Month: December 2018

Categories
Quick Analysis

Major Report Outlines Deadly Challenge

A key report  has just been released outlining the extraordinary danger facing America from an electro-magnetic pulse. The troubling study, performed by the Air University-Lemay Center for Doctrine Development and Education, describes the apocalyptic crisis that would arise from an enemy attack, or a natural-occurring event emanating from the sun.

As noted in History.com, “On the morning of September 1, 1859, amateur astronomer Richard Carrington ascended into the private observatory attached to his country estate outside of London. After cranking open the dome’s shutter to reveal the clear blue sky, he pointed his brass telescope toward the sun and began to sketch a cluster of enormous dark spots that freckled its surface. Suddenly, Carrington spotted what he described as ‘two patches of intensely bright and white light’ erupting from the sunspots. Five minutes later the fireballs vanished, but within hours their impact would be felt across the globe. That night, telegraph communications around the world (essentially the only electronics of the period)began to fail; there were reports of sparks showering from telegraph machines, shocking operators and setting papers ablaze.”

If a similar event, also known to scientists as Coronal Mass Ejections (CME) , occurred today, our electronic-dependent nation would, according the study, face dramatic consequences.  The Energy Matters organization  notes that “All we can be certain of is that the Earth will sooner or later be impacted by another major CME, and probably sooner rather than later because major CMEs occur about once every 150 years and the last one – the Carrington Event – occurred 158 years ago.”

Among the most frightening problems would be the meltdown of nuclear power plants.  As the report notes:

“Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and Federal Emergency Management Agency plans to aid distressed nuclear power stations are presently very limited and wholly dependent on logistics that would likely suffer widespread regional or national interruption, thereby inhibiting response and recovery. Where the military is concerned, little planning has been done to mitigate potential impact on service members, installations, or critical missions that could be affected by areas of radiation arising from reactor or spent fuel pool leakage. The national response plan for distributing medications from stockpiles needed to aid recovery efforts is also dependent on logistics for distribution.

“Prolonged loss of power to these critical sites poses a risk of radioactive contamination to the Continental United States with consequentially disastrous impact to the economy and public health. Risks to military and civilian infrastructure and hardware would be similar due to jet-stream winds spreading radioactive materials. In all cases, consequence management of such impacts would be inherently complicated due to a reliance on federal and local logistics which are themselves dependent on EMS.”
Any urologic problem associated with an individual cannot be completely ruled out in patients at increased best price for sildenafil risk for prolonged cardiac repolarization. It also contains the exact amount of the plant product is not more than the prescribed buy generic viagra https://regencygrandenursing.com/PDFS/Selecting_STR_Checklist.pdf limit. This is the only reason why several males suffering from premature ejaculation levitra online canada should use the herbal remedies to cure sexual disorders naturally and safely. This leads viagra online regencygrandenursing.com to hard erection and that too for a longer period of time.
In aftermath of the Second World War, nuclear weapons scientists in the U.S. noticed the detrimental effects of atomic blasts on electronics. America’s early lead in the field of the electromagnetic spectrum (EMS) came as a result of its head start in this field. The report explains that “EMS is arguably the one domain that can rule them all. Failure to maintain technological dominance or freedom of operations in EMS can diminish or stop a modern nation’s broad civil and defense activities. Based on the totality of available data, the task force contends the second- and third-order effects of an EMS attack may be a threat to the United States, democracy, and the world order.”

Concern over America’s diminishing attention to this field has been brewing for decades. Over thirty years ago, warnings were issued by experts about the challenge. “However,” according to the report, “our collective knowledge…is the lowest point in recent history while the risks and threats are possibly the highest given the nature of widening knowledge and capability. The greater part of this institutional knowledge has diminished due to lack of training emphasis, attrition of experts, and focus on other strategic priorities such as counterinsurgencies and regional conflicts. In short, our institutional understanding has atrophied…

“The potential for an adversary to inflict damage on states through…attack has grown significantly. Today, all aspects of society, governance, and security have dependencies on the electromagnetic spectrum. However, power grids, telecommunications, and many command-and-control systems have not been designed to survive a hostile … environment. Once damaged by natural phenomena … or human induced phenomena…it may take months to years to recover…Multiple adversaries are capable of executing a strategic attack that may black out major portions of a state’s grid. An EMP attack affects all devices with solid-state electronics and could render inoperative the main grid and backup power systems, such as on-site generators.”

“Only a shift in public sentiment and government policy—at multiple levels—will result in a protection effort commensurate with emerging EMS challenges and their potential consequences. Therefore, the [task force] recommends the consideration of an executive order similar to the order establishing the Manhattan Project in the 1940s to create comparable momentum.”

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

Conquering America From Within

If a country with a wholly opposite view of human rights, say, the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, or present-day Iran, conquered and occupied the United States and determined, within a generation or two, to completely abolish American culture and turn its youth against their own  nation, it could not do a more thorough job than the combined devastation wrought by  some within America’s education system, much of its news media, and its entertainment barons.

When will this crisis be taken seriously?

The level of misinformation about America’s history, its role in the world, and its culture is extraordinary in its scope and in its utter defiance of reality.

Many American students are told that their founders were evil men, despite the fact that their accomplishments brought more freedom to the world than any other group of humans in history.

A growing number of politicians denounce the nation’s capitalist economic system, ignoring the solid reality that it has produced the greatest level of prosperity for the greatest number of people than anything else ever attempted.  Amazingly, despite a hundred-year record of utter failure throughout the world, socialism is now being advocated by many prominent figures.

It is often stated by those on the left that the United States’ influence on the planet has been detrimental.  The truth, however, is that in addition to the influence of seminal documents such as the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, America has produced more good for more people across the planet than any other source. In its key role in the defeat of Nazis, Fascists, and the Soviet Union, the nation’s record is unmatched in human history.

It’s not that a portion of America’s people are turning against what their nation has accomplished. Too many youth have been deprived of the knowledge of those accomplishments, and that foul deed has been reinforced by an entertainment industry that consistently casts patriotic Americans as villains, particularly on television programs, and a news media that frequently warps information against the U.S.

In 2015, ABC’s KSFY affiliate reported that “the South Dakota Board of Education approved new guidelines that do not require high schools to teach U.S. history.”

A Nations Report Card  study found that only 18% of eighth grade students are proficient in U.S. history.  Similarly, a worrisome 2014 survey of 1,416 adults recently conducted by the Annenberg Public Policy  Center  found that:

  • While little more than a third of respondents (36 percent) could name all three branches of the U.S. government, just as many (35 percent) could not name a single one;
  • Just over a quarter of Americans (27 percent) know it takes a two-thirds vote of the House and Senate to override a presidential veto; and
  • One in five Americans (21 percent) incorrectly thinks that a 5-4 Supreme Court decision is sent back to Congress for reconsideration.

Von Willebrand disease is transmitted autosomal; gene on chromosome 12 is affected. viagra buying online Men with high blood pressure may also sildenafil canada have difficulty maintaining the hard-on. But in a lot of cases you need those medications to get better or to clear up a ordering viagra without prescription buy at store disease or illness so of course you have to just take the recommendation of your doctor and make do with it. The days of working exclusively on your view this store now cialis price six pack ie rectus abdominus was of course disinformation from the fitness industry and others to promote “their” products and manipulate peoples’ consciousness.

  • Even supposedly well-educated individuals, such as Congresswoman-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez seem uncertain as to the structure of the national government.

Capitol Times.com quotes a statement by Arizona state legislator Steve Montenegro, a Republican, that “Civics and Social Studies and History are being boxed out of the classroom.”  He notes that “96% of a sample group of high schoolers in Arizona and Oklahoma failed to pass a basic test on citizenship issues.”

