Majorityrights News > Category: War on Terror

Iran Front Page, “Iran Confirms Death of ISIS Leader al-Baghdadi” 29 June 2017:

An Iranian official has confirmed that the ISIS terrorist group’s leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is ‘definitely’ dead.

Representative of Iran’s Leader in IRGC Quds Force, Ali Shirazi, said on Thursday ‘the death of this terrorist [al-Baghdadi] is certain’.

Last Thursday, Russia’s deputy foreign minister had declared that it is highly likely al-Baghdadi, the ISIS leader, was killed in a Russian airstrike near Raqqa, Syria, on May 28.

Oleg Syromolotov told Sputnik* the “information is now verified through various channels.”

The remarks are similar to those made June 16 by the Russian Defence Ministry, which said Baghdadi was among more than 300 ISIS militants, including mid-level field commanders, who were killed as a result of Russian airstrikes near Raqqa, the city that serves as the terrorist group’s de-facto capital.

* Sputnik is not in much of a place to confirm anything but Active Measures propaganda. Nevertheless, the story is apparently corroborated by other sources, therefore we’ll presume it to be true.

Trump the great deal -maker not.

It means that Trump has helped to make matters much worse by encouraging Saudi Arabia’s King Salman to elevate his 31-year-old son Mohammed bin Salman to first in line to the throne - in a “dramatic reordering of the kingdom’s line of succession that will have far-reaching consequences for the key US ally and the Middle East as a whole.”...

CNN, “What Saudi Arabia’s royal reshuffle means for the world”, 21 June 2017:

What does it mean for the US?

The key US priorities in the Middle East are stability and predictability, and the appointment of the relatively inexperienced Mohammed bin Salman is undoubtedly a shift away from that.

As defense minister, the prince has taken a hard line with Qatar, Iran and Yemen—and the US should expect to find itself increasingly caught up in the ebb and flow of the region’s ever-increasing political tensions.

The current diplomatic crisis between the Saudis and Qatar—Riyadh is trying to isolate Doha over claims that the latter supports terrorism—is a study in diplomatic tightrope-walking for the US.

Washington is publicly backing the Saudis over the spat—which has been led on the Saudi side by the new crown prince—while at the same time maintaining its large military base in Qatar.

Now, with a more gung-ho crown prince set to take charge, it is fair to assume that the Saudis will double down on its hardline positions on Qatar, Iran and the Yemen conflict.

What does it mean for Qatar?

In the short term, it’s hard to tell. The message to Qatar is clear: Expect more of the same. Mohammed bin Salman’s appointment means that the hard line taken by the Saudis is here to stay—and that no older, wiser voices are going to swoop in and moderate the stance any time soon.

What does it mean for Iran?

The move will further destabilize an already dangerously unstable situation.

Earlier in June, the Iranians pointed the finger at Saudi for a terror attack in their capital, Tehran. They then used this as a reason to fire missiles into Syria—a shot across the proverbial Saudi bow.

Tension between the two has been slowly building recently, and Mohammed bin Salman has taken a hard line against Iran. “We are a primary target for the Iranian regime,” he said in one recent interview. “We won’t wait for the battle to be in Saudi Arabia. Instead, we’ll work so that the battle is for them in Iran.”

Again, without more experienced voices around him, the new crown prince will feel emboldened to pursue his vision of a larger Sunni alliance, in which Saudi Arabia is the unchallenged leading power in the Middle East. This could lead to a dangerous miscalculation.

What does it mean for the Yemen conflict?

This is a conflict that Mohammed bin Salman has played a large part in—assisting the Yemeni forces in fighting off Iranian-backed Houthi rebels. In some respects, it is his war and he has to see it through.

But this is more than about saving face; Saudi stability is linked to Yemeni stability and, for that reason, the kingdom needs to continue supporting Yemen.

The brutal reality is that the conflict in Yemen is an Iran-Saudi proxy war, and the new crown prince one of its architects. It is not going to be solved through diplomacy any time soon.

       

Will the new crown prince loosen up Saudi’s conservative culture?

Forget about the monarchy lifting the ban on women driving any time soon. That will happen on the Saudis’ time frame—regardless of international pressure to change the law—and whatever they say, it is not a priority. One day it will arrive, but it’s not coming fast.

