Tag Archives: Lindsey Graham

Another 9/11 in store for America


A country that sponsors terrorist training inevitably becomes a victim of terrorists. The U.S. persistently continues running short-sighted policies, jeopardizing its own population. After Iraq, where Islamists threaten to remove U.S. puppet Maliki, it is now Right Sector militants in Ukraine, who will soon be fighting against puppet Poroshenko and their “parent number 2” – the Poles.

Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina warned on Sunday that the next large-scale terrorist attack, similar to 9/11 attacks in 2001, can be organized by the Jihadi group that terrorizes Baghdad today – the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” (ISIL). The senator proposed to immediately conduct air strikes on militants’ positions to prevent such a development. “We need air power immediately to stop the advance toward Baghdad,” said Graham on “Face the Nation.” According to him, he proceeds from the information obtained from CIA sources. “I think it’s inevitable. The seeds of 9/11 are being planted all over Iraq and Syria. You don’t have to believe me, this is what they’re telling you they’re gonna do. They’re not hiding their agenda. They want an Islamic caliphate,” Graham said. “They plan to drive us out of the Mideast by attacking us here at home.”

The ISIL 8,000-strong army, which the Americans help to overthrow the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, is sponsored by the money of their allies – the Gulf countries: Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. This is evidenced by the report made by the Brookings Institution. “Over the last two and a half years, Kuwait has emerged as a financing and organizational hub for charities and individuals supporting Syria’s myriad rebel groups. These donors have taken advantage of Kuwait’s unique freedom of association and its relatively weak financial rules to channel money to some of the estimated 1,000 rebel brigades now fighting against Syrian president Bashar al-Asad,” the report says.

According to the report, the money comes to Syria through Turkey or Jordan. The U.S. Treasury Department is aware of this activity (sponsoring the ISIL), the report says. However, Western diplomats and officials simply shrugged it all off.

On Monday, it became clear that ISIL militants already control not only eastern regions of Syria, a part of Lebanon and Jordan, but also a significant part of Iraq. They are some 80 kilometers far from Baghdad. The offensive began on June 11 with capturing the cities of Mosul and Tikrit and 31 Turkish citizen. At the same time, Kurdish militants took Kirkuk, the capital of the eponymous oil province of Iraq, and stated that they were controlling it. Thus, Iraq – the country that peacefully existed under Saddam Hussein – threatens to collapse into three states as Iran, of course, will not allow the transfer of the Shiite south under the authority of the Sunnis.

The struggle against the Soviet “occupation” of Afghanistan pushed the U.S. towards the creation of the infamous Al-Qaeda terrorist network, which then organized the biggest terrorist attack in U.S. history, questioning American invulnerability. History repeats itself, and now the United States is growing a new threat in Syria in the face of a far more dangerous enemy.

President Obama said Friday that he would not send troops to Iraq. Obama blamed the al-Maliki government, which, in his opinion, did not ensure conditions for equal coexistence of ethnic and religious minorities. National Security Advisor Tom Donilon warned that air strikes were “not a panacea.” The United States invested nearly $18 billion in the Iraqi armed forces and the army, but, as we see, the morale of the army is extremely low. Iraqi soldiers surrender and flee.

“If the U.S. had agreed to such help, it would have meant that the Americans are fighting against themselves, as supporting one group in Syria, it’s impossible to fight against it in Iraq, – Andrey Areshev, a political scientist, columnist for Noah’s Ark newspaper told Pravda.Ru. – But they will continue to use manipulated chaos as a method of maintaining their supremacy. The objective is to prevent the formation of a force in Eurasia that could challenge them. The costs of this policy of manipulated chaos, namely, victims on the part of American citizens, have long been understood and accepted. This is the price that one should pay to preserve American hegemony in the world.” However, contrary to this strategy, the US supremacy has been fading away.

Senator Graham said that the collapse of the Iraqi government would be the “worst case scenario.” To avoid this, the U.S. will have to rely on Iran, “likening the situation to the American alliance with Joseph Stalin during the Second World War to ensure victory over Adolf Hitler.” The senator was right. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said Saturday that the Islamic Republic reached an agreement with the United States and other participants in the negotiations to lift sanctions. He also noted that the country would be allowed to enrich uranium.

