Archive for September, 2011

Iranian Jihadists at the Gate

September 30, 2011 Leave a comment

America!! It’s time to wake up: There’s an Iranian missile base in Venezuela; The Iranian Navy is starting a mission in the Atlantic Ocean and into the Gulf of Mexico; Iranian missiles are being armed with nuclear warheads; Iran now has enough enriched uranium for six nuclear bombs; and Iran has hundreds of terrorist cells in the U.S. and in Europe.

For decades I have tirelessly tried to warn the West about the ideology and agenda of the radicals ruling Iran. I have urged the West to help the people of Iran with their aspirations for freedom and democracy. I have tried to help the West understand the determination of these radicals in their quest to bring about death, destruction and disaster to the world.

However, the Western leaders have instead chosen to allow these radicals not only to slaughter the freedom loving people of Iran but to arm themselves to the teeth and to continue developing their nuclear program unabated, which only emboldens them and confirms their belief that Allah is protecting them — that they are on the right path.

In May, I reported that the Revolutionary Guards were building a missile base in Venezuela (Opinion: Iran is Building a Secret Missile Installation in Venezuela). The leaders of Iran and Venezuela hailed what they called their strong strategic relationship, saying they are united in efforts to establish a “New World Order” that will eliminate Western dominance over global affairs.

I revealed back in July (KAHLILI: Iranian missiles could soon reach U.S. shores) that the Guards have armed their naval vessels with long range surface-to-surface ballistic missiles; that the Iranian Navy plans to start missions in the Atlantic Ocean and into the Gulf of Mexico — off the shores of America’s eastern and southern coasts.

Yesterday, Reuters reported that Iran says it is ready to deploy its Navy near the U.S. coast. It is important to now understand that the danger posed by the Jihadists in Tehran is not only an existential threat to Israel, but soon it will be an existential threat to the U.S.

I also revealed several months ago that the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, has ordered the Guards to arm their missiles with nuclear warheads (Does Iran Now Have Nuclear Capable Warheads?). America needs to understand that we cannot fail. We cannot allow them to get the bomb.

The Islamic regime in Iran now has enough enriched uranium for six nuclear bombs. They continue to defy four separate sets of UN sanctions and will soon be arming their missiles with nuclear warheads. Not only will they destroy Israel, but with only one nuclear armed missile for an Electromagnetic Pulse attack, they could bring about the demise of America, as promised by the leaders of Iran. Should that attack occur, over two- thirds of the U.S. population will lose their lives.

If that’s not enough, they have now announced the existence of Hezbollah cells in the U.S. and in the heart of Europe. Their only mission is to destroy the West. The radicals in Iran truly believe that the timing is right, that the time is now for the final glorification of Allah!

See video below of the Islamic regime’s theorist, Rahim Poor Azgadi, calling for Jihad in America and Europe:

Family Security Matters Contributor Reza Kahlili is a pseudonym for an ex-CIA spy who requires anonymity for safety reasons. He is a senior fellow with EMPact America and the author of A Time to Betray, a book about his double-life as a CIAagent in Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, published by Threshold Editions, Simon & Schuster, April 2010. A Time to Betray was the winner of the 2010 National Best Book Award and the 2011 International Best Book Award.

Reza Kahlili
Sept 30, 2011


VIDEO: Iran: Christian Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani still faces execution for not renouncing faith

September 30, 2011 Leave a comment
CBN – Sept 30, 2011

500 passenger planes get the missile-launch-detection-system protection for $B6

September 28, 2011 Leave a comment

Now we know why they let Iran to steal surface-to-air missiles from Libya. You see how things work for the capitalism. They give an order to their mercenaries like Iran to do the arms stealing and ask them to get the stolen missiles in the hands of Al-Qaida, i.e. in Sudan where they have hide the arms. Once they made sure that have provided the necessary anxiety and fear among the public in regard to the safety of the passenger planes, then there are calls in congress to give all the jets that fly to overseas the same protection that military aircrafts have. As such the defense department receives the call to equip some 500 wide-body passenger jets with the new missile launch detection system technology focusing primarily on those planes that fly to overseas, the total cost would be about $B6, a cost which has been made justified considering the imminent threats.

Iran’s Secret War

September 28, 2011 Leave a comment

We all know about Iran’s nuclear desires. To what extent, some may still question–do they want a nuclear weapon or are they simply seeking nuclear power to support their energy complex? GOP candidates have debated the Iranian nuclear topic, yet no GOP candidate has been asked the very real question about Iran’s current proxy war taking place throughout the Middle East—let alone, how they will deal with the rogue regime.

