CONTENTS
1. Germany’s first suicide bomb
2. Western Europe’s (still relatively small-scale) Islamist insurgency
3. BBC omits Muslim first name of attacker
4. CNN – if the same attacks happen against Israelis, it is not terror
5. AFP: no terror in Israel
6. In Paris too
7. Ex-Democrat congresswoman: Israel behind European terror attacks
8. Israel a “major cause of Isis” says British Lib-Dem politician
9. A no-fly zone
10. Turkey: Erdogan publishes photo of new government
We all know about Germany under Angela Merkel deciding to admit about a million immigrants from lands where jihadism, Sharia law, terrorism and hatred of women, Jews and gays are endemic.
Most of know that on New Years’ Eve last, some 1000 of the recent immigrants, predominantly young males from a culture of rape, began sexually assaulting hundreds of German young women in Cologne.
Fewer know that German police took days to acknowledge the extent of the mass rapes and sexual attacks and in this they and the German media have been following the lead of Sweden whose police and media, according to a recent article in Britain’s The Spectator, have been actively covering up the facts on the nature and extent of Muslim sexual attacks on their women.
German police declared within one day that the German-Iranian shooter who killed 9, including children, in the Munich mall attack this week acted alone, and inferred that this was mental illness not terrorism.
This happened during a period where police and security services were on “high alert” due to information about a possible terrorist attack. Unlike most shooters who are killed on site as they continue to shoot, this shooter was found a kilometer away from the mall, and police quickly said that not only did he act alone but that it was suicide. He had been walking around with a Glock 17 semi-automatic handgun and 300 rounds of ammunition in his rucksack. I ask whether it is reasonable to accept such a fast conclusion from police that it was suicide and not terrorism.
I do not understand why the country that makes Mercedes cars that can drive themselves cannot, during a period of high alert, protect public gatherings, or find a shooter in a dense urban environment and must rely on the killer committing suicide a kilometer away – unless of course your ideology says all Muslims are culturally equal to all Western Europeans and that it is appropriate to accept a million mostly unvetted, mostly Muslim, migrants during wartime (radical Islam has declared war, and Hollande accepts this but not Obama and it would seem that Merkel does not accept it either). The ideology of tolerance (which I term “tolerism” in my book of that title) says that tolerance and compassion and empathy, and yes, “submission” to a million demographic soldiers of the Islamic retaking of Europe, will somehow ease the problem.
The perpetrator shouted, “Allahu Akbar” — the terrorist battle-cry. Munich police chief Hubertus Andrae, however, told a news conference there were no indications the gunman had links with ISIS, identifying the attack as a “classic shooting rampage” and not terrorism. Why do we insist that we are only worried about links to ISIS and not links to cultural jihadism and conquest?
Police were quick to emphasize that the shooter also shouted that he was a “German”, all but ignoring that he, or perhaps his parents, was, or were, from Iran, the major terrorist exporting nation in the world. Even if he was not directed by Iranian terrorists, one cannot say that he was not inspired by the constant anti-western propaganda and warlike statements coming out of Iran. One would think that Germany, in light of its crimes during the Nazi era but also due to its role in selling chemicals to Iraq and Syria for its chemical weapons program, and, as disclosed in a report by the World Nuclear Organization, providing 24% of the parts for the Iranian Busheir 1 nuclear plant, be more diligent in pursuing world peace by stopping its tolerance for Islamic warmongers.
In recent months the Kremlin has hinted that keeping Assad in power is not its primary concern. Rather its main objective in Syria is to keep its strategically-important bases in the country.
This has led to suggestions that, in return for building closer relations with Turkey, Moscow might be prepared to do a deal whereby Assad is removed from power and Russia’s military interests in the country are safeguarded.
If that outcome could be achieved, then Russia and Turkey would be able to forge a powerful partnership, one that would pose a serious threat to Western interests in the Middle East and beyond.
The deepening diplomatic pact between Turkey and Russia represents yet another damning indictment of the Obama Administration’s ability to maintain relations with Washington’s traditional allies in the Middle East.