Theresa May confirms white man attacked Muslims leaving mosque after Ramadan prayers

Security at mosques across the UK will be reviewed in the wake of the Finsbury Park terror attack, the Prime Minister has said. More follows…

Independent, 19 June, 2017 - Here is Theresa May’s statement in full:

“This morning, our country woke to news of another terrorist attack on the streets of our capital city: the second this month and every bit as sickening as those which have come before.

“It was an attack that once again targeted the ordinary and the innocent going about their daily lives – this time British Muslims as they left a Mosque having broken their fast and prayed together at this sacred time of year.

“Today we come together - as we have done before – to condemn this act and to state once again that hatred and evil of this kind will never succeed.

“The Government’s Emergency Committee, COBRA, has just met and I can set out what we know about what happened, and the steps that we are taking to respond.

“Just after twenty-past midnight, the Metropolitan Police received reports that a van had been driven into a crowd of people on Seven Sisters Road in Finsbury Park.

“Officers were in the immediate vicinity as the attack unfolded and responded within one minute.

“Police declared it a terrorist incident within eight minutes.

“One man was pronounced dead at the scene; eight injured were taken to three separate hospitals; while two were treated at the scene for more minor injuries.

“The driver of the van - a white man aged 48 - was bravely detained by members of the public at the scene and then arrested by police.

“The early assessment by the police is that the attacker acted alone.

“Our thoughts and prayers this morning are with the family and friends of the man who died and those who were injured.

“On behalf of the people of London – and the whole country – I want to thank the police and the emergency services once again for responding as they always do with great professionalism and courage.

“Extra police resources have already been deployed to reassure communities, and the police will continue to assess the security needs of Mosques and provide any additional resources needed, especially during this final week before Eid Al-Fitr, a particularly important time for the whole Muslim community.

“This was an attack on Muslims near their place of worship. And like all terrorism, in whatever form, it shares the same fundamental goal.

“It seeks to drive us apart; and to break the precious bonds of solidarity and citizenship that we share in this country.

“We will not let this happen.

“When I stood here for the first time as Prime Minister last Summer I spoke about our precious belief in the Union – not just the bond between the four nations of the United Kingdom – but the bond between all our citizens, every one of us, whoever we are and wherever we are from.

“At the heart of that bond is a belief in the fundamental freedoms and liberties that we all cherish; the freedom of speech; the freedom to live how we choose and yes, the freedom to practice religion in peace.

“This morning we have seen a sickening attempt to destroy those freedoms; and to break those bonds of citizenship that define our United Kingdom.

“It is a reminder that terrorism, extremism and hatred take many forms; and our determination to tackle them must be the same whoever is responsible. 

“As I said here two weeks ago, there has been far too much tolerance of extremism in our country over many years – and that means extremism of any kind, including Islamophobia.

“That is why this Government will act to stamp out extremist and hateful ideology – both across society and on the internet, so it is denied a safe space to grow.

“It is why we will be reviewing our Counter-Terrorism strategy and ensuring that police and security services have the powers they need.

“And it is why we will establish a new Commission for Countering Extremism as a statutory body to help fight hatred and extremism in the same way as we have fought racism – because this extremism is every bit as insidious and destructive to our values and our way of life and we will stop at nothing to defeat it.

“Today’s attack falls at a difficult time in the life of this city, following on from the attack on London Bridge two weeks ago – and of course the unimaginable tragedy of Grenfell Tower last week, on which I will chair another meeting of Ministers and officials later today.

“But what we have seen throughout – whether in the heroism of the ordinary citizens who fought off the attackers at London Bridge; the unbreakable resolve of the residents in Kensington; or this morning the spirit of the community that apprehended this attacker – is that this is an extraordinary city of extraordinary people.

“It is home to a multitude of communities that together make London one of the greatest cities on earth.

“Diverse, welcoming, vibrant, compassionate, confident and determined never to give in to hate.

“These are the values that define this city.

“These are the values that define this country.

“These are the values that this government will uphold.

“These are the values that will prevail.”

A relatively new site called The Old Continent: Your Eye on Europe might be of some limited utility to ethnonationalism, but requires significant caveat.

Its four listed “authors”, Timon Dias, Vincent van den Born, Frank Kasteel and Benjamin de Wolf all seem to be coming from some sort of military / policing background - and thus given to a platform that aspires to an objective presentation of criminality and its sources antagonistic to, where not outrightly designated the enemy of European civic union.