At a time when Senator Lindsey Graham, Admiral Mike Mullen, and many others see the reality of Pakistan’s involvement in aiding enemies like the Haqqani network, very few accept or comprehend the magnitude which Iran plays into this mix supporting Pakistan’s ISI. Yes, Iran supports Pakistan’s ISI and yes, Iranian agents have been known to operate in the region.

Iran has also been a major contributor to the ongoing violence in Iraq. In fact, a great majority of the weapons used against U.S. forces comes directly out of Iran. The Shiite nation patiently awaits the departure of U.S. forces so it can pursue its goal of taking over.

Not only does Iran support the ISI and patiently await a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, it has also supported numerous Shiite and non-Shiite terrorist groups like Al Qaeda, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, Hezbollah, and Hamas. Since the release of the 9-11 Commission Report, U.S. policy makers have understood Iran’s involvement with terrorism yet very few politicians have been willing to deal with the threat they pose.

Today, Iran has been heavily involved in numerous secret activities across the Arabian Peninsula and Africa. And, yet again, Iran’s involvement across such lands is not discussed. With Yemen facing an austere civil crisis, Dr. Roby Barret, who in May 2011 published a Joint Special Operations University publication titled Yemen: A Different Political Paradigm in Context, exemplified his expertise of the region by specifically mentioning at least one major Iranian supported factor leading Yemen’s insurrection—the Huthi tribe.

Dr. Barret describes the Huthi tribe as “a small ideologically motivated group that is anti-Western and embraces Iran.” What he failed to mention is the fact that the Huthi are 100% aided by Iran with logistics, finances, and intelligence—activities which the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia fears considering a small part of the Huthi tribe rests in south west Saudi Arabia.

Yemen is a haven for terrorists and if a new Iranian-backed regime takes over, the world will witness the birth of a new Shiite dominated terror producing machine in the Arabian Peninsula. Yemen has its issues fueled by Iran but so do other Arab nation states.Bahrain too faces its own disaster supported by Iran. Shiite dominated youth constantly flood the streets protesting against Bahrain’s Sunni regime. These students are often seen supporting

Ali Salman—a Twelver Shiite educated in Iran who still maintains strong allegiance to the Iranian regime and is President of the Wefaq political party.

Salman has stated that “there is no Shia-Sunni conflict; the conflict is between freedom seekers and dictatorship defenders.” Let’s not be fooled by such rhetoric. What is taking place in Bahrain is virtually identical to that which is occurring in Kuwait—Iranian backed Shiites taking to the streets.

Contrary to popular belief, the United States does have strong relations in the Arab world. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan, UAE, Qatar, etc. have all assisted in the War on Terror. Yes, some terrorists have come out of those nations but the United States too has a history of our own terrorists. In the end, these nations are on the brink of a major tipping point. Regimes are being toppled like a domino effect due to the recent Arab Spring and Iran is behind a lot of this mess.

Now, Palestinians seek statehood. The Palestinian people have constantly engaged in terrorist activities against Israel and the great majority of their operations have been directly tied to Iran. If the Palestinians get their wish, they will be the little child of Iran.

We can worry about Iran’s nuclear endeavors all we want. The real threat posed by the Shiite terror sponsoring regime stems from its current activities of proxy warfare throughout the Middle East. President Obama, or a newly elected American President, will be forced to deal with Iran. Sanctions will not marginalize Iranian activities so the real question must be asked—how will any American President deal with Iran?

Kerry Patton is the Co-Founder of the National Security Leadership Foundation, a non-profit organization pending 501c (3) status. He has worked in South America, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and Europe, focusing on intelligence and security interviewing current and former terrorists, including members of the Taliban. He is the author of “Sociocultural Intelligence: The New Discipline of Intelligence Studies” and the children’s book “American Patriotism.” You can follow him on Facebook.

Kerry Patton

Sept 28, 2011

Related link –

Iranian Navy Coming to a Shore Near You?

September 28, 2011 Leave a comment

The top Iranian naval commander is vowing to send the country’s warships into the Atlantic Ocean and, specifically, the Gulf of Mexico. The Iranian navy is no match for the U.S., but Iran’s move into the Western Hemisphere poses a major asymmetrical threat to the country.

“Like the arrogant powers that are present near our marine borders, we will also have a powerful presence close to American marine borders,” the Iranian state media quoted Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari as saying.

He rejected the possibility of a direct hotline between the U.S. and Iran,saying, “When we go to the Gulf of Mexico, we will establish direct communication with them. In the view of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the illegitimate presence of the U.S. in the Persian Gulf makes no sense.”

The Iranian naval chief bragged about the presence of vessels in the Suez Canal, the Gulf of Aden, the Red Sea and the Bab el-Mandeb. The end goal is to have a naval presence “in all open seas,” including the Atlantic Ocean. In March, he said the Iranian navy would deploy beyond the Persian Gulf and Sea of Oman in 2012.

