers of Kurdish origin serving in the Turkish army reportedly commit "suicide" or are killed in "accidents." In 2012, for instance, out of the 42 soldiers who were officially reported to have killed themselves, 39 were Kurdish and one was Armenian, according to the lawyer Mazlum Orak.

The founders of the Turkish state also promoted Turkish nationalism to the full extent, while denying the very existence of Kurds in Turkey. They fully enforced a ban on Kurdish language, culture and geographical place names. They called Kurds "mountain Turks" and did not allow Kurds to establish legal political parties until the 1990s. Even after that, seven legal pro-Kurdish political parties were closed down by the Turkish constitutional court over 20 years. Scores of Kurdish villages were burned down by the Turkish army, and tens of thousands of Kurds were tortured or murdered wholesale.

Kurds in Turkey have therefore always been brutally oppressed even when there was no organization called the PKK.

Turkish sociologist Ismail Besikci, who was spent 17 years in prison for his writings on Kurds and Kurdistan, compared Turkey to South Africa. He concluded that Turkey's mentality "is much more racist" than South Africa's:

"What happened in South Africa in 1960s was that the white administration told the others: 'You are black; you will live separately from us. You will have separate neighborhoods, schools, hotels, and entertainment places. You will live outside of places where the white live; do not mix with whites.' And for that, they formed very large areas that were surrounded with wires. Those places had very limited infrastructure. The sewer system did not work; there were frequent electric power outages and water cuts. The schooling and health conditions were very insufficient. But the natives experienced their own identity. They lived the way they were. But Turkey tells Kurds: 'You will live with us but you will look like us. You will forget your identity. You will live with Turks but will look like Turks.' I am trying to say that this mentality is much more racist than the administration in South Africa."

Besikci noted that in the 1990s, Nelson Mandela was released from prison and was elected as the president of South Africa: "The president of the white administration that released Mandela from prison became the vice president of Mandela in the elections. South Africa is called the most racist state of the world but such a change happened there. This shows the official ideology there was flexible; it was not so strict."

Kurds are not the ones who started the war in Kurdistan. Kurdish leaders have openly and frequently made it clear that despite all of the state terror, mass murders and oppression they have been exposed to, they wish to live in peace with their Turkish, Arab and Persian neighbors. There is a war imposed on Kurds. And its results have been disastrous for Kurdistan.

The U.S. Department of State really needs to analyze the Kurdish issue more closely and carefully. When they do, they will see that the problem should actually not be called "the Kurdish Issue;" it would be more just to call it, "the Turkish Racism Problem."

Uzay Bulut, born and raised a Muslim, is a Turkish journalist based in Ankara.

---

[1] Selahattin Demirtas, co-President of the HDP, had said in a public statement, "Religions have their centers. Muslims go to Kaaba in Mecca; Jews go to Jerusalem." 

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6351/turkey-racism-problem 

http://www.canarymission.org/ 

Palestinian BDS Proactive

Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP)

Overview

Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) is the primary student organization engaging in anti-Israel activism on American campuses.

The organization describes itself on its website as against racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, classism, bigotry, and anti-Semitism. The group's focus however is almost entirely on it's anti-Israel campaigns, including Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) resolutions, Israel-Apartheid initiatives, drives comparing Israel to Nazi Germany, mock check-points, "die-ins" as well asrallies and protests.

SJP is supported by American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), an organization that has a number of board members who are former employees of the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), a group convicted of funneling funds to the terrorist organization Hamas.

Campus disruption and violent incidents

SJP members frequently intimidate and harass pro-Israel supporters. Members have been responsible for physically assaulting Jewish students, vandalizing communal property and violently disrupting pro Israel speakers and events. Protests organized by SJP chapters regularly include hate-speech and chants such as "From the River to the Sea Palestine will be Free" - calling for the destruction of the Jewish State.

San Francisco State University, December 2013: Mohammad Hammad, president of San Francisco State University’s General Union of Palestinian Students—the chapter kept its original name from 1973—posted a picture of himself wielding a knife on his Tumblr page. “I seriously cannot get over how much I love this blade,” he wrote in the caption. “It is the sharpest thing I own and cuts through everything like butter and just holding it makes me want to stab an Israeli soldier.” According to CBS News, Hammad has come under investigation by anti-terrorism officials and the FBI.