The site is performing a service in reporting on migrant rape crimes, a type of crime very very important to us and under-reported by the media to date; however, their purported objectivity fails to conceal a pandering to a prejudicial social classification that nevertheless remains salient despite the objectivist prejudice against discriminatory social classification - i.e. the classification female remains, irrespective of the prejudice against social classifications - in fact, emerges to impose itself as a category undeniably. And through the disingenuous objectivist premise, males, any males who are most “objectively” manly, are suitable to look after the interests of European union females:

Case in point - of the posts that Timon Dias has recently put up at the time of this writing, two of them are lauding the virtue and strength of black boxing champions, here and here, one post is some voodoo about a cloud that formed in the sky “miraculously” in the shape of Great Britain - “forming a sign from God for Brexit,” and finally he put up a story about a police car having been burned in Amsterdam by migrants. So, we may guess that Dias is black, part black, perhaps otherwise colored, but at least “philo-black”, i.e., not having European people’s subjective and relative interests as empirically grounded systemic wholes, close to heart.

The other writers seem to be more coherently focused on reporting migrant crime in Europe, particularly as it comes by way of Islam. In pursuing these crime stories as an objective matter, emphasizing previously under-reported incidents of migrant rape, they can supply facts that counter the heretofore mainstream media’s liberal prejudices against ethno-nationalism. Though “Old Continent” is the same as the legacy media in that it purports to be objective, it differs in its undeclared bias in this way of having a prejudicial eye on immigrant crime and particularly Islamic sourcing of that criminal behavior. Whereas the heretofore mainstream media has had a prejudicial eye against conservative reaction to liberal causes, such as problems perpetrated through immigration and Muslim people. This liberal prejudice and de-emphasis on the crimes aided and abetted by liberalism has left us acutely susceptible.

Thus, the site can be helpful to us for this “objective” angle in a few different ways. Firstly by directly providing us with factual events to help supply and support our own arguments and secondly their “objectivity” can help us indirectly to put together our arguments for ethnonationalism as a means of systemic accountability and protection - indirectly, for example, through their “objective” reporting on sources of “anti-Semitism” they can inadvertently call attention to Jewish culpability as Muslim “anti-Semitism” is “objectively” aired. That helps us, of course, because Jewish prejudice and culpability has been something that you cannot talk about in mainstream media as it has been under their sway, but the facts get out through a back door of “objectivity”, despite that, albeit indirectly.

Nevertheless, while the site is helpful to us in providing factual episodes to supply argument against liberal and Jewish media bias, it remains incumbent upon the wise, upon the ethnonationalist, to put together an assessment of patterns from these factual reports, to overcome the pseudo-objectivity that Jews, right-wingers and liberals have enforced upon us, and to warrant necessary prejudicial, discriminatory social classification, to marshal these patterns in our relative interests by contrast to show the way to our salvation - warrant that ethno-national activists can take up in the cause of its implementation.

Thus, where I have not published information from enemy sources or sites with platforms markedly different form ours for the fact that they didactically reveal their prejudices, then I have done so because they are presenting information that is basically factual enough such that much spin cannot be applied to mislead our audience. This would be the case, for example, when I publish material, e.g., from NPR, Haaretz, the Jerusalem Post   ..and where I reluctantly publish material from Russian Active Measures organs, RT and Sputnik.

Thus, I issue the caveat about this site, The Old Continent: Your Eye on Europe, that I cannot vouch that they are operating fundamentally in ethnonational interests, they seem rather to be operating as civic European unionists at best. At worst, and this is likely, they are of the counter-Jihadist mold. In fact, not only are they not likely to ask the “J.Q.”, their kosherness is evident in their focus on “extreme” Islam, their pro-Geert Wilders articles, e.g., here and here (as opposed to our stance on Wilders); the site’s apparent institutional sympathy, technical and informational backing, along with its verbal i.q. are still more kosher indication.

With that caveat, and given that Majority Rights will run information coming through sites with platforms a bit off, or even from opposing platforms, we might avail ourselves of facts that help our cause, where they supply them. Let’s try this story for starters…

...with one more preliminary remark: note the glib and inappropriate caption to the inappropriate image placed with the article - does that reflect subjective and heartfelt relative concern?

