World Threats

Yesterday was a huge night in the Republican presidential race. Rick Perry dropped out and endorsed Newt Gingrich, whose ex-wife has given two scathing interviews. The result of the Iowa caucus changed, recognizing Rick Santorum as the winner. Gingrich is surging in the South Carolina polls and the final debate before Saturday’s primary was dynamic.

The importance of last night’s debate can be seen by looking at the polls. Gingrich’s numbers in South Carolina have climbed and it’s very hard to tell if he or Mitt Romney has the edge. The RealClearPolitics poll average has Romney with a slight lead, 32 to 31 points, but has Romney trending down and Gingrich trending up. Nate Silver’s latest poll analysis has Gingrich with a slight lead, 35 to 33 points. Silver believes Gingrich has a 62% chance of winning the primary. South Carolina has chosen the eventual Republican nominee every time since 1980.

Earlier this week, Romney got a boost when Jon Huntsman dropped out and endorsed him. Now, Gingrich has gotten a boost when Rick Perry dropped out and endorsed him. These two former candidates only had single-digit support in South Carolina but every point counts now. Interestingly, four recent polls with results favorable to Romney (IPSOS, Marist, Politico & CNN) show that even if all of Perry’s supporters go to Gingrich, Romney still wins. On the other hand, the recent polls that show Gingrich ahead (PPP, ARG, Rasmussen & Insider Advantage) indicate that, if Perry’s supporters back Gingrich, the former House speaker has a solid lead. At this time, the outcome of the primary is very uncertain and that’s why this debate was so fiery.

Click here to read the rest of my FPM article.

In its first major victory, the Free Syria Army has kicked the Assad regime’s forces out of Zabadani, a town 19 miles from Damascus near the Lebanese border. For a rebel army consisting of mostly low-level defectors that is routinely dismissed as a rag-tag force, this is huge and will cause a psychological shift in the conflict. The Assad regime will probably take the town back, but the morale boost from this cannot be overstated.

The opposition won Zabadani after the regime pounded the city for five days with artillery fire and military offensives. A ceasefire has been reached, agreed to through local power-brokers (regime representatives didn’t directly meet with the FSA), and the shelling has suddenly stopped. The destructive siege has been lifted. The regime has a very small presence remaining, which the Free Syria Army agreed to allow. Syrian activist Ammar Abdulhamid has posted videos showing people openly demonstrating and celebrating fireworks in the town. There is also video of an abandoned checkpoint. The regime may very well break the ceasefire, but this moment could prove to be a turning point.

Zabadani is a mostly Sunni town with a Christian minority. Someone sent me a thoughtful commentary. If the Christians are protected, this will help undercut Christian support for Assad, which is based solely on self-preservation. The Syrian Christians see what is happening in Iraq and Egypt and don’t want it happening to them.

It is past time for the U.S. to directly engage the Free Syria Army. If we do not, you will see the Libyan Islamist militia leaders, Qatar, Turkey and other Islamists build their influence in our absence. Abdulhamid recommends that the West provide communications equipment, rocket-propelled grenades to hit the regime’s tanks with, and night-vision goggles. Others have suggested setting up a free wireless Internet zone near the Turkish border. These are all very good and very inexpensive ideas.

The Free Syria Army has called for direct foreign military intervention and many protesters are doing the same. They want airstrikes on the regime’s power centers and a no-fly zone. Qatar now supports sending Arab peacekeepers into Syria. Abdulhamid also suggests a naval blockade to intercept arms deliveries to the regime, which is another good idea. It is now known that Syria has been using Iran to secretly sell its oil. Hopefully, the European Union will officially hit Iran with an oil embargo on January 23 and help solve that problem.

The death toll is now around 7,000. It’s time to stop standing by the sidelines as a terrorism-supporting enemy of the U.S. slaughters his people.

One of the mistakes that the West makes is that it doesn’t listen to what the Islamists are saying. If only we listened, we could hear their strategy. On November 20, Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi, the top Muslim Brotherhood theologian and arguably the most influential Sunni cleric in the world, called on Muslims to embrace “gradualism.”

The doctrine of gradualism is successful because we fail to appreciate the ability of the Islamists to be skillful political strategists. Gradualism is an intelligent form of jihad based on pragmatism, patience, long-term planning and self-evaluation. The Islamists evaluate their performance and recalibrate their strategy accordingly. The West misinterprets this as being “moderate,” when in reality, not all Islamists are as reckless as Al-Qaeda.

“Gradualism in applying the Sharia is a wise requirement to follow,” Qaradawi declared, stating that Mohammed followed it.