UC Berkeley, March 2010: Husam Zakharia, while serving as president of the SJP chapter on campus, rammed a female pro-Israel student activist with a shopping cart. She was holding a sign reading “Israel Wants Peace.”

Temple University, August 2014: A Jewish student was hit in the face by someone who was with a group of students, many of whom were confirmed as SJP members. Two witnesses heard members of SJP call him a “kike” after the attack. “Before this, I just thought Students for Justice in Palestine was crazy”, the victim said after the incident, “but I didn’t know it would lead to violence.” 

Loyola University, September 2014: Members of SJP at Loyola University Chicago verbally assaulted Jewish students affiliated with Hillel who were staffing a table with literature for a Birthright Israel trip. SJP members reportedly surrounded the table, blocking the movement of the Hillel students and preventing others from approaching. One student witness told The College Fix, a news website that covers campus issues, that SJP members ambushed the Jewish students.

Northeastern University, 2013: The entire SJP was suspended from campus for the school year for intimidating students on campus. In 2011 the chapter chose to interrupt an on-campus Holocaust remembrance event by whipping out anti-Israel signs and yelling insults at the audience and speakers before storming out.

Florida Atlantic University, April 2012: SJP members postedeviction notices on the dorm room doors of 200 students, most of them Jewish. The tactic has been repeated at various campuses. As one NYU student said, “this made me feel targeted and unsafe in my own dorm room and I know others feel exactly the same as myself.”

SJP is rapidly creating a hostile and unsafe environment on US campuses for all who do not share their radical anti-Israel views. For this reason, they have even been labeled by some as “Hamas on Campus.”

In August, 2014, a document was leaked to the public entitled"Declaration of Principles and Strategies of Binghamton University Students for Justice in Palestine." It outlined the tactics and organizational details for the Binghamton University branch of SJP, and gave insight into the guiding principals of SJP. The guide ensures that the SJP takes no stance on the "one state vs. two state solution", so as not to alienate any possible allies. The document also shuts down any possibility of dialogue with pro- Israel students, as it "prohibit (s) the leadership of SJP from engaging in any form of official collaboration, cooperation, or event co-sponsorship with the following student organizations and groups, due to their unyielding support for the Apartheid State of Israel." The article then lists groups such as Hillel, CAMERA and AEPi, and clarifies that this includes collaborations on publications, discussions, or events. Most worryingly, it gives it's members directives on how to disrupt any pro-Israel activity with the maximum impact while staying "within the bounds of what is not widely considered to be legally reprehensible." In other words, ruining the free speech of the pro-Israel camp while avoiding being arrested. Tactics mentioned include flyering and writing articles, political theater, non-violent disruption of speakers and essentially any other tactic that "doesn't include violence."

 Radical Speakers

SJP chapters regularly host speakers who engage in language considered anti-Semitic by the U.S. State Department. Chapter events routinely include individuals andorganizations who are linked to terrorist activity and call for violence against Jews. 

Ali Abunimah: Abunimah rejects a two-state solution and regularly employs radical, inflammatory rhetoric. In August 2014, Abunimah was so appalled by a campaign for the UN to recognize Judaism’s holiest day (alongside 10 other holidays already recognized) that he tweeted, “Making Yom Kippur a UN holiday to honor the genocidal ‘state’ of Israel would be sure way to increase global anti-Jewish sentiment.” 

Max Blumenthal: Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz called Blumenthal “an extremist bigot whose greatest appeal is to anti-Semites…. No decent person should ever support the views expressed by Max Blumenthal.” Blumenthal's recently published book Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel was dubbed “The Israel Hater’s Handbook” and described as worthy of the “Hamas Book-of-the-Month Club” by Eric Alterman of progressive magazine The Nation.

Amir Abdel Malik Ali: An Imam who calls repeatedly for jihad and the destruction of Israel. In a 2006 speech at UC Irvine during “Israel Apartheid Week,” he said of Israel, “The truth of the matter is your days are numbered. We will fight you. We will fight you until we are either martyred or until we are victorious.” In an equally chilling statement in 2010, Malik Ali asserted his support for terrorism, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad.