Western diplomats regard the decision by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to restore relations with Moscow last month as part of a carefully-coordinated attempt by Ankara to build a new power base in the region.
For decades Turkey, a key NATO member, has said that it wants to forge closer ties with the West, to the extent that Turkish diplomats insist that Ankara is still serious about joining the European Union.
But the increasingly hard-line Islamist approach taken by Mr Erdogan in the wake of the failed military coup, which has seen tens of thousands of judges, academics and journalists forced from their jobs, has caused the Turkish government to realise the prospects of maintaining relations with its Western allies are remote so long as it continues with the current crack-down.
This had led Mr Erdogan to embark on a campaign to reach out to countries such as Russia, which he regards as a viable alternative to the U.S. in protecting Turkey’s interests in the region.
BERLIN—Authorities said a 27-year-old Syrian man tried to enter an outdoor concert in southern Germany and then blew himself up, injuring 12 people, in what appeared to be this country’s first suicide bombing in years.
The bombing took place in central Ansbach, a small town in the state of Bavaria that was hosting a concert that attracted 2,000 people on Sunday night.
Just after 10 p.m., the man sought to enter the concert but couldn’t get in, Bavarian Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann told reporters early Monday morning in Ansbach. Investigators believe the man then set off a bomb that killed him and injured 12, three of them seriously, Mr. Herrmann said.
No one had life-threatening injuries, officials said.
It wasn’t immediately clear whether the man was only seeking to kill himself or also to hurt others, Mr. Herrmann said.
But investigators were looking into whether the blast was motivated by Islamist extremism, he said.
The man had come to Germany two years ago and applied for asylum. His asylum application was rejected last year but he wasn’t deported because of the civil war in Syria, as is standard practice in Germany, Mr. Herrmann said.
The man was already known to the police, he said, because he had twice been treated in a hospital after trying to take his life. He was also known because of a previous drug misdemeanor, a police spokeswoman said.
The spokeswoman said the police have formed a 30-person task force supported by state police, who would help analyze the explosive device, which was filled with metal clamps. The bomber’s mobile phone and other technical devices were also being analyzed and police were searching the refugee shelter where he resided, she said.
The German intelligence service recently reported many clandestine Iranian attempts to obtain dual-use chemical, biological and nuclear technology.
In the Iran nuclear deal, the parties decided to engage “in different areas of civil nuclear co-operation,” including construction and modernization of Iranian light water reactors, provision of technical assistance and on-the-job training. Meanwhile, Israel has been denied a bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement with the US.
Israel’s reported MOU requests on security assistance, missile defense, and regional qualitative military advantage are justified.
The terms of any U.S.-Israel agreement must withstand comparison to the concessions offered Iran in the JCPOA and show unequivocally that Israel, a trusted ally and major strategic partner, fared better in negotiations than an unconstrained enemy.
The one-year anniversary of the signing of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) between Western powers and Iran focused public attention on the regime’s activities and Obama Administration policies and actions regarding this avowed enemy. Virtually unnoticed, despite the linkage to Iran-related developments, were reports that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is being pressured to set aside reservations and accept the terms the White House is offering for the Memorandum of Understanding with the U.S.
As recent developments show, such an acquiescence would be mistake. There is cause for concern.
Iran continues to take Americans and other Westerners hostage, indicting three dual-nationals just days ago on unknown charges. This remains a troubling pattern of diplomatic blackmail, negotiation by coercion. Last month in Lebanon, a so-called parliamentarian for Hezbollah, a terrorist surrogate of the Iranian regime, called for “Israeli civilians to be kidnapped in a future war with Israel.” He “boasted” that Hezbollah’s missiles “can now reach Tel Aviv from Iran, not just Damascus, Beirut, or Cairo.”
The German intelligence service recently reported on numerous Iranian attempts to clandestinely obtain dual-use chemical, biological and nuclear technology. The report by the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV), the domestic intelligence service of the Federal Republic of Germany, also noted “a further increase in the already considerable procurement efforts in connection with Iran’s ambitious missile technology program, which could, among other things, potentially serve to deliver nuclear weapons.”