Thus, the U.S. policy to sponsor terrorists and provide political support to them in the fight against legitimate governments, is flawed. In addition to threats of terrorist attacks in the United States or in third countries against American citizens, it still implies the strengthening of strategic rivals.

Let’s go back to Ukraine. We may expect the growth of terrorist activities conducted by trained fighters, renamed as the National Guard of Ukraine. One shall expect the strengthening of Russia’s strategic position as well. Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the militants were trained in Poland. This was stated by Polish politician Janusz Korwin-Mikke as well. Although Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk denied the data, the Polish press had described those camps in detail long before Maidan. Prior to that, Poland was violating domestic law by participating in operations to support the organization of secret CIA prisons. Poland does have some experience of conducting illegal activities.

Sunday’s attack of Right Sector fighters on the Russian Embassy in Kiev shows that they feel complete impunity. What will happen when they get out of control, topple Poroshenko and turn their bayonets against their sworn enemy – the Poles? History knows such examples, for example, the Volyn (Volhynia) massacre, in which thousands of innocent Poles were killed. “Such an option can not be excluded, because such structures are deliberately cultivated. It is quite possible that they can be used against Poland or another European country, but, in my opinion, they are grown to be used against Russia,” Andrei Areshev told Pravda.Ru.

Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recalled that eleven years ago, the U.S. announced victory of democracy in Iraq. However, the situation in the country has been worsening steadily. According to Lavrov, the unity of Iraq was called into question: “The development of terrorism takes place because occupying forces were not contributing to the national dialogue. They were engaged exclusively in their own interests.” Just replace “Iraq” with “Ukraine.” The time, when Western peacemakers are deployed in Ukraine is drawing near, and there you have the description of the situation in five years.

Lyuba LulkoPravda.Ru

US preparing for direct dialogue with Iran over ISIS threat in Iraq – report

Volunteers, who have joined the Iraqi Army to fight against predominantly Sunni militants, carry weapons during a parade in the streets in Baghdad’s Sadr city

The US is getting ready for an open dialogue with Iran to discuss Iraq’s security concerns and ways of responding to radical Sunni militia that have been gaining ground in western Iraq, The Wall Street Journal quoted senior US officials as saying.

The talks are likely to begin as early as this week. This unlikely cooperation is to take place as world leaders try to negotiate an agreement with Iran to curtail its nuclear program.

Iraq’s security concerns are the central aspects common to both parties. Radical Sunni militants of Al-Qaeda offshoot the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS/ISIL) have been advancing and capturing cities in the northwest of Iraq. The jihadists have declared the capture of the capital Baghdad as their top objective.

It is not yet clear which diplomatic channel the Obama administration will be using, the report said.

Reuters also cited a senior US official as saying that Washington is considering the discussion with Tehran.

One option for the US is to go through Vienna, where US and Iranian officials are scheduled to meet with other world powers to discuss Iran’s nuclear program. Earlier, the US State Department announced that the No. 2 US diplomat, Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns, will be going to Vienna to participate in those talks.

US Senator Lindsey Graham stated on Sunday that Washington needs Iran to avoid a government collapse in Iraq. “We are probably going to need their help to hold Baghdad,” Graham told CBS’ ‘Face the Nation.’

Iran has also spoken out in support of cooperation. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said on Saturday that Tehran may consider cooperating with Washington to battle the extremist threat.

“We have said that all countries must unite in combating terrorism. But right now regarding Iraq we have not seen the Americans taking a decision yet,” Rouhani said at a press conference.

When asked if Tehran would work with its old adversary the United States in tackling advances by Sunni insurgents in Iraq, Rouhani replied, “We can think about it if we see America starts confronting the terrorist groups in Iraq or elsewhere.”

Obama: We Will ‘Do Our Part’ in Iraq, But Won’t Send Troops


The U.S. will not send troops to Iraq amid the deteriorating situation there, President Obama reiterated Friday, but America will “do our part” to help the troubled nation.