Khader Adnan: A former member of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) headlined an SJP-sponsored event at American University. Adnan is an open supporter of suicide bombings and has accused the Palestinian Authority of collaborating with Israel.

The SJP chapter of University of South Florida opened the 2014 school year by scheduling an event titled “The Hidden Genocide: The Story of Palestine.” The keynote speaker was Monzer Taleb, who has come under investigation by the U.S. government for funneling funds to Hamas.

Background

SJP is an outgrowth of the General Union of Palestinian Students (GUPS), originally founded in Egypt in the 1950s, and established at San Francisco State University in 1973.

In 2001, after graduating from San Francisco State, UC Berkeley graduate student—now professor—Hatem Bazian co-founded his own chapter of GUPS called Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) refashioned in his own image. 

As a member of the Muslim Students Association (MSA), Bazian grew to believe that the organization's open identification as a Muslim entity hampered its efforts to inspire widespread student interest and involvement. Thus in 2001 he co-founded SJP to shed the explicit Islamic colors of the MSA and add a degree of separation from the Muslim Brotherhood. This new group was intended to appear as a secular social justice movement whose agenda however still aligned with that of the Brotherhood.

http://www.canarymission.org/organizations

US mad "willful decision" to support ISIS in Syria

Infowars.com and the alternative media have repeatedly pointed out the indisputable fact the Islamic State is a creation of the United States.

In May declassified US Defense Intelligence Agency documents from 2012 revealed the United States and its partners in the Gulf states and Turkey supported the Islamic State and planned to establish a Salafist principality in Syria.

In September General Thomas McInerney admitted the United States “helped build ISIS” as a result of the Obama administration backing “some of the wrong people” in Syria and also said “weapons from Benghazi (ended) up in the hands of ISIS.”

In 2012 it was discovered that the US, Turkey and Jordan were jointly operating a Special Forces command training base for Syrian rebels out of the Jordanian town of Safawi. According to Aaron Klein of WND, many of the rebels were “future ISIS members.”

Now the former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Michael Flynn, has confirmed the conclusion of the DoD document and states it was “a willful decision” by the United States to support ISIS and al-Nusra.

“As Michael Flynn also previously served as director of intelligence for Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) during a time when its prime global mission was dismantling Al-Qaeda, his honest admission that the White House was in fact arming and bolstering Al-Qaeda linked groups in Syria is especially shocking given his stature,” writes Brad Hoff of the Levant Report.

Earlier this month the Obama administration authorized the use of airstrikes to defend “U.S.-trained Syrian rebels” (ISIS) as they attempt to overthrow the al-Assad government and military.

“While everyone was freaking out over a lion, the Obama White House just declared war on Syria and hardly anyone even noticed,” Paul Joseph Watson wrote for Infowars.com on August 4.

http://www.infowars.com/former-dia-director-us-made-willful-decision-to-support-isis-in-syria/  

A U.S. General has made a shocking revelation saying that early on President Obama knew that ISIS was growing but made a “willful decision” to let the radical terror group grow unmolested and even supplied arms that he knew would go to ISIS.

Former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Michael Flynn told al Jazeera that Obama knew he was helping ISIS to grow but decided to do it anyway. Flynn spoke of the decision to arm opposition to Syria’s Bashar al-Assad that the administration decided to continue despite warnings that those weapons would fall into the hands of radicals.

HASAN: You are basically saying that even in government at the time you knew these groups were around, you saw this analysis, and you were arguing against it, but who wasn’t listening?

FLYNN: I think the administration.

HASAN: So the administration turned a blind eye to your analysis?

FLYNN: I don’t know that they turned a blind eye, I think it was a decision. I think it was a willful decision.

HASAN: A willful decision to support an insurgency that had Salafists, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood?

FLYNN: It was a willful decision to do what they’re doing.

So, according to Gen. Flynn, Obama knew that he was arming ISIS.

Incredible. How is this not treason?

Full video interview (10:47 is where ISIS exchange takes place).

http://800whistleblower.com/top-general-admitting-that-obama-knowingly-armed-isis-how-is-this-not-blatant-treason/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook# 

Iran: Challenging Our Missile Program Means Crossing a Red Line

Cartoon: Iran’s missiles will never be negotiable
Source: (IRGC-affiliated) Tasnim News Agency
(The scrap Obama is holding): “The Iranian missile file”

Following the UN Security Council’s endorsement of the Iran nuclear deal, Iranian military and political spokesmen clarified Iran’s uncompromising position on the continued development of its ballistic missile program and emphasized that any attempt to challenge the program means crossing a red line. Security Council Resolution 2231 leaves in place for eight years the embargo on selling missile technology to Iran and for five years the embargo on selling heavy weapons to it.