Joy Pullman, writing for The Federalist, reports that: “U.S. civics education, if it exists at all, is being transformed into a political machine to push left-wing causes, undermine American government, and incite civil unrest, finds a 525-page report from the National Association of Scholars. [NAS] The ‘New Civics’ uses attractive, bipartisan-sounding words like ‘civics’ and “service learning” to trick Americans and their representatives into allowing progressive political machinery to hijack public funds and young minds, finds ‘Making Citizens: How American Universities Teach Civics.’……A series of surveys of adult Americans from 2008 to 2011 found that college graduates tended to know less than the average American about basic government functions, although the average American failed the test with or without a college degree. ‘[W]hile college adds little to civic knowledge, it does seem to encourage graduates to identify more strongly with the Democrat and Liberal ends of the political spectrum,’ one of these reports found. Younger students are no better. Although the Obama administration replaced national civics and U.S. history exams with technology assessments in 2013, their results were consistently poor: “In 2010, the last time the history test was administered, students performed worse on it than on any other NAEP test. Less than half the eighth-graders knew the purpose of the Bill of Rights, and only 1 in 10 could pick a definition of the system of checks and balance.”

In a Fox interview, the late columnist Charles Krauthammer  said that American students are being taught “about all of the pathologies of the United States and very little of the glories.’…

Throughout American history, there has always been a segment of the population that has been uncomfortable with the nation’s foundational concepts of individual rights, competitive economic practices, and frontier spirit.  While always free to advocate their oppositional beliefs, they never had the tools at hand to overturn those basic concepts.  That began to change in the latter half of the Twentieth Century, a result of that group’s realization that they would not win at the ballot box and had to find different levers of influence.  In that effort, they succeeded. President Obama’s promise to “fundamentally transform” America was the most overt expression of this drive.

The hard left attained key control over much of education, entertainment, and a significant portion of the news media.  This allowed them to obscure the overwhelming facts which argued against their positions.  Since rational arguments worked against their views, the emotional realm of entertainment allowed them to replace reasoned discussion with fiction.

America now finds itself in an existential battle for the survival of its basic principles and culture.

Illustration: Victory at Yorktown (Smithsonian Institution)

Categories
Quick Analysis

Foreign Policy Update

Remarks at the United Nations Security Council Meeting on Iran

Michael R. Pompeo Secretary of State United Nations New York City December 12, 2018

Just two days ago, the head of the IRGC’s airspace division, Amir Hajizadeh, boasted that Iran is capable of building missiles with a range beyond 2,000 kilometers. He said, quote, “We have the ability to build missiles with broader ranges. We don’t have limitations from a technical perspective.” End of quote. He also said there are many “enemy bases” within 800 kilometers of Iran – in other words, within striking distance of Iranian missiles. He bragged that Iran does 40 to 50 tests per year.

As I’ll talk about further, it is clear that the Iranian regime’s ballistic missile activity has grown since the nuclear deal. Iran has exploited the goodwill of nations and defied multiple Security Council resolutions in its quest for a robust ballistic missile force. The United States will never stand for this.

No nation that seeks peace and prosperity in the Middle East should either.

Since 2006, this Council has been telling Iran to stop testing and proliferating ballistic missiles in one form or another. From 2010 to 2015, Iran was subject to UN Security Council Resolution 1929 – the strictest resolution addressing the Iranian ballistic missiles to date.

In that resolution, the Security Council decided that, “Iran shall not undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using ballistic missile technology, and that States shall take… necessary measures to prevent the transfer of technology or technical assistance to Iran related to such activities.” This provision of UNSCR 1929 imposed a legal prohibition on Iran’s ballistic missile activity. There was force of law behind these words.

Nevertheless, Iran conducted multiple ballistic missile launches between 2010 and 2015, in flagrant violation of that resolution.

So what did we do in response? Did we increase accountability on Iran for serial violations of international law? Quite the opposite. In fact, the level of accountability on Iran has diminished instead of — decreased, while the risk has increased.

In connection with the Iranian regime’s engagement in nuclear talks, and at the Obama administration’s urging, the Security Council replaced Resolution 1929 with Resolution 2231. Resolution 2231 “calls upon” Iran not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons. Notwithstanding that change in language, the world’s concerns remain.

When we collectively “call upon” Iran to cease its ballistic missile activity, we must agree to stop it now. But Iran is as defiant of the world’s insistence as ever. Because here we are, for the 12th year in a row, meeting about Iran’s ballistic missiles, addressing an incredibly problematic data set.

Iran’s pace of missile activity, including missile launches and tests, did not diminish since the JCPOA. In fact, Iran’s missile testing and missile proliferation is growing. Today Iran has the largest ballistic missile force in the Middle East. It has more than 10 ballistic missile systems in its inventory or in development. It has hundreds of missiles which pose a threat to our partners in the region.

From more recent times: In 2016, during the time of the JCPOA, Iran unveiled two new short-range ballistic missiles, which it claims are capable of striking targets between 500 and 700 kilometers. In January of 2017, during the time of the JCPOA, Iran launched a medium-range missile designed to carry a payload greater than 500 kilograms, and which could be used to carry nuclear warheads. Its suspected range also approaches 2,000 kilometers, which is far enough to target Athens, Sofia, Bucharest, and other major European cities. If the IRGC airspace commander is telling the truth, and Iran has capabilities beyond 2,000 kilometers, other European capitals are at risk as well.

In July of 2017, while the United States was still in the JCPOA, Iran tested a Simorgh space launch vehicle. The United States, France, Germany, and the UK all assessed that the launch was inconsistent with 2231, because space launch vehicle use – uses a similar technology as intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Iran has exported ballistic missile systems as well, most recently to Yemen. We have hard evidence that Iran is providing missiles, training, and support to the Houthis, and the Iranian-Houthi missile force is fully engaged. This poses a threat to innocent civilians – including Americans – living in Riyadh, Abu Dhabi, Dubai, as well as people of all nationalities who travel on civilian aircraft in that region.

Iran is also transferring ballistic missile systems to Shia militias in Iraq.

And just look at the last two weeks. The Iranian regime test-fired a medium range ballistic missile that is capable of carrying multiple warheads.

Our goodwill gestures have been futile, futile in correcting the Iranian regime’s reckless missile activity and its destructive behaviors. No nation can dispute that Iran is in open defiance of UN Security Council Resolution 2231.

The United States is not alone in raising these concerns. I’d like to thank France and Germany and the United Kingdom for raising concerns about Iranian missile proliferation to the secretariat.

I would also like to thank our partners from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, who are working with UN inspectors in recovering material debris of Iranian-supplied missiles, rockets, and UAVs launched into their countries by Houthi forces in Yemen.

Our Israeli allies have brought further evidence to the Security Council about Iran’s continued launches of ballistic missiles that are inherently capable of carrying nuclear weapons. Israel has also given evidence to the secretariat of Iran’s transfer of weapon systems to its proxies all around the Middle East, and in defiance of what we have insisted that they do.

So the question – the question now: What steps ought we take to confront this Iranian malign activity? We risk the security of our people if Iran continues stocking up on ballistic missiles. We risk escalation of conflict in the region if we fail to restore deterrence. And we convey to all other malign actors that they too can defy the Security Council with impunity if we do nothing.

Some common treatments available are – *Oral drugs – order viagra online , viagra are the oral drug that dilates the blood vessels of the penis on the occurrence of such pathetic and miserable health complications you need to adopt Generic Benicar , the medicament structure that has been embedded with the potentials to behave as a synthetic chemotherapeutic antibiotic of the tetracycline group, marketed as the common brand name of Vibramycin. The professional doctors are well qualified in counseling the patients by applying four types of techniques-regimental therapy, diet therapy, Pharmaco therapy and Surgery. http://downtownsault.org/thefoundary/ prescription de viagra In his five volume autobiography ‘ My Life and Loves’, he describes his decrease in firepower with age. ‘My Creator – when I was wholly without experience and had only just entered my teens, gave me, so to speak, a magazine gun of sex, and hardly had I learned its use and enjoyment check this link viagra price when he took it away from me forever, and gave me in. You need to follow the medications for a few hours. best prices on sildenafil The United Nations Charter, as you all know well, calls the primary – gives – bestows upon the Security Council “the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.” We all take this responsibility seriously. The United States seeks to work with all other members of the Council to reimpose on Iran the ballistic missiles restrictions outlined in 1929.

Beyond addressing Iran’s ballistic missile activities, the Council should not lift the arms embargo in 2020 on Iran. This is a country in noncompliance with multiple UN Security Council resolutions, including those related to al-Qaida, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Yemen, and Somalia. Iran is harboring al-Qaida, supporting Taliban militants in Afghanistan, arming terrorists in Lebanon, facilitating illicit trade in Somali charcoal benefiting al-Shabaab, and training and equipping Shia militias in Iraq, even as we sit here today.