The Islamists, especially the Muslim Brotherhood, have always worked in stages. In December, the Brotherhood’s Supreme Guide, Mohamed Badi, outlined six phases: Sharia over the individual; Sharia over the family; Sharia over the society; Sharia over the government; the resurrection of the Caliphate and finally, “mastership of the world.” The Muslim Brotherhood is in the process of completing the fourth phase in Egypt.

Click here to read the rest of my FPM article.

The Republican presidential candidates debated in South Carolina last night.Mitt Romney tried to secure his lead while the other contenders sought to chip away at it. Every Republican nominee since 1980 has won the South Carolina primary, making it widely viewed as the last chance to stop Romney’s momentum.

The debate audience seemed to favor Romney, though Newt Gingrich won the loudest applauses by far. A remarkable number of attendees supportedRon Paul, admiring his consistency, integrity and willingness to dramatically slash the budget and size of government. A few of his supporters frankly admitted that his national security views are flawed, but argued that the crisis at home is a greater threat than anything abroad. It is clear that, for better or for worse, libertarianism has become a significant force in the Republican Party.

The biggest applause of the night came when Juan Williams forcefully challenged Gingrich, accusing him of “belittling” people and asking him if he could see why some of his statements could be offensive to African-Americans. He pushed back, defending his position that schools should hire students to do work, claiming that one New York City janitor would cost the same as 30 or so students. He explained that it would make kids less likely to drop out, would teach work ethic and “money is a good thing if you are poor.” He vowed to continue to state “facts that are uncomfortable” and put forth similar ideas. The audience roared.

Click here to read the rest of my FPM article.

Last year, it seemed like an Islamist super-bloc was forming in the Middle East. Secular regimes fell and others faced uprisings. Turkey grew closer to Iran and Syria. The Iranian regime produced an End Times documentary depicting the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood as the fulfillment of prophecy. Now, pro-Western governments remain unstable but the Islamists are turning their daggers on each other.

The division in the Islamist ranks is most clearly seen in Syria. The Iranian regime has deployed the Revolutionary Guards to help the Bashar Assadregime crush the uprising. Hezbollah and the Shiite-led Iraqi government are sticking by Assad’s side. On the other side are genuine secular democratic forces but also the Muslim Brotherhood, Libya, Qatar and Turkey. Turkey is demanding that Assad resign and is hosting the Free Syria Army, the rebel forces who are violently trying to overthrow him. The Emir of Qatar has justendorsed sending Arab military forces to Syria to stop the regime’s crackdown.

Click here to read the rest of my FPM article.

An Iranian nuclear scientist was killed yesterday in an attack similar to those carried out on other scientists. Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan is the fifth scientist to mysteriously die. The killing is the latest in a long list of apparent covert operations in recent months to stall Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

Iran describes Roshan as the “deputy in charge of commerce” at its Natanz enrichment facility and immediately blamed “the Zionist regime” for his death. Two individuals attached and detonated a magnetic bomb to his car in Tehran outside of Allameh Tabatai University, killing him and his bodyguard. Roshan was a lecturer at the university.

At Natanz, Roshan was in charge of procuring equipment. The fact that he had a bodyguard shows he had an important role. His death comes just one day after the Israeli military’s chief of staff said that 2012 is a “critical year” for Iran and referred to “events that happen unnaturally.” Indeed, the past few months has seen a huge rise in “accidents” and other “unnatural” events affecting Iran’s nuclear program and the regime’s pillars of strength.

On December 22, the Iranian regime claimed that its oil depot in Abadan was hit with a rocket. It is located in the Arab-populated Khuzestan Province, so it may have been launched by locals that often clash with the regime. The attack came just two weeks after Iran announced that it would spend $800 million to increase its gasoline output by 12,500 barrels per day by February.

Click here to read the rest of my FPM article.

Iranian President Ahmadinejad visited his dear friend, Hugo Chavez, this week as his regime undertook another series of provocations. The Islamist and radical Marxist embraced, joined together by their ideologies’ common hostility to America. As Iran announces that it is enriching uranium at an underground facility designed for nuclear weapons production, it knows that Islamists aren’t its only allies.

Iran has been acting exceptionally aggressive lately, probably with the objective of causing oil prices to spike to counter the impact of international sanctions. President Obama approved sanctions on Iran’s Central Bank, resulting in a 20% drop in the value of the rial against the dollar. It appears that the European Union, which buys 17% of Iran’s oil exports, will agree to an oil embargo on January 23 when its foreign ministers gather in Brussels. Japan is also preparing for an embargo. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, enemies of Iran, are being asked to help by increasing their exports.