Iran has been aggressively building a presence in the Western Hemisphere. It is allied to Hugo Chavez’s government in Venezuela, where Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards have a presence. They are collaborating on their nuclear programs, and Venezuela has agreed to allow Iran to construct a base for medium-range ballistic missiles on the Paraguana Peninsula. Hezbollah is spending $500,000 to set up operations in Cuba. Three operatives have arrived from Mexico, and another 23 are on their way. Hezbollah also has a presence in the Tri-Border Area between Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay, and is working with drug lords in Mexico. It is very conceivable that Iranian warships will be allowed to dock in Venezuela, Cuba or perhaps another Latin American country.

The commander’s comments show that Iran aspires to be a global power and seeks to directly threaten the U.S. The preamble of the Iranian constitution says the regime is committed to “the establishment of a universal holy government and the downfall of all others.” A website tied to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei claimed that the U.S. is trying to hijack the Arab Spring and spark a Sunni-Shiite religious war. It said Iran must respond to the Saudi and Bahraini royal families’ oppression of Shiites. “There is indeed a better solution: crush the snake’s head (America),” the website said.

An Iranian naval presence in the Western Hemisphere would help the regime build its terrorist networks. Most frighteningly, it would make it easier for Iran to launch an Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) attack on the U.S. This involves the detonation of a nuclear warhead at high altitude, instead of physically striking a target. All electronic components would be fried for hundreds of miles, crippling the U.S. If executed properly, an EMP attack could knock out all of America’s electricity with anonymity.

The EMP scenario sounds like Hollywood fantasy, but the Congressional EMP Commission chaired by Dr. William Graham, a former science advisor toPresident Reagan, concluded that the threat is real. The Iranian regime apparently believes so, too. Its military has been simulating an EMP strike with its Shahab-3 medium-range missiles. One Iranian military journal states that the West will “disintegrate” if it is victimized by “dangerous electronic assaults.” “American soldiers would not be able to find food to eat nor would they be able to fire a single shot,” it says. The Russian Club-K missile system, obviously designed to give rogue nations the ability to fight the U.S., makes an EMP attack a more realistic possibility.

Dr. Peter Vincent Pry of EMPAct America, a top nuclear expert, says that such a catastrophe can be prevented with proper investment. He says that the most important 300 transformers can be shielded from an EMP attack for only $200-400 million. For about $20 billion, the entire power grid can be protected. Rep. Trent Franks launched the Congressional EMP Caucus in February and hasintroduced the SHIELD Act to “secure the most critical components of America’s electrical infrastructure against the threat posed by a potentially catastrophic electromagnetic pulse.”

Those who dismiss the threat from a nuclear-armed Iran or any other rogue state have failed to grasp warfare in the 21st century. No longer are large navies, armies or even nuclear stockpiles necessary to take down a superpower. The West’s enemies can deliver catastrophic blows using the EMP, cyber warfare, terrorist proxies or other asymmetrical techniques. If Iran believes these methods can bring them victory and is preparing to potentially use them, then we must prepare to defend against them.

Ryan Mauro is the founder of, the national security adviser for the Christian Action Network, an analyst with Wikistrat and is a frequent contributor to Fox News. He can be contacted at

Ryan Mauro
Sept. 28, 2011

Related link –

Muslim Brotherhood’s Growing Influence

September 26, 2011 Leave a comment

CBNNews – Spet 21, 2011
Former FBI special agent John Guandolo and investigative journalist Patrick Poole say the revolutions sweeping across the Arab world have made the Brotherhood stronger than ever, not only in the Middle East, but in America.

Iran ‘steals surface-to-air missiles from Libya’

September 25, 2011 Leave a comment
Was this a Wal-Mart shoplifting? With all the West and U.S. spy satellite technology and a close watch and focus of NATO on Libya how come this can be possible at all?I tell you how? The West led by U.S. helps IRI with the robbery, they left the way open for them to steal the arms, exactly the same way they helped them to steal Iraqi fighter jets from Iraq right before the Saddam fall. But what does the West want to do this for? Isn’t apparent? After the war in Iraq by GWB (George Without Brain) U.S. don’t dare anymore to start another war, they are afraid of its people, they have become smarter now! They want to create war in the region among different tribal and religious sectors in the region without their direct involvement. But they have to make sure the involved parties have the required arms to start off a war, when the time calls for it. [DID]

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards have stolen dozens of sophisticated Russian-made surface-to-air missiles from Libya and smuggled them across the border to neighbouring Sudan, according to Western intelligence reports.
The weapons were seized by units attached to the Guards’ elite Quds Force, which travelled to Libya from their base in southern Sudan.