It is also stoking conflict in Syria and Yemen. The Council must address these malign activities. It cannot reward Iran by lifting the arms embargo.

We also call on the Council to establish inspection and interdiction measures, in ports and on the high seas, to thwart Iran’s continuing efforts to circumvent the existing arms restrictions.

Some have questioned our decision to withdraw from the JCPOA. We reply that it is self-evident why we did so based upon the very conversation we’re having here today. Prior to the deal, Western leaders made grand claims of how the JCPOA would usher in a new era of moderation from the Iranian regime.

Indeed, America’s own president said, quote, “Ideally, we would see a situation in which Iran, seeing sanctions reduced, would start focusing on its economy, on training its people, on re-entering the world community, to lessening its provocative activities in the region.” But what do we actually see?

The JCPOA has without a doubt, to date, shielded the Islamic Republic of Iran from the accountability to the risks it presents to the world.

The Iranian regime is pursuing the same destructive, revolutionary goals that it has for the past 39 years – except now it has more money to achieve them, thanks to the nuclear deal.

I’m here today first and foremost as my capacity as the Secretary of State of the United States of America. Under President Trump, the security of our people and our allies comes first.

But in the finest traditions of American leadership, the United States will continue to unite sovereign nations in their responsibility to work for the peace and security of their own people and a stable international order.

The United States is going to continue to be relentless in building a coalition of responsible nations who are serious in confronting the Iranian regime’s reckless ballistic missile activity.

This includes the treatment of its own people as well. That type of malign activity is something that the United States will keep standing side by side with the people of Iran. They have been the worst victims of the regime for nearly 40 years and they have the unwavering support of the United States.

Finally, The Trump administration clearly defined in May the 12 areas in which we are demanding change from Iran.

If Iran makes a fundamental strategic shift and honors these demands, we are prepared to ease our pressure campaign and support the modernization and reintegration of the Iranian economy into the international economic system.

But relief – relief from our efforts will come only when we see tangible, demonstrated, and sustained shifts in Tehran’s policies.

Deputy Secretary Sullivan’s Participation in U.S.-Russia Counterterrorism Dialogue With Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Syromolotov

The below is attributable to Deputy Spokesperson Robert Palladino:‎

Deputy Secretary of State John J. Sullivan participated today in a U.S.-Russia Counterterrorism Dialogue in Vienna, Austria. The Russian Deputy Foreign Minister responsible for counterterrorism, Oleg Vladimirovich Syromolotov, attended on behalf of his government.

Despite our continued concerns with Russia’s destabilizing activity, the United States seeks to facilitate the sharing of any information that can protect the United States, its people, and its interests against terrorist attacks. In addition to discussing the reciprocal exchange of information, the Deputy Secretary raised a number of issues, to include foreign terrorist fighters, preventing terrorist travel, and the protection of major international sporting events. Deputy Secretary Sullivan also addressed Russia’s attempts to undermine democratic institutions and its continued aggression in Ukraine. Going forward, U.S. and Russian experts will meet at the working level to explore whether further cooperation on counterterrorism will be possible.

 

 

llustration: Pixabay

DARIA NOVAK served in the United States State Department during the Reagan Administration, and currently is on the Board of the American Analysis of News and Media Inc., which publishes usagovpolicy.com and the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.  Each Saturday, she presents key updates on U.S. foreign policy from the State Department.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Must-See Propaganda

To many, particularly those in the millennial demographic, there are important sources of information that are not compliant with the admittedly weak and frequently ignored journalistic ethics of television news programs.

Indeed, the practice of replacing accuracy with propaganda in television extends far beyond nightly news programs.

The extraordinary media obsession to push left-wing perspectives has received scrutiny because of its tendency to replace objective reporting with one-sided and frequently inaccurate coverage. The most recent examples of this practice could be most prominently seen in the treatment of two stories, the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh and the arrival of the illegal immigrant caravan at the U.S. southern border. Baseless accusations against the Judge were breathlessly relayed without any attempt to employ reasonable journalistic standards such as fact-checking. After the nominating process was completed, it became clear that the salacious stories about him were untrue. In the case of the caravan, network and cable news programs have ignored the reality that a lion’s share of the participants are military-age males, some of whom have unsavory connections.

It has long been discussed that for some, late-night comedians are a source of information about candidates and news stories. In 2014, a Pew Research Center Fact Tank analysis noted that “Pew Research Center’s recent report on Americans’ media habits finds that a portion of online adults get their news from two Comedy Central staples, The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. And other studies have shown that people do, in fact, learn from these programs while they laugh…  on par with such sources as the Wall Street Journal and USA Today… nearly a quarter (22%) of 18- to 29- year-old males say they got news about politics and government from The Colbert Report in the previous week… Roughly a quarter (26%) of consistent liberals reported getting news about government and politics from The Colbert Report… That is far more than other ideological groups. In fact, a mere 1% of consistent conservatives say they get news from the show. The share of consistent liberals who get news from The Colbert Report is similar to that of The Huffington Post (29%) and CBS News (30%)…”

It’s not just humor-seeking audiences that consider comedians’ views important. Frequently, the latest jibes from Saturday Night Live shows becomes prominent areas of discussion in political circles, and not infrequently, comments made by imitators of political figures become more well-known than actual quotes from the politicians themselves.

The worrisome trend has expanded beyond programs that have at least a pretense of involvement with actual news, and now extends to television entertainment drama series.

The pressure in the buy sildenafil online bile ducts is up, so the sphincter of Oddi begins to spasm. Kamagra oral jelly is http://cute-n-tiny.com/tag/puppy/page/8/ wholesale cialis canada composed of sildenafil citrate and hence this medicine is also known as sildenafil jelly also. As these cases are levitra shop uk said to be the best for this issue. According to Wikipedia, erectile dysfunction is really a sexual dysfunction characterized by the inability to develop or maintain an erection with real-world partners, but can only achieve orgasm by visualizing porn clips ? He prefers porn to real-world sex, finding it more engaging, appealing and intense than the actual act He does not talk about porn to his real-life partners and tries to enjoy cute-n-tiny.com order viagra pornography secretly Unfortunately,. The program “Designated Survivor” presented a prime example. A group consisting of (surprise!) military veterans and Second Amendment types are revealed to be the perpetrators of a crime in which almost the entire body of U.S. elected officials were assassinated while attending a State of the Union address. The original idea that it was Middle Eastern terrorists is, of course, discredited.

This lunatic-fringe series is not alone.  The latest “24” reboot characterized veterans as burned-out psychotics, a consistent theme of the Obama Administration, which in a report libeled veterans as more of a threat than actual terrorists.  Newsbusters notes that 24 “caricatures [veterans,] shows every single vet on the show as broken in some way. Even in small scenes, such as when we see a group of homeless veterans hanging out under an overpass, complete with garbage drum fire…The liberal critics have already expressed displeasure that the bad guys are radical Islamists. Funny, though, there haven’t been any objections to how our military veteran heroes are portrayed. Hollywood and its critics are so predictable. They don’t want to insult the radicals in the Muslim world but it’s no problem to slam the good guys.”

The various NCIS and similar crime dramas have a frequent plot line.  A horrendous crime or terrorist act is planned or perpetrated, and the obvious villains, be they Middle Eastern suspects or illegal immigrants tied to criminal organizations, are wrongly accused.  The real bad guys turn out to be American right-wingers. In many forms and variations, the story-line is repeated over and over again.

Ben Shapiro, in his book “Primetime Propaganda, outlined how television executives have utilized prime-time television to push left-wing agendas and have not been particularly shy about using McCarthy-like tactics to discriminate against and harass anyone who disagrees with them.

The scope and arrogance of this practice is truly Orwellian.

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

Hezbollah Uses Illegal Drug Trade to Threaten America

The frightening extent of Iran’s’ terrorist reach into the Western Hemisphere is becoming more clear, as law enforcement officials across the globe move to curb Hezbollah.

The Hill reports that Argentinian officials have frozen the assets of 14 people tied to the Barakat clan, a group led by  Assad Ahmad Barakat, a top financier for Hezbollah’s Latin American activities.  He is considered one of the terrorist organization’s most important financiers.