Click here to read the rest of my FPM article.

A blast killed a prominent Iranian nuclear scientist in Tehran today. The attack bears many similarities to other similar fates faced by Iranians working on the clandestine nuclear program. Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan was killed when two people on a motorcycle placed a magnetic bomb to his vehicle. There has been at least one similar attack in the past, which the Islamic Republic blamed on the United States and Israel.

Roshan was a chemistry expert who was involved in building polymeric layers for gas separation, which is the use of various membranes to isolate gases. He was also deputy director of Natanz uranium enrichment plant, in central Iran, for commercial affairs. According to conservative news website mashreghnews.ir, Roshan was in charge of purchasing and supplying equipment for the facility.

Natanz is the centerpiece of Iran’s efforts to make its own nuclear fuel. But Iran said earlier this week it was expanding some operations to a bunker-like site south of Tehran protected under 300 feet of rock. The existence of the Fordo facility has been known for more than two years, but some Western officials fear the opening of the labs could be another step toward developing nuclear arms.

This comes as tensions are visibly rising. Iran is also being squeezed by new oil sanctions, which could spark conflict.

Nothing would more shift the world’s strategic balance in our favor than energy security. From Russia to Venezuela, Iran to Saudi Arabia, our dependency on foreign oil sustains our adversaries while sending money overseas that could be spent here at home. The last eight presidents have made empty promises to achieve energy security so many people have given up hope that it’ll ever happen, but it may be closer than you think.

I was inspired to write about this after I saw a hopeful video by political analyst Dick Morris. He explained that the U.S. and Canada are producing more oil and contrary to common opinion, our dependency is decreasing, not increasing. It is believed that the expected drilling of up to 3,000 oil wells in Texas by 2013 will increase production by one-fourth by the end of the decade, equal to Venezuela or Kuwait. Five years ago, North Dakota’s Bakken oil field produced nothing. Now it produces 400,000 barrels per day.

In the 1990s, we imported two-thirds of our oil. We are down to about half and in the coming years, it will only be one-fourth. Of the oil we currently import, about half comes from our adversaries. By 2015-2016, Morris says, domestic production will be able to replace the 3-4 million barrels of oil per day we import from these enemies.

This optimistic picture gets even better because of two countries: Israel and Iraq.

Click here to read the rest of my FSM column.

The Republican presidential candidates debated on Saturday night and Sunday morning in a last bid to influence the outcome of Tuesday’s primary in New Hampshire. Romney emerged unscathed from the first event, but suffered a double-teaming from Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum in the second as the two sought to chip at his double-digit lead in the state.

Suffolk University has Romney with 35% of the vote in New Hampshire, followed by Ron Paul (20%), Jon Huntsman (11%), Newt Gingrich (9%), Rick Santorum (8%) and Rick Perry with less than one percent. American Research Group likewise finds Romney with a huge lead at 40%, but differs on the rest. ARG has Huntsman in second (17%) followed by Paul (16%), Santorum (12%), Gingrich (8%) and Perry (1%). Romney is expected to win comfortably, but it is hard to predict how everyone else will perform. That made these two debates especially important for those vying to be the alternative to Romney.

Rick Santorum is now a top-tier candidate and performed like one, speaking powerfully and with an impressive amount of detail and facts. Arguably his best moment was when a moderator on Sunday asked him how he’d react if he had a son who told him that he was gay. Santorum replied, “I’d love him just as much as the second before he told me.”

Click here to read the rest of my FPM article.

On Thursday, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland reacted to a statement by the Deputy Leader of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood that it would “not recognize Israel under any circumstances” with a mind-bogglingly naïve reassurance that we shouldn’t worry:

“We’ve seen this press report. I would say that it is one member of the Muslim Brotherhood. We have had other assurances from the party with regard to their commitment not only to universal human rights, but to the international obligations that the Government of Egypt has undertaken.”

Riiight. So, according to the State Department, we should believe the private assurances from the Muslim Brotherhood that they’ll respect the peace treaty with Israel instead of the public statements of its top leaders?

The Muslim Brotherhood is already setting the stage to end the treaty. The same leader that said the Brotherhood wouldn’t recognize Israel said that it would honor current treaties during the “interim” period. After that, the peace treaty with Israel will be submitted to a referendum.

The writing is on the wall. If the ruling Egyptian military council actually lets the Islamists take over (a big if), the Muslim Brotherhood will tell the U.S., “Don’t blame us. We honored the commitment, just like we told you we would. The people chose to cancel it.”