Defense Minister: We Will Not Permit Access to Military Facilities

Iranian Defense Minister Hussein Dehghan again affirmed, reiterating Iran’s position throughout the nuclear talks with the world powers, that issues involving Iran’s missile program are not up for discussion and Iran is determined to keep developing all of its missile programs. As for attempts to clarify Iran’s past activity regarding “possible military dimensions” of its nuclear program, Dehghan again underlined that Iran will definitely not grant anyone access to its security and military secrets and facilities.1

Concerning the statements about Iran by U.S. spokesmen after the deal was signed, Dehghan said:

The U.S. officials make boastful remarks and imagine that they can impose anything on the Iranian nation because they lack a proper knowledge of the Iranian nation…the time has come now for the Americans to realize that they are not the world’s super power and no one recognizes them as such any longer.2 

- See more at: http://jcpa.org/iran-missile-program-red-line/#sthash.3aKuLkhe.dpuf

Source: Fars News (Iran)
Written on the Apron : “statement”

The IRGC Commander: The Crossing of Red Lines

Upon the Security Council’s endorsement of the nuclear deal, the commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Mohammad Ali Jafari, said that several provisions of the resolution constitute the crossing of red lines that Iran set, particularly on the issue of the preservation and development of its military capabilities, and that Iran will never accept this.3 The adviser to the Supreme Leader’s Representative at the IRGC, Yadollah Javani, likewise asserted that Iran’s ability to defend itself, and particularly its missile capabilities, have constituted a red line throughout the negotiations and Iran will not cross it in any way. Javani claimed that the United States and its partners have been trying to use the nuclear talks to weaken Iran and undercut its ability to defend itself.4 The deputy commander of the IRGC for political affairs, Brig. Gen. Rasoul Sanayee Ra’ad, reiterated that “Iran’s military capabilities, including access to ballistic missiles, are no bargaining chip or agenda.”5

The Foreign Ministry: The Agreement Does Not Address the Missile Program

After the adoption of Resolution 2231, the Iranian Foreign Ministry hastened to make clear that:

Iran will continue to enhance its defense capabilities to safeguard its sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity against any potential acts of aggression as well as the threat of terrorism in the region. Iran’s military capabilities, including development of its ballistic missiles, are solely meant for defense as they have not been designed to carry nuclear warheads, and those capabilities are outside the scope of the UN resolution and its annexes.6

The Majlis: We Will Protect the Missile Program

The members of the Iranian Majlis (parliament) warned that several provisions of the agreement signed in Vienna are likely to cross the red lines drawn by Supreme Leader Khamenei, particularly regarding the preservation and development of Iran’s military capabilities. Ebrahim Aqamohammadi, a member of the Majlis’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, warned that the Majlis

will accept no clause of the final agreement that it deems as to be in violation of people’s rights and in opposition to our military capabilities…. Our military capability is not something that we could offer to others, and the parliament while studying the text and finalizing it, will surely not impose restrictions on the Iranian nation’s confrontation against the enemies.7

Seyyed Mehdi Hashemi, a Tehran member of the Majlis, said the Majlis would “reject any limitations on the country’s access to conventional weapons, especially ballistic missiles.”8

The Missile Program: A Central Component of Iran’s National Security Concept

Without connection to the nuclear talks, Iran will keep developing its programs for missiles and rockets of various ranges as it has done so far with considerable success despite the weapons embargo.

The missiles and rockets will continue to be a central component of Iran’s national security concept, which involves the capability to launch missiles and rockets at Israel and at Western and Arab targets throughout the Middle East, and of its concept of asymmetrical war against its enemies. This concerns both Iran’s own borders (specifically the Western countries and the Gulf States in the Persian Gulf) and its various Middle Eastern proxies, from Hizbullah on Israel’s northern border and the Palestinian organizations in Gaza to the Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Iran has also made clear at all stages of the rigorous nuclear talks that the missile and rocket issue is not up for discussion. In addition, following the Security Council resolution, Iran’s Foreign Ministry again hastened to emphasize that the ballistic missile program in particular, and the missile program in general, have no connection at all to the talks and were never discussed during them. Iran claims that its missiles were not intended to carry nuclear warheads and are, therefore, outside the scope and jurisdiction of the Security Council’s resolution and its annexes.