A picture of a blatantly unrelated Swedish police car. But man, aren’t they sweet

The Old Continent, Swedish migrant gang-rape: Court can’t establish which suspect did what. So they all walk free, avoiding deportation”, 15 June 2017:

On October 17, 2015, a woman in the Swedish town of Ludvika was raped outside of a restaurant in the center of town. The two men suspected of the crime were arrested on the 22nd of January 2016, followed a month later by a third man, suspected of aiding and abetting. All three of them were accused in court of rape. One of them confessed he was at the scene with the woman, but claimed that the other two were the ones to rape her.

They, in turn, said they were nowhere near the incident and didn’t even know anything had happened.

The Falu District Court, however, found the woman’s story to be very credible. Besides that, cigaret butts had been found on the site, which, according to the police, indicated hat the men had been present. The court, therefore, concluded that one of the men raped the woman, the other held her down and the third stood watch, or at the very least did nothing to prevent the crime. Consequently, all three of them would be sentenced for conspiring to jointly rape the woman. They received four years in prison, after which they were to be deported. They would also have to pay damages of 166.860 SEK (around €17.000) to the woman.

Prosecutor Sanna Gens chose to appeal the decision, seeking higher sentences. This backfired, when on appeal the defendants were acquitted entirely.

Although Court of Appeal agreed that the woman was forced into “sexual acts comparable to intercourse” and that the three men were on the scene with the woman, it did not follow District Court in concluding that this made them guilty of rape.

The case against the men was based heavily on the testimony of the victim. The Court of Appeal found that some elements of her story “appeared to be unclear and to some extent inconsistent with the other investigation.”

Because it is unclear exactly which suspect did what, reasoned the Court of Appeal, none of the men ought to have been convicted and all three of them “should therefore have been acquitted of all charges” as the Court deliberated. So out went the four-year prison sentences and the deportation order.

One of the men, a 25-year-old living in Ludvika, even received 140.000 SEK (around €14.000) compensation for time spent in prison, while another claimed compensation for his ‘suffering’ at the hands of the Attorney General, as well as loss of earnings to the amount of 37.600 SEK (slightly over €3850). This has been rejected, however, on the grounds that he was evidently present at the crime scene.

Trump feels the Israeli/Saudi orbit expanding over Qatar and (it is hoped) Iran as well..  (photo Matt Troller, Twitter).

“Being on the left means never have to say, ‘I’m sorry.’”

But the greatest lesson is this: Next time the Left gets hysterical, just assume the hysteria is fraudulent. There has been no exception to this rule in my lifetime. And that includes the hysteria about Trump-campaign “collusion” with Russia. - Dennis Pager, National Review, 13 June 2017.

Let’s give credit where it’s due. The Right says Trump is Not anti-Semitic and that’s absolutely true. In fact, he’s quite philo-Semitic. They go further to suggest that The Left is getting away with hysterical accusations by pulling at liberal heartstrings - and as the nominal protectorate of full group interests, including compassion for marginals, wouldn’t “The Left” be in a good rhetorical position to do just that?

National Review, “Remember the Hysteria about Trump-Induced Anti-Semitism”, 13 June 2017:

The hysteria was genuine. The anti-Semitism wasn’t.

As I document in my book Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American Values to Triumph, which is an explanation of Americanism, leftism, and Islamism, hysteria is a major tactic of the Left. If you think about it, there is never an extended period of time — one year, let’s say — during which society is not engulfed by a hysteria induced by the Left. The mother of them all is global warming, or “climate change,” as the Left has come to call it (because the warming was not quite enough to induce widespread panic). Hysterics such as billionaires Al Gore and Tom Steyer, along with virtually all the Western news media, warn us that the existence of life on earth is threatened by carbon emissions.

But in its longevity, global warming is almost unique among left-wing hysterias. In general, left-wing hysterias last for much less time, from a few months to a year or two. And when they end — because the hysteria is widely recognized as fraudulent — they’re immediately dropped and completely forgotten. The Left never pays a price for its hysteria.

Take, for example, the hysteria the Left created by charging President Trump’s election with the unleashing of unprecedented amounts of anti-Semitism and racism in America. Being attuned to the Left’s use of hysteria, I knew it was hysteria at the time. In the March 7, 2017, issue of the Jewish Journal, I wrote a column titled “There Is No Wave of Trump-Induced Anti-Semitism or Racism.” It was all a lie. That’s why you hardly hear anything now about an alleged wave of racism or anti-Semitism in the country. What rankles those who have a passion for justice is that the mendacious fomenters of the hysteria have gotten away with it.