In early May, the Deputy Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces, Brigadier General Ali Abdollahi, reportedly revealed at a conference in Tehran that the regime had test-fired a high-precision ballistic missile “with a range of 2000 kilometers and pinpoint accuracy of 8 meters.” In March, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) launched two Qadr medium-range ballistic missiles. On one of them, in Hebrew, was inscribed the phrase, “Israel must be wiped out.”
“I am a soldier of the Caliphate and am launching a martyrdom operation in Germany. … I have lived among you, lived in your homes. I planned this in your own land. And I will slaughter you in your own homes and in the streets. … I will slaughter you with this knife and sever your necks with an axe, if Allah permits. ” – Germany’s axe-attacker, in an Islamic State video.
“Künast should not be watching so many bad movies. Who would believe that if someone attacks the police with an axe and a knife, the police are supposed to shoot the axe out of the attacker’s hands? That is really clueless and stupid. If police officers are attacked in this manner, they will not engage in Kung Fu. Unfortunately, it sometimes ends in the death of the perpetrator. This will not change.” – Rainer Wendt, Chairman of the German Police Union.
The Bavarian Criminal Police Office has now launched an internal investigation to determine if police were justified in shooting a jihadist.
A 17-year-old Afghan asylum seeker brandishing an axe and shouting “Allahu Akbar” (“Allah is the greatest”) seriously injured five people on a train in Würzburg, Bavaria. The assailant was shot dead by police after he charged at them with the axe.
The teenager, who had claimed asylum after arriving in Germany in June 2015 as an unaccompanied minor, had been placed with a foster family just two weeks before the attack as a reward for being “well integrated.”
Bavarian Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann said police had found a hand-painted Islamic State flag in his room at his foster home in the nearby town of Ochsenfurt. They also found a farewell letter to his father which read: “Now pray for me so that I can take revenge on these infidels. Pray for me that I can get to paradise.”
Shortly after the attack, the Islamic State released a video purporting to show an Afghan asylum seeker holding a knife and making threats against Germany:
“In the name of Allah, I am a soldier of the Caliphate and am launching a martyrdom operation in Germany.
“Here I am. I have lived among you, lived in your homes. I planned this in your own land. And I will slaughter you in your own homes and in the streets.
“I will make you forget about the spectacular attacks in France, if Allah permits.
“I will fight to the death, if Allah permits. I will slaughter you with this knife and sever your necks with an axe, if Allah permits.”
In the video, the Islamic State identified the attacker as Muhammad Riyad, who can be heard speaking Pashto, a language spoken in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran. But German media identified the attacker as Riaz Khan Ahmadzai. The discrepancy raised questions about the teenager’s true identity.
According to the very State Department that pushed so hard for the Obama administration’s Iran appeasement deal, that same nation upon whom we have lavished over $100 billion, lobbied on behalf of and promised protection of its nuclear infrastructure, remains the world’s leading state sponsor of terror.
While many are aware of the pernicious activities of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard across the globe, and the Khameinist regime’s support of Shia jihadist groups like Hezbollah, lesser discussed is Iranian collaboration with Sunni jihadists.
For the latest evidence of an alliance that might surprise those who view Sunni and Shia Muslims as diametrically opposed mortal enemies, look no further than the recent news out of the U.S. Treasury Department.
As reported in the always-insightful Omri Ceren’s latest dispatch, Treasury announced that it was imposing sanctions on three senior Al Qaeda members stationed in Iran.
According to the Treasury press release, it took such action to “disrupt the operations, fundraising, and support networks that help al-Qaida move money and operatives from South Asia and across the Middle East.”
As Ceren highlights, one such Al Qaeda operative, Abu Bakr Muhammad Muhammad Ghumayn, controlled the financing and organization of Al Qaeda in Iran.
Another operative, Yisra Muhammad Ibrahim Bayumi, engaged in direct dialogue with the Iranian government, serving as a mediator. He was “reportedly involved in freeing al-Qaida members in Iran.”
It strains credulity to believe that a closed Shia nation like Iran, often competing against Sunni forces, would be unaware of Al Qaeda officers within its borders. And in this case we have clear evidence that it was comfortable with Al Qaeda operating on its soil because Iranian authorities were negotiating with the aforementioned Bayumi.