Obama spoke as radical Sunni fighters continued their rapid advance across Iraq, raising fears of a sectarian civil war.

“Over the last couple of days, we’ve seen significant gains by the ISIL terrorist organization that operates in both Iraq and Syria,” Obama said. “Iraqi security forces have proven unable to defend in a number of cities.”

“Now Iraq needs additional support to break the momentum of these extremist groups,” he said.

But that support won’t come in the form of sending combat troops back to Iraq. Obama said he has asked his national security team to “prepare a range of other options” for the U.S. to consider that he will look at over the next several days.

“Over the past decade, American troops have made extraordinary sacrifices,” he said. “Any actions that we may take to provide assistance to Iraqi security forces have to be joined by a serious and sincere effort by Iraq.”

The chaos “should be a wakeup call to Iraq’s leaders,” he said, and “could pose a threat eventually to American interests as well.”

The president’s remarks came a day after he told reporters “I don’t rule out anything” when it comes to a U.S. response to the violence.

“This is an area we’ve been watching with a lot of concern, not just over the last days but the last several months,” Obama said Thursday. “What we’ve seen indicates Iraq’s going to need more help, from us and from the international community.”

Iraq asked the U.S. for air assistance in tempering the militant uprising, U.S. officials said earlier this week. The Iraq ambassador to the United States repeated that call Friday, saying the Americans had the experience and the will to respond to the “terrorist threat.”

The developments in Iraq have prompted leading Republicans to call for action. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., voiced security concerns, urging U.S. involvement as militants encroached on the capital.

“I have never been more worried about another 9/11 than I am right now,” Graham said.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., echoed that worry, calling this “the gravest threat to our national security since the end of the Cold War.”

US airstrikes to support Iranian Revolutionary Guard’s offensive in Iraq?

F-16 Fighting Falcon aircraft

Iran deployed its Revolutionary Guard to help Iraq battle insurgents from a group inspired by Al-Qaeda, according to a recent report. In the meantime, the US is mulling airstrikes to support the Iraqi government.

On Wednesday, Al-Qaeda affiliate insurgents from the armed group Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS) conquered former dictator Saddam Hussein‘s hometown of Tikrit, marking the second major loss for the Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Earlier this week, insurgents captured Mosul, the second-largest city in the country. With jihadists threatening Baghdad and security forces unable resist the Sunni Islamists’ assault, Maliki turned to foreign powers for help, getting responses from two unlikely allies, Iran and the US.

Two battalions of the Quds Forces, which is the overseas branch of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, moved to Iraq on Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal reported. There they worked jointly with Iraqi troops to retake control of 85 percent of Tikrit, security forces from both countries told the Journal. Iranian forces are also helping guard the Iraqi capital of Bagdhad, as well as two Shiite holy cities that the Sunni jihadists are threatening.

Iranian Revolutionary Guard

Meanwhile, on Thursday morning, US President Barack Obama declared that he doesn’t rule out any options with regards to the ISIS takeover of cities in the northern region of Iraq. The administration and its national security team are discussing military options.

“We do have a stake in ensuring these jihadists don’t get foothold in either Iraq or Syria,” Obama said.

Later in the day, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney clarified that US will not send ground troops to Iraq, but is seriously considering airstrikes that would help to drive jihadist militants out of their strongholds.

Iraq has privately indicated to the Obama administration that it would welcome airstrikes with either drones or manned aircraft that target ISIS militants in Iraqi territory, US officials said Wednesday.

If so, US may find itself assisting its archnemesis in the Middle East to fight against Sunni militias that enjoy support from one of America’s closest allies in the region, Saudi Arabia. The ruling family of the kingdom has long been accused of supplying jihadists all over the region with arms and financial support, the New York Times reported.

The US and Iran severed diplomatic relations in 1979, after Islamic militants following Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini seized the government and deposed the American-backed shah. Iranian students stormed the American embassy in Tehran, leading to the 444-day Iran hostage crisis. Following the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran was in a state of heavy international isolation. The US has led the world in debilitating sanctions against the Islamic Republic that have increased as the Middle Eastern country has developed its nuclear program.