The Stratfor research group  notes that Hezbollah has a strong base of operations on the continent.  Its activities are financed by a billion-dollar drug trafficking operation.

The London Center for Policy Research, relying on a Politico investigatory article, stresses that the Obama Administration, in its still unexplained complete tilt towards Iran, blocked the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration from moving against the terrorist/drug smuggling organization.

“The Hezbollah operation also involved arms trafficking and money laundering. According to the report, cocaine trafficking originated in Latin America, specifically through Venezuela and Mexico, with profits generated in the U.S. and laundered through the purchase of used cars. According to U.S. agents involved in the investigation, the criminal operation was directed and planned by Hezbollah’s innermost circle and ‘its state sponsors in Iran.’

“According to Politico, the money collected by Hezbollah went directly toward its military activities in the Middle East, particularly to the Assad regime in Syria where more than half a million people have been killed and millions more have been displaced. Furthermore,the drug profits aggravated issues at home; tons of cocaine were sold in the U.S.at a time when drug addiction constitutes one of America’s most pressing crises, having claimed close to 50,000 American lives in the past year alone.

“The DEA sought approval to continue investigations, order arrests, extraditions and prosecutions of suspects, and impose financial sanctions on some of the operation’s major players. However, the Departments of Justice and Treasury rejected, delayed, or blocked those requests. Likewise, the State Department rejected requests to pursue cooperation with countries that could have helped target key suspects involved in those criminal activities.”
You can log onto a popular online shop 100mg viagra cost and presented in front of the global patrons. https://pdxcommercial.com/property/1227-se-stark-street-portland-oregon/1227-se-stark-st-brochure/ levitra on line Oatmeal with 2 tablespoons of protein powder, apple slices, cinnamon on top. Many of us remember the major controversy that erupted from having prayer in schools and the even greater controversy from taking it out of schools. levitra online cheap How Can order cheap viagra Help? Sildenafil is not suitable to you.
In November, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies reported that fifteen Hezbollah-linked individuals went on trial in France for laundering millions of euros in South American drug money.

The ultimate goals of the Hezbollah-drug cartel connections are becoming more clear.

The Center for Security Policy notes that “Hezbollah and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary GuardsCorps (IRGC) have … established a presence in the region, training “soldiers of the revolution” in Venezuelan camps… According to the late Argentinean prosecutor Alberto Nisman, Iran has a presence in 12 countries in the region including Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Guyana, Paraguay, Trinidad and Tobago, Suriname, and Uruguay. Iran…also sought a strategic position in the region to increase deterring capabilities against the U.S…

“Moreover, Venezuela issued passports to Iranians and Hezbollah members to facilitate their free travel around the region and the world. Likewise, several Caribbean countries that allied with Chavez established dangerous liaisons with Iran. Guyana signed an agreement with Iran in which Iran would map Guyana’s mineral resources, including uranium. Dominica signed an agreement with Iran that enabled citizens of Iran, parts of the Middle East and Central Asia to obtain a second citizenship and a passport. The islands of St. Kitts and Nevis have also sold passports to Iranians.”

In an analysis released on November 15, The Clarion Project  noted that “Iran’s terror proxy Hezbollah is ramping up south of the US border, as witnessed by arrests of its operatives in Bolivia and Peru. Information revealed by the State Department’s top counter terror official Nathan Sales confirmed the increased presence of Iran and Hezbollah in Latin and South America.In Bolivia, “large caches of military equipment and explosives” belonging to Hezbollah jihadis were found in the La Paz area. Jihads have also been dispatched to Peru, where prosecutions of operatives by the government is ongoing. Last year in Paraguay, a number of Hezbollah-linked individuals – some with connections to the U.S. were arrested for money laundering and drug trafficking, according to the State Department. Panama also worked with the U.S. on a number of counter-terror efforts with suspects linked to Hezbollah.”

Photo: Iran’s President Rouhani (Iran official site)

Categories
Quick Analysis

Democratic Party Retains Support of Groups it Doesn’t Favor, Part 2

Many expected Jewish voters to turn away from the Democrat Party in the aftermath of Barack Obama’s sharp tilt away from Israel and towards Moslem nations, particularly Iran.

Andrew Kohut, in a RealClearPolitics article noted that “Republicans are not only politically more supportive of Israel in the Middle East conflict, they are much more likely than Democrats to believe that God gave Israel to the Jewish people. A 2013 Pew Research survey found a 58 percent majority of Republicans holding this view, compared with only 36 percent of Democrats and 42 percent of Independents.  Analysis of the survey suggests that this is partly because Republicans are more likely to believe in God than Democrats. But even when the comparison is limited only to people who believe in God, Republicans are still significantly more inclined than Democrats to hold the view that God gave Israel to the Jewish people.”

The Democrat leaderships’ move away from its Jewish supporters coincides with its drift into the hard-left. Progressive Anti-Semitism, often portrayed as anti-Israel or Pro-Palestinian, is broader than the traditional ethnically-based hatred that history is all too familiar with.  It contains the seeds of the broader Progressive/Left’s disdain and hatred for all religion. A devotion to religious principles means that individuals see a higher power than government, a belief that the Left, which places the power of government above individual rights, cannot co-exist with.

The reality and political power of modern anti-Semitism in the political Left is clear, and one need look no further than the fact that Keith Ellison, the former Congressman and newly elected Attorney General of Minnesota, served until the recent election as Deputy Chair of the Democratic National Committee. His past association with anti-Semites, particularly Louis Farrakhan (most recently noted for shouting “Death to America” while visiting Iran) and his statements that U.S. foreign policy is “governed” by Jewish interests, are well known.

If men do viagra brand online not respond to oral medications, they may try other treatment options. Cardiovascular cialis tablets india complications: after the kidney transplantation, the cardiovascular will be the second reason which threatens patient’s life. We also developed medicine systems through our knowledge of ED has advanced cialis online rapidly in recent years. The vitality of our immune system’s strength tadalafil overnight shipping cannot be stressed enough. In a Haaretz article generally sympathetic to Ellison, Michael Olenick writes “…a Jewish student who clashed with Ellison and who was the opinions editor at the [Minnesota Daily, the student newspaper], recalled Ellison maintaining that an oppressed group could not be racist toward Jews because Jews were themselves oppressors. ‘European white Jews are trying to oppress minorities all over the world,’ Olenick remembers Ellison arguing. Keith would go on all the time about ‘Jewish slave traders.’”

Another newly elected Democrat Congresswoman, New York’s Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, counts herself as a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, a group which supports  the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel.

Haaretz reports that “According to a Pew Research Center survey, the percentage of Democrats saying they sympathize more with Israel than the Palestinians has declined from 38 percent in 2001 to 27 percent in 2018 — the lowest level of support on record. Support for Israel further decreased among self-identified “liberal” Democrats from 48 percent in 2001 to 19 percent in 2018. In the same time period, their support for Palestinians rose from 18 percent to 35 percent. Some credit Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., with normalizing such criticism of Israel. While the 2016 Democratic presidential candidate defined himself as “100 percent pro-Israel,” he recently called on the U.S. to adopt a more balanced policy toward Israel and the Palestinians. In late March, Sanders’ office posted three videos to social media harshly criticizing Israel for what he deemed its excessive use of force in Gaza and the Trump administration for not intervening during the border clashes. Left-wing activists have also drawn Democratic politicians into Israel controversies. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, a potential 2020 presidential candidate, penned a glowing Time magazine write-up of controversial progressive heroines and Women’s March leaders Tamika Mallory and Linda Sarsour. Mallory, in a non-apology steeped in intersectional progressive terminology, has since defended her own relationship with Farrakhan following his recent anti-Semitic rants. Sarsour, who argued that Zionism and feminism are incompatible, is a prominent supporter of BDS.”

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

Democratic Party Retains Support of Groups it Doesn’t Help

The intriguing question of whether the Democratic Party would be able to retain the loyalty of some of its traditional supporters whose interests no longer coincide with the leaderships’ policies appears to have been, at least for the moment, settled favorably for the organization. The loyalty is enjoyed despite increasingly clear evidence that the Democratic National Committee has adopted a progressive platform reflecting views of major hard-left donors and academic elitists that do not benefit at least two key groups who have demonstrated strong support for the party since the latter half of the 20th Century.