It may not be crafted by the media that encourage it, it’s not the fault of the kind souls that pour out their hearts in flowers and candles at each mass murder, but together they compose a distressing symbolic discourse.
How many flowers would it take to stifle the screams of a child in his stroller targeted by a man at the wheel of a 19-ton truck? “Même pas peur [not even scared],” is the slogan of the improvised memorials but we saw terrified people running in all directions when the truck attacked on the Promenade des Anglais. They hid in restaurants and ducked under the waters of the sea. Unverified whispers say some of the victims were crushed in the stampede.
Backtracking on the promised termination of the state of emergency the president hastily vowed to extend it as mournful Parisians trekked back to Place de la République, to lay flowers and peace & love messages at the feet of the Marianne statue sullied with hateful graffiti after three months of occupation by the Nuits Debout.
This softly floral reaction is not engineered by the media but it is blessed to the exclusion of more sober more combative emotions. A motorcyclist tried to stop the massacre with his bare hands. It’s not a rumor, it’s a fact attested by authentic video footage of the man hanging on to the door of the murderous truck. Did anyone try to identify this hero killed in battle? Or still alive? Would they even want to contemplate his courage, congratulate him posthumously for his gesture? [update July 21: the hero did go public with an account of his exploit]. At the other extremity and at the very bottom of the scale of human qualities crouches the recipient of a text message sent just before the attack: “Bring more weapons.”
So which is it? Did Bouhlel have one or several accomplices, or was his plan to fool the police into thinking the truck atrocity was the first event in a multiple-stage massacre? A 13th of November for the sunny South.
In fact, suspected accomplices are currently detained. Newscasters dutifully convey the information… with words as gentle as a rose petal, as if the truth could startle a tender congregation immersed in tears and compassion. For once, authorities state the naked radical Islamic truth of the atrocity, but commentators prefer to focus on the killer’s psychological problem, as if Daesh soldiers passed tough exams like cadets at St. Cyr Military Academy. They recite ad nauseam the rosary of signs of non-compliance, as if the fact that Bouhlel didn’t go to the mosque could resuscitate the dead. Or acquit Islam. Pitiful ignorance! Don’t they know that totalitarian movements always enlist thugs? Bouhlel was not a good Muslim, they repeat, citing pork, alcohol, sex, and salsa.
Successive French governments have built a trap; the French people, who are in it, are thinking only of how to escape. The situation is more serious than many imagine. Whole areas of France are under the control of gangs and radical imams.
Prime Minister Manuel Valls repeated what he already said 18 months ago: “France is at war.” He named an enemy, “radical Islamism,” but he was quick to add that “radical Islamism” has “nothing to do with Islam.” He then repeated that the French will have to get used to living with “violence and attacks.”
The French are increasingly tired of attempts to exonerate Islam. They know perfectly well that all Muslims are not guilty. But they also know that all those who committed attacks in France in recent years were Muslims. The French have no desire to get used to “violence and attacks.” They do not want to be on the losing side and they feel that we are losing.
Nice, July 14, 2016: Bastille Day. The evening festivities were ending. As the crowd watching fireworks was beginning to disperse, the driver of a 19-ton truck, zig-zagging, mowed down everyone in his way. Ten minutes and 84 dead persons later, the driver was shot and killed. Dozens were wounded; many will be crippled for life. Dazed survivors wandered the streets of the city for hours.
French television news anchors quickly said that what happened was almost certainly an “accident,” or when the French authorities started to speak of terrorism, that the driver could just be a madman. When the police disclosed the killer’s name and identity, and that he had been depressed in the past, they suggested that he had acted in a moment of “high anxiety.” They found witnesses who testified that he was “not a devout Muslim” — maybe not a Muslim at all.
President François Hollande spoke a few hours later and affirmed his determination to “protect the populace.”
Prime Minister Manuel Valls repeated what he already said 18 months ago: “France is at war.” He named an enemy, “radical Islamism,” but he was quick to add that “radical Islamism” has “nothing to do with Islam.” He then repeated what he emphasized so many times: the French will have to get used to living with “violence and attacks.”