Iran’s success at maintaining its missile capability while totally excluding the issue from the negotiations will have far-reaching ramifications for the Middle East. The country’s expected economic recovery, along with its growing confidence after holding its own against the world powers and continuing to build up all the elements of its nuclear and missile programs, will likely accelerate its missile, drone, and rocket development along with the transfer of completed missiles and rockets, plus the know-how to manufacture them, to the terror organizations that Iran supports all over the Middle East, as Khamenei has already made haste to affirm in his recent defiant speeches.

The rockets, drones and missiles will be a major part of Iran’s growing assistance to its proxy terror organizations and other clients in the Middle East. Iran wants to recast the region in its own image while continuing the process, already in full swing, of ejecting the United States from it. The rockets and missiles are likely to strike U.S. allies in the region (the Houthis are already firing rockets at Saudi territory) and, in the future, the more Iran’s confidence grows, to limit U.S. freedom of movement in the Persian Gulf and in the area of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait while exacting a high price for the U.S. in any military conflict with Iran.

The United States has in fact made peace with Iran’s transformation into a regional power, without calculating the dangerous long-term implications for itself and for its allies in the region.

* * *

Notes

1 http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13940429000930

2 http://www.irna.ir/en/News/81689116/

3 http://www.tasnimnews.com/Home/Single/804960

4 http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13940427000154

5 http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940429000686

6 http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/07/20/421104/Iran-Foreign-Ministry-JCPOA-ballistic-missiles-P51-Vienna

7 http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940429000686

8 http://english.irib.ir/news/item/212961-%26apos%3Bmajlis-to-reject-restrictions-on-iran-s-access-to-ballistic-missiles%26%23×2019%3B

- See more at: http://jcpa.org/iran-missile-program-red-line/#sthash.3aKuLkhe.dpuf

https://youtu.be/ZH_fnPSguyQ

http://www.canarymission.org/

Iran publishes book on how to outwit US and destroy Israel

Modal Trigger

“Palestine”

While Secretary of State John Kerry and President Obama do their best to paper over the brutality of the Iranian regime and force through a nuclear agreement, Iran’s religious leader has another issue on his mind: The destruction of Israel.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has published a new book called “Palestine,” a 416-page screed against the Jewish state. A blurb on the back cover credits Khamenei as “The flagbearer of Jihad to liberate Jerusalem.”

A friend sent me a copy from Iran, the only place the book is currently available, though an Arabic translation is promised soon.

Obama administration officials likely hope that no American even hears about it.

‘Reclaiming Muslim lands’

Modal Trigger

An Iranian man holds up a banner above Israeli flags before setting them on fire during a demonstration in Tehran July, 2014. Iranians rallied to mark the Quds (Jerusalem) Day in a show of support for Palestinians, and to protest against IsraelPhoto: Getty Images

Khamenei makes his position clear from the start: Israel has no right to exist as a state.

He uses three words. One is “nabudi” which means “annihilation.” The other is “imha” which means “fading out,” and, finally, there is “zaval” meaning “effacement.”

Khamenei claims that his strategy for the destruction of Israel is not based on anti-Semitism, which he describes as a European phenomenon. His position is instead based on “well-established Islamic principles.”

One such principle is that a land that falls under Muslim rule, even briefly, can never again be ceded to non-Muslims. What matters in Islam is ownership of a land’s government, even if the majority of inhabitants are non-Muslims.

Khomeinists are not alone in this belief.

Dozens of maps circulate in the Muslim world showing the extent of Muslim territories lost to the Infidel that must be recovered.

These include large parts of Russia and Europe, almost a third of China, the whole of India and parts of The Philippines and Thailand.

However, according to Khamenei, Israel, which he labels as “adou” and “doshman,” meaning “enemy” and “foe,” is a special case for three reasons.