Old habits die hard, and the vigorous, indeed strident, support of the Party by much of the media, including major news sources, social media giants, and the entertainment establishment has proved decisive. Despite adopting positions diametrically opposed to the interests of key supporters, especially Jewish and black voters, there was little indication that those demographics strayed from the Party in the 2018 election.

According to Pew Research in the 2018 election, Blacks favored Democrat congressional candidates by a margin of 90-9. Pew also reported that Jews favored Democrats by a 79-17 margin.

The support of Black Americans for Democrats is an interesting phenomenon. The Republican Party began as part of the fight to abolish slavery, an institution ardently supported by Democrats of the time. The GOP also fought against Democrats’ adoption of the doctrine of segregation.

Noted Historian Michael Barons’s Hoover study on Race, Ethnicity, and Politics in American History  noted that “The inrush of blacks into the southern electorate in the 1860s and early 1870s was followed by moves by white Democrats to bar them from voting. Often these took the form of physical intimidation that might well be called terrorism; this persisted until the 1960s. Legal means were used as well: grandfather clauses, poll taxes, all-white Democratic primaries, literacy requirements administered discriminatorily.”

FactCheck.org  explains that “Blacks mostly voted Republican from after the Civil War and through the early part of the 20th century. That’s not surprising when one considers that Abraham Lincoln was the first Republican president, and the white, segregationist politicians who governed Southern states in those days were Democrats. The Democratic Party didn’t welcome blacks then, and it wasn’t until 1924 that blacks were even permitted to attend Democratic conventions in any official capacity…”

Once blood flow is changed a natural erection occurs automatically. secretworldchronicle.com sildenafil delivery Avlimil contains no estrogen, testosterone, progesterone, or other hormones and is available on-line without cialis buy cialis a doctor’s prescription. The order try for source now cialis prices in australia will reach to you in no time. After washing the bladder, levitra on line http://secretworldchronicle.com/tag/victoria-victrix/ fill with a rinse solution. While Democratic President Lyndon Johnson fought diligently for passage of the Civil Rights Act which passed in 1964, more Republicans than Democrats supported the measure. 80 percent of Republicans supported the measure in the House of Representatives, while only 61 percent of Democrats favored it.  In the Senate, 82 percent of Republicans voted for the measure, compared to only 66 percent of Democrats.

Johnson, a Southern Democrat, enjoyed overwhelming support from the media, and was cast as the champion of civil rights, gaining the support of black Americans for the Democrat Party.

The first black president, Barack Obama, was a Democrat.  But his policies didn’t help black Americans. Antonio Moore, a black American, explains in Newsmax: “By nearly every economic indicator, blacks [became] worse off than when President Obama was sworn into office. During Obama’s terms, black Americans experienced record lows in small business loans, and saw their lowest home-ownership rates in 25 years. This is along with having record highs in unemployment, and experiencing large amounts of wealth loss under his administration. Since Obama took office, the racial wealth gap grew over 30 percent.”

Dr. Michelle Diggles, in a Third Way article, notes that while some groups have remained loyal to the Democrat Party, others may be expected to change over the coming decades.

“Can Democrats rely on demographic cohesion to deliver them to power in coming elections? Are Hispanics, Asians, and Millennials brand-loyal to the Party? Two examples provide contrasting perspectives: black voters and Catholic voters. Black voters have supported the Democratic Party in large numbers…Conversely, Catholics, who were once stalwart Democrats in the early 1900s, became Reagan Democrats by the latter 20th century and now comprise a bloc of swing voters.”

The Report Concludes Tomorrow

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO, U.S. Agree on Russian Violation

NATO’s members and President Trump are in solid agreement that Russia has substantially violated the long-standing Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty, signed by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987.

While President Trump’s push to get NATO members to contribute a fair share of the defense organization’s budget has raised some tension, the inherent danger posed by Putin’s latest aggressive act has produced unity within the alliance. According to Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, speaking at a foreign ministers meeting in Brussels, “All allies have concluded that Russia has developed and fielded a new ground-launched cruise missile system – the SSC-8, also known as the 9M729…Allies agree that this missile system violates the INF Treaty and poses significant risks to Euro-Atlantic security. And they agree that Russia is therefore in material breach of its obligations under the INF Treaty.”

NATO describes the treaty violated by Moscow as “…a pillar of European security. The treaty eliminated an entire category of destabilizing weapons…” Stoltenberg noted that “Russia’s deployment ratchets up tension on the continent. This is really serious, …these missiles are in particular dangerous because they are hard to detect, they are mobile [and] they are nuclear-capable,” the secretary general said at a news conference…The new Russian missiles can reach European cities, thus reducing warning time… they also reduce the threshold for nuclear weapons in the event of a conflict. That’s the reason why the INF Treaty has been so important, and that is why it is so serious that this treaty risks breaking down because of the Russian violations.”

Stoltenberg, referring to Washington’s efforts to get Putin to comply with the treaty, emphasized that “the United States has made every effort to engage with Russia, and to seek answers about the new missile. The U.S. has raised the matter formally with Russia at senior levels more than 30 times…Other allies have raised it with Russia, too. We did so, a few weeks ago, in the NATO-Russia Council here in Brussels… This violation “erodes the foundations of effective arms control and undermines allied security. This is part of Russia’s broader pattern of behavior, intended to weaken the overall Euro-Atlantic security architecture.”

The Secretary-General reported that The United States continues to fully comply with the INF Treaty. “There are no new U.S. missiles in Europe, but there are new Russian missiles in Europe…Arms control agreements are only effective if they are respected by all sides. A situation where the U.S. abides by the treaty and Russia does not is simply not sustainable.”
Besides them, avoiding overdose viagra online online or increased dose is strict NO-NO. This “mid-life crisis” poses a great cialis price pdxcommercial.com impact in the treatment of erectile dysfunction. If possible then always try to have everyone move together as if they’re in a chain gang, all clones of one another viagra shop usa moving in the same direction. These shocks do not pose any injury to the penis nor do they claim to have hormone type effect of cheap Kamagra rather than any other pills. order levitra online
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, speaking at the Brussels meeting, explained that “…whatever successes this treaty helped produce, today we must confront Russian cheating on its arms control obligations…our nations have a choice. We either bury our head in the sand or we take common-sense action in response to Russia’s flagrant disregard for the express terms of the INF Treaty. It’s worth noting that Russia’s violations didn’t happen overnight. Russia’s been flight-testing the SSC-8 cruise missile since the mid-2000s. They’ve been testing it in excess of ranges that the treaty permits. All the tests of the SSC-8 have originated from a Kapustin Yar site from both a fixed and mobile launcher. Its range makes it a direct menace to Europe… Throughout all of this, the United States has remained in scrupulous compliance with the treaty. In spite of Russia’s violations, we have exercised the utmost patience and effort in working to convince Russia to adhere to its terms. On at least 30 occasions since 2013, extending to the highest levels of leadership, we have raised Russia’s noncompliance and stressed that a failure to return to compliance would have consequences.

“Russia’s reply has been consistent: deny any wrongdoing, demand more information, and issue baseless counter-accusations. For more than four years, Moscow has pretended that it didn’t know what missile or test the United States was even talking about, even when we provided extensive information about the missile’s characteristics and testing history. It was not until we chose to publicize the Russian name of the missile in November of 2017 that Russia finally acknowledged its existence. Then Russia changed its cover story from the missile that does not exist to the missile that exists but is treaty-compliant.

“These violations of the INF Treaty cannot be viewed in isolation from the larger pattern of Russian lawlessness on the world stage. The list of Russia’s infamous acts is long: Georgia, Ukraine, Syria, election meddling, Skripal, and now the Kerch Strait, to name just a few.”

Photo: NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg speaks with reporters during a foreign ministers meeting at NATO headquarters in Brussels, Dec. 4, 2018. (NATO)

Categories
Quick Analysis

Foreign Policy Update

From the U.S. State Department:

Secretary Pompeo’s Meeting With ROK Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha

On December 6, Secretary Michael R. Pompeo met with Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha of the Republic of Korea. Secretary Pompeo and Foreign Minister Kang reaffirmed the ironclad alliance between the United States and the Republic of Korea and pledged to maintain close coordination to ensure the final, fully verified denuclearization of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Briefing With Special Representative for Syria Engagement Ambassador James F. Jeffrey

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: Okay. Let me review the bidding since the Astana meeting last week on Thursday of Turkey, Iran and Russia trying to focus on the political track. And I will focus my remarks on the political track because we’re at a critical juncture on that important track in this month. I’ll explain a little bit why and where we are on it.