So, as a Jew who understands how much damage left-wing Jews have done to the real fight against anti-Semitism, I think that some of these people are worth mentioning. Perhaps the individual who most spread the lie of Trump-induced anti-Semitism was a previously unknown man named Steven Goldstein, executive director of the previously unknown Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect in New York.

[...]

Well, guess what. It turned out that President Trump was entirely right: There was no eruption of anti-Semitism in America, let alone one emanating from the White House. Furthermore, “those asking the question” did indeed deserve to be “lashed out” against.

And why aren’t we hearing any more about Trump-induced anti-Semitism in America? Because law-enforcement officials reported that a disturbed Israeli-American Jewish teenager in Israel was the source of nearly all the threats against Jewish community centers. And that a handful of other threats to them came from an angry, obsessive black radical trying to frame an ex-girlfriend.

Will any of those who spread the lie and hysteria about Trump-induced anti-Semitism now apologize?

I wrote the answer to that question about 35 years ago: “Being on the left means never have to say, ‘I’m sorry.’”

But the greatest lesson is this: Next time the Left gets hysterical, just assume the hysteria is fraudulent. There has been no exception to this rule in my lifetime. And that includes the hysteria about Trump-campaign “collusion” with Russia.

Read full article at National Review,

Metropolitan Police report:

As well as #LondonBridge officers have also responsed to an incident in #BoroughMarket. We have armed police at the scenes.

The first incident is reported to have involved a white van mounting the pavement at the south end of London Bridge and striking a number of pedestrians, perhaps five or six.  One report states that three men then jumped out of the van and began attacking people with knives.  One man may have been led away in cuffs.  There are dozens of police and ambulance vehicles at the scene.  Victims reported to be receiving CPR.

The second incident is at nearby Borough Market, and again involves knife attacks, possibly on diners in a restaurant.

Gunfire - probably from the police - has been reported from both scenes.

It is too early for anything definitive yet.  The media are scrambling for witness stories:

One terrified woman said she was at a restaurant and police swarmed on the area.

She said police were firing weapons. “We had to run,” “There was loads of shooting.”

Officers were seen dragging startled diners and revellers out of restaurants and bars and telling them to run.

A witness named Martin said: “There’s been about eight of them stabbed. I ran up to see if they were all right but people were already with them. I was bloody terrified

“I thought is that real? If we had of been on the other side of the road, it could have been us.”

But reliable information can only come from the police, when they are in a position to supply it - which may be an hour or two yet.

More from the Met:

Officers have then responded to reports of stabbings in #BoroughMarket. Armed officers responded and shots have been fired. 2/3

And now (23.45 hrs) a third incident:

Officers are now responding to an incident in the #Vauxhall area. 3/3

Vauxhall is some distance from London Bridge, so it can’t be surviving perps from the other attacks.  Always assuming, of course, that this one is real, terror-wise, and not just an accident or one of the ubiquitous black-on-black stabbings that has got included by dint of all the confusion.

The advice being given right now to the unfortunates caught up in the attacks:

Update at 00.45 hrs: The Met makes the following request:

Pls continue to avoid #LondonBridge #BoroughMarket to allow the emergency services to deal with the ongoing incidents

... from which is it is reasonable to conclude that the Vauxhall shout was a false alarm.

00.52 hours: Yep:

The incident at #Vauxhall is a stabbing and is not connect to the incidents at #LondonBridge & #BoroughMarket

The other two have been formally declared terror incidents.

Express, “All 22 victims of Manchester terror attack named and identified”, 25 May 2017:

The full list of the victims:

  Saffie Rose Roussos, 8
  Nell Jones, 14
  Sorrell Leczkowski, 14
  Eilidh MacLeod, 14
  Olivia Campbell, 15
  Megan Hurley, 15
  Chloe Rutherford, 17
  Georgina Callander, 18
  Courtney Boyle, 19
  Liam Curry, 19
  John Atkinson, 28
  Martyn Hett, 29
  Kelly Brewster, 32
  Philip Tron, 32
  Angelika Klis, 40
  Marcin Kils, 42
  Elaine McIver 43
  Alison Howe, 45
  Michelle Kiss, 45
  Lisa Lees, 47
  Wendy Fawell, 50
  Jane Tweddle-Taylor, 51