The first is that it is a loyal “ally of the American Great Satan” and a key element in its “evil scheme” to dominate “the heartland of the Ummah.”

The second reason is that Israel has waged war on Muslims on a number of occasions, thus becoming “a hostile infidel,” or “kaffir al-harbi.”

Finally, Israel is a special case because it occupies Jerusalem, which Khamenei describes as “Islam’s third Holy City.”

He intimates that one of his “most cherished wishes” is to one day pray in Jerusalem.

‘Israel fatigue’

Modal Trigger

Iranians hold a demonstration in November, 2013 in Tehran in mark the 34th anniversary of the 1979 US embassy takeover, when Iranian students held 52 American diplomats hostage for 444 days.Photo: Getty Images

Khamenei insists that he is not recommending “classical wars” to wipe Israel off the map. Nor does he want to “massacre the Jews.” What he recommends is a long period of low-intensity warfare designed to make life unpleasant if not impossible for a majority of Israeli Jews so that they leave the country.

His calculation is based on the assumption that large numbers of Israelis have double-nationality and would prefer emigration to the United States and Europe to daily threats of death.

Khamenei makes no reference to Iran’s nuclear program. But the subtext is that a nuclear-armed Iran would make Israel think twice before trying to counter Khamenei’s strategy by taking military action against the Islamic Republic.

In Khamenei’s analysis, once the cost of staying in Israel has become too high for many Jews, Western powers, notably the US, which have supported the Jewish state for decades, might decide that the cost of doing so is higher than possible benefits.

Thanks to President Obama, the US has already distanced itself from Israel to a degree unimaginable a decade ago.

Khamenei counts on what he sees as “Israel fatigue.” The international community would start looking for what he calls “a practical and logical mechanism” to end the old conflict.

Khamenei’s “practical and logical mechanism” excludes the two-state formula in any form.

“The solution is a one-state formula,” he declares. That state, to be called Palestine, would be under Muslim rule but would allow non-Muslims, including some Israeli Jews who could prove “genuine roots” in the region to stay as “protected minorities.”

Under Khamenei’s scheme, Israel, plus the West Bank and Gaza, would revert to a United Nations mandate for a brief period during which a referendum is held to create the new state of Palestine.

All Palestinians and their descendants, wherever they are, would be able to vote, while Jews “who have come from other places” would be excluded.

Khamenei does not mention any figures for possible voters in his dream referendum. But studies by the Islamic Foreign Ministry in Tehran suggest that at least eight million Palestinians across the globe would be able to vote against 2.2 million Jews “acceptable” as future second-class citizens of new Palestine. Thus, the “Supreme Guide” is certain of the results of his proposed referendum.

He does not make clear whether the Kingdom of Jordan, which is located in 80% of historic Palestine, would be included in his one-state scheme. However, a majority of Jordanians are of Palestinian extraction and would be able to vote in the referendum and, logically, become citizens of the new Palestine.

Holocaust ‘propaganda’

Modal Trigger

A military truck carries a Qadr medium-range missile during Iran’s annual military parade, marking their war with Iraq (1980-1988) in Tehran September, 2014.Photo: Getty Images

Khamenei boasts about the success of his plans to make life impossible for Israelis through terror attacks from Lebanon and Gaza. His latest scheme is to recruit “fighters” in the West Bank to set up Hezbollah-style units.

“We have intervened in anti-Israel matters, and it brought victory in the 33-day war by Hezbollah against Israel in 2006 and in the 22-day war between Hamas and Israel in the Gaza Strip,” he boasts.

Khamenei describes Israel as “a cancerous tumor” whose elimination would mean that “the West’s hegemony and threats will be discredited” in the Middle East. In its place, he boasts, “the hegemony of Iran will be promoted.”

Khamenei’s book also deals with the Holocaust which he regards either as “a propaganda ploy” or a disputed claim. “If there was such a thing,” he writes, “we don’t know why it happened and how.”

This is what Iran’s leaders are preaching to their people and their allies in the Middle East. Do we really want to give succor?

http://nypost.com/2015/08/01/iran-publishes-book-on-how-to-outwit-us-and-destroy-israel/

http://www.canarymission.org/

The Canary Mission database was created to expose individuals and groups that are anti-Freedom, anti-American and anti-Semitic in order to protect the public and our democratic values.