We also just completed today a meeting of what we call the small group, which is an informal group of European states – Germany, France, and Britain – and Middle Eastern states – Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt – who work with us and consult with us on this issue. They met with Under Secretary David Hale, and they also met with the head of the Syria negotiating committee – commission, rather, Nasr Hariri, who is basically the senior, and his senior staff from the Syrian political opposition, who are very much involved in this whole process.

So what I’d like to do is to take you through what happened last week and where we are now with the small group. As you may remember, the summit in Istanbul over a month ago now saw Angela Merkel, Vladimir Putin, President Macron, and President Erdogan meet together to discuss Syria. They discussed primarily two very contentious issues: the Idlib deconfliction zone of ceasefire, and particularly the political process, specifically the constitutional committee which is to be stood up, and it’s something that three countries, known as the Astana group – Turkey, Iran, and Russia – took upon themselves a year ago to try to stand up, because the regime was not being cooperative.

That’s all under the aegis of UN Resolution 2254 from December of 2015, which is the basic core document that is trying to resolve this terrible and very dangerous conflict, and we see indications of the danger of it all of the time. I can’t confirm or deny the reports that were in The Washington Post today of strikes against terrorists. I can’t confirm or deny reports of Israeli contacts a few days ago. But we get these things all of the time because this conflict is a very dangerous conflict, and as I’ve said before, you have the five military forces, outside military forces in close proximity.

Okay, so we were hoping – following up from the Istanbul conference – that the Russians, the Iranians, and the Turks would be able to finalize the third list of members to this constitutional committee, and that was a primary goal of the Astana meeting last Thursday. They didn’t succeed. They issued a statement that basically did examine the Idlib de-escalation area, they call it, and stressed the importance of a lasting ceasefire while underlying the necessity to continue the effective fight against terrorism. That is good news because the Idlib ceasefire, as President Trump notably and other senior officials have said, is very, very important to the overall hope for stability in Syria.

But they did not take any significant action on the constitutional committee. Rather, they stated once again that there is no military solution to the Syrian conflict, but all they did was reaffirm their determination to set up joint efforts to launch the constitutional committee in Geneva. But they didn’t even say “by the end of the year”; what they said was “the soonest possible time,” which tends to be waffling.

As a result of that, you may have seen that the UN envoy, Staffan de Mistura, who was present at the conference, issued his own statement. It begins, “Staffan de Mistura appreciates the work done at the Astana meeting by the three guarantors to ensure the Idlib de-escalation arrangements are sustained.”

He then issued for the UN at this point in the process quite a strong statement: “However, Special Envoy de Mistura deeply regrets that at a special meeting in Astana with the three Sochi co-conveners, there was no tangible progress in overcoming the 10-month stalemate on the composition of the constitutional committee. This was the last occasion of an Astana meeting in 2018 and has, sadly for the Syrian people, been a missed opportunity to accelerate the establishment of a credible, balanced, and inclusive Syria-owned, Syria-led, UN-facilitated constitutional committee.”

We then issued a statement by Heather, “No breakthrough” on the Astana meeting, pointing out what had happened, making reference to Staffan, and basically saying that this is not a process we think has come to its end.

Today with the Syria small group, we first of all reviewed implementation of a UN-facilitated, Syrian-led, and Syrian-owned political process that would create a permanent, peaceful, and political end, in line, again, with 2254. There was support, as you can imagine, for UN Envoy de Mistura’s statement regarding the November 28th, 29th Astana meeting which I just read to you, particularly the importance of sustaining the Idlib de-escalation arrangements, the efforts to meet the December 31st deadline to convene the Syrian constitutional committee, and we are looking forward to de Mistura’s December 14th report to the Security Council.

That will be the key point where we see whether we are going to have the political process moving forward under the UN, facilitated perhaps by the Astana guarantors putting pressure on Damascus, or whether we’re going to be in another stalemate and then with a new Syrian UN envoy, Geir Pedersen, coming on board right thereafter. We’ll all have to re-examine where we’re going on this extremely important, extremely dangerous issue.

So I’ll stop there, having brought you up to date on the situation.

STAFF: (Inaudible) AFP.

QUESTION: Thank you for doing this. Do you – we are now December 3rd. Do you really think that it’s possible to convene the committal – constitutional committee before the end of the year? You have already pushed that deadline back other times, so do you think that this time you can do it, or you are going to say by the end of January and then by the end of February?

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: We are staying with, as the Istanbul summit states, the end of the December. I’m sure that if Staffan de Mistura got a green light from the regime or the Astana people that there was a list that he could accept and verify as credible, that on the 14th he could announce a December convening, and I believe it would convene.

STAFF: Nadia, Al Arabiya.

QUESTION: Good to see you, Ambassador. As you just explained and elaborated, there seem to be a political stagnation. What does it take to have a breakthrough, especially that some people say the U.S. is playing a secondary role and Russia and Turkey are leading?

And if – allow me as well, I have a question on Russia. Yesterday, they accused the U.S. of playing a dangerous game, as they said, or playing the Kurdish card, especially now that the SDF are trying in the final push to clear an area from ISIS. Are you playing a dangerous game?

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: That’s about – first of all, we’re not playing a dangerous game. Russia is playing a dangerous game accusing us of playing a dangerous game. We are totally committed to defeating Daesh along the Euphrates. Our local ally in that, as you know, since 2014, has been the SDF, as everybody else knows. They are involved in a very, very tough battle. This is not an organization that has been totally destroyed. We think that we’ll be able to finish the job in the months ahead, but there’s very heavy fighting there and we’re putting a lot of our own effort and the effort of our friends and allies and partners into it.

In terms of – can you give me the first half of your —

QUESTION: What does it take to have a breakthrough in this since we have political stagnation versus —

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: Yeah. Oh, yeah, I know, that – are we playing a secondary role. There’s about six questions there, so I’ll try to pull each of them out.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: We think we’re playing a primary role. I think you should ask the others and get their opinions because we’re always going to think we’re playing a primary role. Ask any of the other participants in this process the role of the United States overall in Syria. I think they’ll say it’s a very, very active role with many aspects.

Now, in terms of a breakthrough, we’ve been in a stalemate since this whole Sochi – Astana/Sochi process began in December of 2017, following on six years of stalemate. What we’ve seen in the last few months is a ministerial at the small-group level at the UN putting pressure on the UN and on the Astana group to come forth. Then we saw the Istanbul summit where, for the first time, Russia said that they would try to get this thing done by the end of the year. Up until that point, they would be saying there’s no artificial deadline, when in their minds any date is an artificial deadline, so we got them to move on that. And there’s at least a possibility that they will move by the 14th with de Mistura.

So I would say while I still think that the chances are not great, I would say they’re better now than they were three months ago or six months ago.

QUESTION: Thank you.

STAFF: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: Ambassador, thank you very much for doing this. One zoomed-in question and then one zoom-out.

Zoom-in: Idlib itself, the fighting, what are you tracking? Are you seeing the collapse of the stalemate itself in terms of the fighting on both sides?

And then zoom-out: Last time you and I had a conversation about the strategy in Syria, one of the three pieces of the strategy was the removal of all Iranian-commanded forces from the entirety of Syria. Is that still part of the strategy and is there any progress on that?

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: That is part of the overall strategy. I would say we have made progress hammering that particular goal to everybody. We think that the people who need to listen are listening. I don’t – again, have nothing to announce. I have no specific thing to point to. But this is in play, and again, as I mentioned at the time, it’s in the context of a political solution to the overall conflict and the withdrawal of all the other forces that have arrived since 2011.

Now in terms of Idlib, we still believe (a) that it is a very good thing that there is this de-escalation zone. We believe it is holding. All of our conversations, not just with the Turks but with the Russians, indicate it is. We had one incident a week ago with alleged use of chemical weapons by terrorists from Idlib, and the Russians then conducted a strike. We cannot, I want to underline, corroborate any chemical weapons attack based on that incident, and we’ll try to have more for you as soon as possible.