Under Hussein’s dictarorship, Sunnis dominated the Iraqi political landscape, even though over 60 percent of Iraqis are Shia. In Iran, over 95 percent of the population is Shia. The two countries are the only majority-Shiite nations in the Middle East. (Over 1.1 billion Muslims around the world are Sunni, while less than 200 million Muslims are Shia.)

From 1980 to 1988, the two nations battled in a deadly war in which both sides deployed chemical weapons. The US sided with Hussein during that war, but turned against the dictator when he invaded American ally Kuwait in 1990, leading to the first Gulf War. Hussein stayed in power until the second Gulf War began in March 2003.

Once Hussein was captured by American forces in December 2003, the Shia majority regained political power. Al-Maliki is a Shiite Muslim and has become unpopular with Iraq Sunni minority, which has accused the government of discrimination. Since 2005, Iran and Iraq have had a flourishing relationship, and are now considered to be each other’s strongest allies.

Militants of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) waving the trademark Islamists flag after they allegedly seized an Iraqi army checkpoint in the northern Iraqi province of Salahuddin on June 11, 2014.

Quds Forces have been active in Iraq for years, creating, training and funding Shiite militias that battled the US military after the 2003 invasion. Iran sees the battle for Iraq as “an existential sectarian battle between the two rival sects of Islam-Sunni and Shiite—and by default a proxy battle between their patrons Saudi Arabia and Iran,” according to the Wall Street Journal.

The US still sees Iraq as vital to its national interests, despite having pulled its troops out of the country at the end of 2011.

“What we’ve seen over last couple of days indicates degree to which Iraq is going to need more help,” Obama said, calling recent events a “wake-up call for the Iraqi government.”

“The next 9/11 is in the making,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) said of the danger of the Iraqi insurgency.

Obama facing Hill rebellion on Iran sanctions


Obama is facing a growing insurrection on Capitol Hill over Iran sanctions legislation, with one source telling Fox News the bill is attracting a “flood” of support and another lawmaker vowing to muscle through the legislation with a veto-proof majority if necessary.

The momentum comes a day after 26 senators, half of them Democrats, introduced Iran legislation in defiance of the administration — the bill threatens new sanctions if Tehran does not hold up its end of a newly struck nuclear deal.

The president criticized those lawmakers in a year-end press conference on Friday, claiming they were just trying to “look tough.”

But the legislation could pose a serious challenge to the administration, which warns that even the introduction of such a bill could imperil ongoing nuclear talks. Though the White House has threatened to veto, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Fox News he’s looking to gather enough senators — 67 — to override.

“If the president wants to veto [the bill], we’ll override his veto,” he said. “He’s making a mistake for the ages, to not keep the pressure on the Iranians.”

One source told Fox News that, as of mid-day Friday, there were close to 50 senators signing up to co-sponsor. The Republican source said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has also taken a significant procedural step to fast-track the bill as early as next month.

A Senate Democratic source confirmed that Reid did take a procedural step allowing the Iran sanctions bill to skip the committee process so that it is available for floor action — but noted that the move doesn’t automatically send the measure to the floor.

The next several weeks will no doubt involve numerous conversations between White House advisers and leading senators. The White House argues that passing new legislation now, even if it doesn’t automatically trigger sanctions, could undermine the six-month nuclear deal as well as talks to reach a more comprehensive agreement.

Senators in support of the legislation argue that sanctions brought Iran to the negotiating table, and that the formal threat of new sanctions will help seal a favorable final deal.

Obama stepped up the pressure on Congress to stand down on Friday.

“There is no need for more sanctions legislation. Not yet,” he said during his press conference.

He said that if sanctions become necessary, Congress could do it “in a day, on a dime.”

Obama said he’s “not surprised” by what’s happening on the Hill, but suggested little more than politics was at play.