The public reaction showed that Valls convinced hardly anyone. The French are increasinglytired of attempts to exonerate Islam. They know perfectly well that all Muslims are not guilty. They also know that, nevertheless, all those who committed attacks in France in recent years were Muslims. They do not feel protected by François Hollande. They see that France is attacked with increasing intensity and that radical Islam has declared war, but they do not see France declaring war back. They have no desire to get used to “violence and attacks.” They do not want to be on the losing side and they feel that we are losing.
“Everything I told you then is true. … But the interpreter there told me that a faithful woman must not use words like sex and rape. Words like that would dishonor my husband and our family. She also said that I was a blasphemer, because I went to the police. No woman should report her own husband. The husband must be honored.” — “Sali” in an apparent suicide note to her lawyer, Alexander Stevens.
“I am aware of statements in which interpreters have pressed and supposedly said to Christians on the way to the police or beforehand: If you complain, you can forget your application for asylum. I often noticed that statements were retracted because Christians were threatened.” — Paulus Kurt, Central Committee of Eastern Christians in Germany (ZOCD).
“The interpreters are neither employed by the Federal Agency, nor are they in any way sworn in to the legal system of the Federal Republic of Germany. Ultimately, examination of the asylum application is left solely to these interpreters… In our view, a decision-making process such as this, which is practiced on a massive scale, is not in keeping with due process.” — Open letter from employees of Germany’s Federal Agency for Migration and Refugees.
Alexander Stevens is a lawyer at a Munich law firm specializing in sexual offenses. In his recent book, Sex in Court, he describes some of his strangest and most shocking cases. One such case raises the question: What do you do when interpreters working for the police and courts lie and manipulate? As no one monitors translators, it is likely that in many instances, the dishonesty of interpreters goes undetected — Stevens’ book chronicles the devastating effects one dishonest interpreter had on a case.
The parents of a Syrian girl, “Sali,” had promised their daughter to a man named Hassan, who, at the time, was still living in Syria. The arrangement was seen as mutually beneficial: Sali’s parents would receive money and Hassan would be allowed to enter Germany. Sali would never willingly have married a man 34 years her senior, but the family’s honor required it. However, Sali did not receive any benefits from this arrangement. Hassan’s interest in Sali was apparently confined to her body. He forced Sali to perform all kinds of sexual practices several times a day, and brutally abused the girl in the process.
Sali was unable to hide the fact that she took no pleasure in these rapes and she became ill, so Hassan reproached her and “openly threatened to demand a large compensation payment from her family, for the cost of the wedding reception and lost pleasures of love.” Sali sought help from a women’s shelter, where an employee took her to a lawyer: Stevens. At the shelter, Sali described her misfortune, but was careful repeatedly to come to her husband’s defense. She was more worried about her family’s honor, should Hassan decided to divorce her, than about herself.
“After two hours of painstaking depictions of sexual abuse, corporal punishment, and mental humiliation,” Stevens writes, “I had no doubt that everything had actually happened as she said.”
The next day, Stevens tried to get an appointment for questioning with the police and an interpreter. But he was surprised when he got to the shelter. Sali was like a different person. Suddenly, she wanted nothing to do with him or the women’s shelter employee.
Sometime later, an employee of the women’s shelter sent him a letter that Sali had left behind for him. It read:
Dear Mr. Stevens,
I am very sorry to have caused you so much inconvenience. Please believe me when I say I did not want to. Everything I told you then is true. I also wanted to make a statement to the police regarding what I told you. But the interpreter there told me that a faithful woman must not use words like sex and rape. Words like that would dishonor my husband and our family. She also said that I was a blasphemer, because I went to the police. No woman should report her own husband. The husband must be honored. I did not know what to do, Mr. Stevens. Because I think she is right. I should never have disgraced my husband and my family. Therefore, I would ask you not to tell anyone. I do not want to create any more trouble for my family and my husband’s family. Please forgive me. You were very good to me.
Sali
By this time, Sali was already dead. According to the employee from the women’s shelter, the police suspected suicide.