STAFF: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: Mr. Ambassador, good to see you again. My question is about Idlib. Contradict to Manbij roadmap, there are some reports indicating that there are a good amount of YPG/PYD militants still in Idlib right now. And also, what’s your –

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: YPG/PYD in Idlib?

QUESTION: Yeah, according to some of the reports from the field. And my question is —

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: Not Manbij? You said Idlib.

QUESTION: I’m sorry, Manbij. I’m sorry. I’m sorry, Manbij. You’re right. I’m sorry.

So my question is: What’s your solution to preventing a possible attack from the group against Turkish troops? And I mean, they constantly are showing solidarity with PKK terror group and also threatening Turkish groups on the field, so —

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: Sure. First of all, some – it’s over 50 – we’ve confirmed over 50 members of those organizations have left Idlib, and we passed that number on to the Turks. We’re also in the process now under what we call the Manbij roadmap that Secretary Pompeo and his counterpart Foreign Minister Cavusoglu agreed in June to vet senior leadership in the Manbij Military Committee, which is the military side, and in the Manbij Council – this is some, oh, 70, 80, 100 people – to vet them jointly by our two countries to ensure that there is nobody there who might be threatening the Turks.

In terms of an attack out of there, again, we have a quite significant force there. We have, under the Manbij Roadmap, joint patrols with the Turks, and – I’ve been out there myself – very good observation of everything that is going on. That region is, as regions go in Turkey – rather, correction – in Syria quite secure, at least north of where the regime is.

QUESTION: Have you personally talked to YPG/PYD leadership about this?

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: I talk to whoever I need to talk to to accomplish my job.
Many go onto other continue reading this cheap viagra without prescription professions that keep them, or training, declaring after their playing days are done. There are various food tadalafil generic cialis remedies, which can help heal erectile dysfunction. It was also clinically established that buy cheap levitra and other pills or tablets for healthier intercourse and a happier sex life. Effect of male impotence on your sex hop over to these guys tadalafil for women drive or make you impotent. 3.
STAFF: Barbara.

QUESTION: Thank you. Ambassador, if, as you seem to think it’s possible or likely on the 14th the Staffan de Mistura doesn’t come through with the breakthrough, then what happens next? Is there a Plan B if the whole Astana/Sochi process doesn’t segue into the UN process and the regime doesn’t agree to this third committee? What happens then?

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: Well, again, the first address to such a question is the UN, because the UN has been charged by the Security Council to carry out this political process under 2254 and specifically to the new successor to de Mistura, Mr. Pedersen. But our suggestion, and I think I would reflect the views of many of the other major UN countries that are concerned and interested in Syria, is that we do not continue with this rather strange Sochi/Astana initiative, for them to take over the job of putting together a constitutional committee and presenting it on a platter to de Mistura. They tried and they failed, or at least up to this point they failed. And if they are still failing by the 14th, the U.S. view, as we indicated in Heather’s comment or Heather’s press release on Thursday, is let’s pull the plug on Astana.

QUESTION: And then what?

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: And then we go back to the UN.

QUESTION: And the UN comes up – and the UN gets the regime to the table how?

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: Well, that’s a good a question because we’ve been trying now for six years. First of all, the regime has shown some flexibility. Again, is this is a stalemate? Yes. Are we quite as stalemated as we were a few months ago? I don’t think so. I think that particularly in Astana the Turkish Government has held its position and not succumbed to pressure by the other two to sign up to a third list that would be pro regime. That’s very important.

You’ve seen on the ground, be it al-Tanf, be it in Idlib, be it in some of the alleged Israeli actions, be it in some of our actions in the northeast, you’ve seen an unwillingness to yield to pressure from the regime or from the regime’s allies. And you’re in a different conflict now, a conflict – not a conflict, but you’ve got a situation where you’ve got a number of outside countries that are present on the ground or in the air over Syria, and that gives you fewer actors to deal with.

At one point John Kerry, when he was trying to do this in 2016, was trying to get a ceasefire among 400 opposition groups. Now the opposition groups are basically in a much different situation, and it’s much easier to get them to stop shooting, as we’ve seen in Idlib and other areas. So that’s the first thing why I’m somewhat more optimistic.

The second thing is it’s very clear that the Damascus regime, and particularly the Russians and the Iranians, want to see what I call the three Rs: refugees essentially pushed back to Syria; reconstruction aid, perhaps up to 400 billion according to the UN, to flow into the country from the West – us, Europe, international organizations; and the regime to be recognized by the world as legitimate. None of those things are happening, and they’re not going to happen until the political process makes progress, as far as I can see. And I don’t see a change in that, and I think that’s dawning on at least the Russians.

STAFF: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: Thank you for your time, Mr. Ambassador. My question is what will be the U.S. policy on the Kurds in Syria.

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: Our policy is to work with the people of the northeast first of all to defeat ISIS. We have to do some basic humanitarian work and local stabilization work in order to have a platform for this defeat of ISIS. We have no political agenda either with the Kurdish groups, with the Arab groups, or with any other groups inside Syria. Our position is (a) the territorial integrity of Syria under its present borders; (b) we will work with all political forces that are willing to recognize and accept the UN political process and the basic criteria of all of these UN initiatives since 2012 on Syria, which is no threat to the neighbors, no threat to the population, no use of chemical weapons, no support for terrorism, no mass slaughter of one’s own civilians, and accountability for war crimes. That’s our position with everybody and anybody.

STAFF: Right here.

QUESTION: Ambassador Jeffrey, last – during your last briefing you stated that the forces under the command of Iran were not as active as previously. Is that still the case? And what do you know about what they’re actually doing on the ground in Syria?

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: Well, right now there is a relative lack of combat in Syria other than the most active is against the ISIS forces around Hajin, around the Euphrates close the Iraqi border, which is an operation that we are leading with the SDF. There have been some very limited regime operations against ISIS or Daesh in the southwest of the country but not very much. So apart from that there hasn’t been much military activity. That has an impact on the activity levels of the Iranians or anybody else, but I would just say that we’re monitoring the Iranian situation closely. We’re not the only ones monitoring the Iranian situation closely.

QUESTION: Does it look like they’ve maybe shrunk in terms –

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: I would say we’re monitoring the Iranian situation closely.

STAFF: Said.

QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you, Ambassador. I wanted to ask you – I mean, we’re a bit confused on the position of the United States as far as Syria is concerned. On the one hand they say we will be there forever, on the other hand that your operation is limited and so on. Could you just give us like a vignette of how and when will the United States forces leave Syria?

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: Well, the United States forces are in Syria for one mission, which is the enduring defeat of ISIS/Daesh. That is a military mission that flows from congressional authorization in 2001 against terror post-9/11. That’s the military mission of our military there.

When we say we’re going to be present not forever in Syria but present until our conditions – enduring defeat of ISIL, as was said earlier, the withdrawal of all Iranian-commanded forces from the entirety of Syria, and an irreversible political process. We’re saying the United States as a whole, that the President as the Commander-in-Chief and as the leader of our foreign policy has various options that involve military involving our forces. Remember we were present not in northern Iraq but over northern Iraq in Operation Northern Watch for 13 years. That can be a UN force. Under 2254 there is language on a UN-managed and operated ceasefire. That can be partner forces. That can be other countries’ forces.

Then there’s the diplomatic initiatives that we do with the Small Group in the UN, then there is the actions of our friends and allies. For example, the Istanbul summit we weren’t there, but we were working with the French, the Germans, and the Turks, and we got a good result from it. That’s an example of the kind of tools we use.

Also economic, both sanctions on this regime every way possible – we’re announcing them all of the time, including particularly our focus is on oil transfers from Iran to Syria and money back. We’re pursing that very aggressively.

And finally, our position, which has an awful lot of support, not to push refugees back, not to recognize the regime, and in particular not to allow reconstruction funds to flow to Syria until we see real progress on these other tracks.

So that’s the summary of all of the tools we have that under the rubric of we will stay on in Syria until we get these goals.

QUESTION: Thank you.

STAFF: Tracy, did you have a question?