“I think the politics of trying to look tough on Iran are often good when you’re running for office or if you’re in office,” he said. “But as president of the United States right now … what I’m saying to [Congress], what I’ve said to the international community, and what I’ve said to the American people is, let’s test it.”

Obama facing Hill rebellion on Iran sanctions | Fox News.

Dictator Obama- WaPo’s Modest Proposal .

Barack-Obama-and-Joe-Biden-SC-504x250“It’s time to put that power back where it belongs,” explains Jonathan Zimmerman in today’s Washington Post, “Barack Obama should be allowed to stand for re election just as citizens should be allowed to vote for — or against — him. Anything less diminishes our leaders and ourselves.” The 22nd Amendment, limiting the Presidential term, according to Zimmerman, reflected “a shocking lack of faith in the common sense and good judgment of the people.” Of course, in the increasingly ‘entitled’ America, it would only cost a few hundred million to bribe all the newlydowngraded Middle-to-Lower class Americans with Obamaphones in order to finally get a “dictatorial democracy” by indirectly funding the lower common denominator with $400 in free money every election cycle.

End Presidential Term Limits (Jonathan Zimmerman),

Via WaPo, I’ve been thinking about Kilgore’s comments as I watch President Obama, whose approval rating has dipped to 37 percent in CBS News polling — the lowest ever for him — during the troubled rollout of his health-care reform. Many of Obama’s fellow Democrats have distanced themselves from the reform and from the president. Even former president Bill Clinton has said that Americans should be allowed to keep the health insurance they have.

Or consider the reaction to the Iran nuclear deal. Regardless of his political approval ratings, Obama could expect Republican senators such as Lindsey Graham (S.C.) and John McCain (Ariz.) to attack the agreement. But if Obama could run again, would he be facing such fervent objections from Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Robert Menendez (D-N.J.)?

Probably not. Democratic lawmakers would worry about provoking the wrath of a president who could be reelected. Thanks to term limits, though, they’ve got little to fear.

Nor does Obama have to fear the voters, which might be the scariest problem of all. If he chooses, he could simply ignore their will. And if the people wanted him to serve another term, why shouldn’t they be allowed to award him one?

Read More at Zero Hedge . By Tyler Durden.

Dictator Obama- WaPo’s Modest Proposal – Sound Money Institute.

GOP presses Obama to salvage Saudi ties, address ‘loss of credibility’ in Mideast | World Tribune

Sen. John McCain, left, and Sen. Lindsey Graham. /AP/J. Scott Applewhite

WASHINGTON — The Republican leadership in Congress has pressed President Barack Obama to improve U.S. relations with Saudi Arabia.

Leading Republican members of the House and Senate have called on the Obama administration to respond to Saudi concerns over Iran and Syria. They said the U.S. crisis with Riyad reflected the loss of confidence in Obama’s leadership.

“The United States is experiencing a serious failure of policy and loss of credibility in the Middle East,” two senior Republican senators wrote.

On Oct. 27, Sen. John McCain, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Sen. Lindsey Graham wrote a column in the Washington Post that criticized Obama’s policy toward U.S. allies in the Middle East.

“Events in the region are headed in a perilous direction, and there is little reason to feel confident that the Obama administration has a strategy to secure U.S. interests and values in this vitally important part of the world,” the two senators said.

The column marked a series of statements by Republicans on the Saudi
crisis with Washington. Media reports have quoted senior Saudi officials as
saying that the Gulf Cooperation Council kingdom would conduct an
independent policy regarding Iran and Syria.

“Those are critical issues to the Saudis, to the Qataris, to the
Jordanians and to others in the Arab League that I think rattled their faith
in the administration’s ability to protect them in a very dangerous world,”
House Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Rogers said.

In an interview with CNN, Rogers warned that Saudi Arabia retained
options to cooperate with allies other than the United States. He cited
reports that Riyad was working with France and Jordan.

“So what you see is that friction starting to take hold and we have to
repair this and repair it soon,” Rogers said. “They’re going to find other
friends. I argue that’s not good for the United States.”

GOP presses Obama to salvage Saudi ties, address ‘loss of credibility’ in Mideast | World Tribune.