Am I the only one that sees this as obvious?

In yet another blockbuster story by my friend Aaron Klein over at WorldNetDaily, he reveals that “one of the most senior Hamas officials” told him (on the condition of anonymity) that he privately welcomes an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear sites to stop the Shiites from dominating the region.

Klein also reports that the ruling Egyptian military council has asked Hamas to not retaliate against Israel if Iran is attacked.  Sources within Hamas told him that the leaders are indeed considering taking such a stance, but it has not come to a conclusion. In my opinion, Hamas would have to do something to strike at Israel or it would lose all credibility. The Palestinian Islamic Jihad group, Klein says, remains firmly in Iran’s pocket.

The best way to describe Saturday night’s debate is a disappointment. There was no moment with any potential to change the poll standings. Amazingly, the moderators never asked Gingrich about calling Romney a “liar” or his other harsh statements this week that I reviewed in my most recent PJ Media column.

In fact, the most memorable exchange was between George Stephanopoulos and Mitt Romney, when Stephanopoulos asked an absurd hypothetical question about whether a state has the right to ban contraception. And Stephanopoulos just wouldn’t let it go. It was simply bizarre and a complete waste of time.

Here are my thoughts on each candidate’s performance:

Mitt Romney: The clear winner. His supporters were never given a compelling reason to jump ship and he suffered no significant attacks. Not bad for a guy who Politico said was facing a “weekend from hell.”

Click here to read the rest of my PJ Tatler article.

I recently read an open letter to Shiekh Yousef al-Qaradawi, the theological leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, and it included various quotes about how he views “democracy” and “freedom.” It is very important to dissect the semantics here, because what the Muslim Brotherhood and fellow Islamists refer to as “democracy” and “freedom” and “human rights” is not equivalent to how we use those words in the West. Yet, we seem to fall for it every time those feel-good words are used.

In the Islamist ideology, “democracy” means Sharia-based governance, perhaps with some level of representation by the people through elections. True “freedom” can only be achieved through Sharia guidance. The secularist, non-Islamist version of “human rights” is viewed by the Islamists as a violation of “human rights” because it deprives people of the justice and peace brought only about by Sharia-based governance.

If you think I’m making this up, look at Qaradawi’s quotes in the open letter. I’ve copied some of the most insightful ones below.  Notice how Qaradawi makes a distinction between Islamist “democracy” and the sinful secularist “democracy” of the West.

“Democracy itself also can make whatever it wants as lawful, or prohibit anything it does not like. In comparison, the Shari’ah as a political system has limits. If we are to adopt democracy, we should adopt its best features.”

“What I am for is a genuine type of democracy, for a society driven by the laws of Shari’ah that is compatible with the values of freedom, human rights, justice and equity.”

“As a Muslim society we should adopt it in an Islamic context of a society that seeks to live with its Shari’ah laws. Our society should abide by what has been made lawful by Allah and also what has been made unlawful by Him.”

“Our democracy is different. It is well connected to the laws of Shari’ah. Yes, we adopt some of the principles of democracy, but it is incumbent upon us also to uphold our principles. We have pillars of our Shari’ah that we have to abide by. We want the people to be consulted and participate actively in politics as well as in the process of decision-making.”

The Islamists don’t hide what they believe. We just don’t listen to them when they say it.

The Republican presidential candidates will have back-to-back debates this weekend on Saturday at 9 PM and Sunday at 9 AM, amounting to what Politico is calling “Mitt Romney’s weekend from hell.” Santorum will have the spotlight as he never has before, but expect Newt Gingrich to steal the show by doing everything he can to take Mitt Romney apart.

The big moment everyone is waiting for is when a moderator asks about how Gingrich flatly called Romney a “liar” over the anti-Gingrich ad campaign in Iowa by a pro-Romney Super PAC. Gingrich followed that with: “Somebody who will lie to you to get to be president will lie to you when they are president.” He’s repeatedly called him “timid” and a “Massachusetts moderate” that Obama will “laugh at” in a general election.

“Obama’s going to say, ‘I developed Obamacare based on Romneycare. I even brought your staff into the White House in order to develop it,’” Gingrich said in making the case against Romney’s electability. He accuses him of raising taxes on the blind, funding abortions, and allowing gay marriages. Gingrich mocks him for only getting 25% of the vote in Iowa and says Romney is “out of the mainstream of the Republican Party.” If you doubt that Gingrich will get this personal on stage, consider the fact that he refuses to congratulate Romney on his victory in Iowa.

Click here to read the rest of my PJM article.