QUESTION: Oh yes, you just mentioned the sanctions. I wanted to ask about that. I think it was two weeks ago you all sanctioned – I think it was Russian and Iranian companies that were supplying oil to the Government of Syria. Does that kind – I mean, does that kind of sanction have an impact? Do you have any sense of seeing that that has reduced the shipments of oil to Damascus?

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: Yes.

QUESTION: Okay. Do you want to elaborate?

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: No. (Laughter.)

STAFF: Okay I think we have – last question. Michelle.

QUESTION: With the ultimate goal of removing Iranian influence from Syria —

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: I didn’t say that. I would – I wish I could say that, but that’s not U.S. policy. It’s Iranian-commanded forces.

QUESTION: Okay.

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: Nice try.

QUESTION: But given that’s part of it and finance – and squeezing them financially would be a part of that —

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: Yes.

QUESTION: — what progressive effect have you seen on the continued sanctions regime on Iran in light – the effect of the Iranian involvement in Syria right now? Would you say that there has already been some effect?

AMBASSADOR JEFFREY: All I can say is – that’s the problem if you leave government and you become an outside analyst, commentator, and think tanker. There is things you’ve written. I was ambivalent and probably leaning against pulling the plug on the JCPOA as late as a year ago. I have to say, from everything I have seen in coming back in, it was an absolutely valid decision in terms of putting pressure on Iran where it really hurts, which is in the financial area. It’s still early. As you know, it’s less than a month since we imposed the NDAA oil sanctions on Iran, but we have seen a dramatic drop in both international firm engagement in Iran, in the banking sector’s activities and their ability to use the international financial system, and we’ve seen a huge drop of over a million barrels of oil. I mean, Brian Hook comes down here and does the briefings far better than I. I’m just doing the top level.

And I’m seeing some impacts of this on Syria, which I can’t get into. It’s another way of answering the same question, the other one asked a few minutes ago.

On the Passing of President George H. W. Bush

Devoted husband, loving father, steadfast friend, exemplary patriot: this is how I will always remember President George H. W. Bush. Whether he was serving in the skies over the Pacific during World War II, protecting America at CIA headquarters, or leading our nation in the Oval Office, President Bush was one of America’s most consequential and dedicated public servants. In his private life, he was a devoted family man who exuded kindness and respect to everyone he met. I am privileged to have known him as a friend, and I will always treasure the special bond we shared of having led the world’s finest intelligence service. Though our hearts are heavy today, we take comfort in knowing he is no longer apart from his beloved wife Barbara. My thoughts and prayers, as well as those of my State Department colleagues, are with the entire Bush family.

Illustration: Pixabay

DARIA NOVAK served in the United States State Department during the Reagan Administration, and currently is on the Board of the American Analysis of News and Media Inc., which publishes usagovpolicy.com and the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.  Each Saturday, she presents key updates on U.S. foreign policy from the State Department.

Categories
Quick Analysis

OUTLAW REGIME: A CHRONICLE OF IRAN’S DESTRUCTIVE ACTIVITIES

A new report  from the U.S. State Department outlines Iran’s aggressive activities. The document outlines “… the magnitude of the Islamic Republic’s destructive activities at home and abroad.” Many of the activities highlighted have occurred recently, while others date back to the early days of the revolution. As the analysis makes clear, the one constant is that the Iranian regime will do whatever it takes to maintain its grip on power and spread its revolutionary ideology. The New York Analysis of Policy and Government presents the Executive Summary.

The Revolutionary Guard Corps

The regime’s primary tool to execute its aggressive policies since 1979 has been the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). The IRGC is the most powerful conglomerate in Iran, spreading and consolidating its control over much of Iranian life. Its navy regularly threatens freedom of navigation in the Persian Gulf while its Aerospace Force directs the country’s ballistic missile program in defiance of Security Council resolutions. Its Ground Forces are deployed abroad to bolster the Assad regime and its Basij paramilitary force is mobilized at home to surveil and harass ordinary Iranians. Finally, its extra-territorial IRGC Qods Force (IRGC-QF) leads the Islamic Republic’s destabilizing support for proxies and terrorist groups.

State Sponsored Terrorism

The Islamic Republic’s support for terrorism [has been primarily driven by the IRGC.] Since 1979, Iran has made it a policy of state to actively direct, facilitate, and carry out terrorist activity globally. Unlike almost any other country, the Islamic Republic has supported terrorism within its own military and intelligence apparatuses: the IRGC-QF and the Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS). Today, the IRGC-QF is active across the Middle East and has plotted or carried out terrorist attacks in five out of seven continents. Where it is unable or unwilling to act directly, the Iranian regime has mastered the use of terrorist proxy groups like Lebanese Hizballah, Palestine Islamic Jihad, the Bahraini AlAshtar Brigades and the Iraqi Kata’ib Hizballah to conduct terrorist attacks.

Missile Development

Iran’s development of ballistic missiles…pose a critical threat to regional security. Iran has the largest ballistic missile force in the Middle East and it is continuing to explore multiple pathways to expand its longer-range missile capabilities. Recognizing this threat, the UN Security Council had previously worked to impose tough limitations on Iran’s proliferation activities. However, this progress was rolled back following the adoption of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015, which failed to address Iran’s ballistic missile program. With a weaker nonproliferation regime to constrain its activity, Iran has continued to defy international scrutiny and its pace of missile launches and tests has not diminished following the implementation of the JCPOA.

Illegal Financial Acitivities

The Islamic Republic’s [has engaged in] illicit financing activities, which undermine the integrity and security of the global financial system. The Iranian regime relies on opaque and fraudulent financing activities to fund its proxies and support its proliferation of ballistic missiles and other weapons. In the last year, the IRGC-QF has been exposed for using front companies to move funds, procure restricted materials and technologies, exploit currency exchange networks in neighboring countries, and produce counterfeit currency.

Maritime Aggression

Capabilities in bed will not count in case your man’s penis just viagra low price isn’t big enough to be able to stimulate the growth of hair that had thinned from androgenic alopecia. Polyester webbing slings with single and double ply are manufactured by using this herb so that the person can experience a very smooth viagra vs cialis and happy love making session. Aside from skin cancer, prostate cancer is the most convenient form cipla tadalafil of Kamagra ED treatment. This medicinal drug has been approved by the FDA to treat the condition. online prescription for viagra ran [also poses a] threat to maritime security in the Persian Gulf and Red Sea. The Islamic Republic has repeatedly threatened to interfere with freedom of navigation and international shipping in these areas. In the Persian Gulf, the IRGC’s naval forces have engaged in numerous unsafe and unprofessional incidents with naval vessels and have a history of illegally detaining U.S. and U.K. sailors. In the Red Sea, Iran-backed Houthi militants have attacked coalition warships and Saudi commercial vessels. Iran has also engaged in the illicit shipping of arms to other regions. In 2010, for example, Nigerian officials uncovered an arms cache on board a commercial vessel from Iran.

Cyber Attacks

The Islamic Republic’s [has engaged in] malign behavior in cyberspace. Iran has increasingly conducted a series of cyberattacks involving surveillance and sabotage affecting critical infrastructure, financial and commercial entities, and educational institutions. It has also deployed its cyber capabilities to identify and silence critics domestically and spread its disinformation campaigns abroad.

Human Rights VIolations

The Islamic Republic’s [is guilty of] repeated and systemic abuse of human rights in violation of international laws and norms. The Islamic Republic persecutes civil society activists and marginalizes ethnic and religious minorities. The regime also denies its citizens due process, regularly falling short of its own legal standards. Its prisons are notorious for mistreatment and torture, and its use of capital punishment is excessive and extends to minors. Beyond its borders, the Islamic Republic and its proxies have committed numerous human rights abuses, including targeting innocent civilians in Syria and arbitrarily detaining Sunnis in Iraq.

Environmental Degradation

[There is an] enduring and increasingly irreversible tragedy of environmental degradation at the hands of the Islamic Republic’s self-serving leaders. Following decades of misguided agricultural policies and IRGC-driven dam projects, Iran is inching ever closer to an environmental crisis. The regime’s failure to respond to worsening environmental conditions has led to a significant depletion of Iran’s water resources and forced the migration of millions of Iranians. Instead of addressing these existential issues, the Islamic Republic has responded with force against those calling for reform.

Photo: Iranian Air Defense missile system (Iranian Military)