Acting on orders received from Revolutionary Guards commanders inIran, they took advantage of the chaos that engulfed Libya following the collapse of the regime of former dictator Colonel Muammar Gaddafi to seize “significant quantities” of advanced weaponry, according to military intelligence officers in Libya.

They say the weapons stolen by Iran include sophisticated Russian-made SA-24 missiles that were sold to Libya in 2004. The missile can shoot down aircraft flying at 11,000 feet, and is regarded as the Russian equivalent of the American “stinger” missiles that were used by the US-backed mujahideen to defeat Soviet forces in Afghanistan in the 1980s. It is similar to the weapon used by al-Qaeda in the failed attempt to shoot down an Israeli passenger jet taking off from Kenya’s Mombasa airport in 2002.

Intelligence officials believe the missiles and other weapons seized from Gaddafi’s abandoned arsenals were smuggled across the Libyan border to southern Sudan earlier this month where they are now believed to be held at a secret storage facility run by the Revolutionary Guards at al-Fashir, the capital of North Darfur. Some of the missiles are also reported to have been smuggled into Egypt.

The governments of Iran and Sudan recently signed a defence cooperation pact, and hundreds of Revolutionary Guards are based in Sudan where they help to train the Sudanese military and help to support the Sudanese government’s campaign against rebel groups. The Guards also have a number of training camps that are used to train Islamist terror groups.

Intelligence officials now fear that the missiles and other weapons will fall into the hands of extremists and will be used to carry out terror attacks.

In the past Iran has been accused of smuggling weapons from Sudan to the Gaza Strip, where they have been used to launch attacks against Israel. In 2009 Israeli warplanes bombed an Iranian arms convoy in Sudan that was carrying weapons to Hamas militants based in Gaza.

Tons of weaponry, including thousands of shoulder-held surface-to-air missiles, has been stolen from Gaddafi’s abandoned depots since his regime was overthrown by rebel forces in August. Much of the weaponry, which includes mortars and anti-tank weapons, has been smuggled across the border to Algeria, where there are growing fears within Western intelligence circles that they may fall into the hands of al-Qaeda and other Islamist terror groups.

Some military experts have sought to play down the important of the surface-to-air missiles, arguing that militant groups lack the knowhow and the equipment to fire them. But this would not be an issue for the Revolutionary Guards, who have specialist training in firing such weapons. The fear now is that Iran will use the Libyan weapons to equip terror groups in the region.

“Iran is actively supporting a number of militant Islamist groups in Egypt, Gaza and southern Lebanon, so there is concern that these sophisticated weapons will fall into the hands of terror groups,” said a senior intelligence officer. “If the SA-24 missiles fall into the wrong hands then no civilian aircraft in the region will be safe from attack.”

American and European intelligence agencies have now launched a coordinated effort to track down the missing weapons in North Africa to make sure they cannot be used for a fresh wave of terrorist attacks against Western targets.

Con Coughlin is an expert on international terrorism and the Middle East; with the benefit of 25 years in foreign journalism (The Daily Telegraph), he deftly scrutinises world affairs.

Con Coughlin
Sept. 22, 2011

Related link –

The New York Times’ Interview with the Thug-in-Chief

September 25, 2011 Leave a comment

TheNewYorkTimes – Sept. 22, 2011
U.S. medias such as The New York Times has continuously made an ass out of U.S. by setting up such interviews with the Asshole Thug-in-Chief.

مصاحبه نیو یورک تایمز با رئیس چاقو کش های ایران
رسانه هایی چون نیو یورک تایمز با انجام چنین مصاحبه ای با رئیس چاقو کش های الاغ ایران امریکا را مضحکه دنیا میکند.

Here and There in the Middle East

September 24, 2011 Leave a comment

1. One of my readers remarked that what we need to study now is the use of fifth columns to subvert and overthrow countries rather than the 1940-era conventional warfare blitzkrieg. Actually, and this was well-known at the time, the Germans used a very sophisticated strategy of ideological and institutional subversion. It is surprising how much this has been forgotten. Political parties and militias were set up or subsidized; newspapers bought up; German minorities organized. If any of you are interested in this I will provide examples in future, some of which I described (using U.S. intelligence archives) in my book, Istanbul Intrigues.

2. Turkey is now going to sell Egypt both unmanned aircraft and swift patrol boats. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, since both are U.S. clients and, according to the Obama Administration, allies. But this is something to watch in the future. Remember that the relatively moderate military commanders in both countries are on their way out and will be replaced by ideologically motivated (or opportunist) officers who will attack whatever they’re told. With excitable, reckless, and anti-American Recep Edrogan running Turkey and excitable, reckless, and anti-American Amr Moussa perhaps soon to be Egypt’s president, old American friends may soon be attacking other old American friends, or even U.S. forces.

Have you noticed that its increasingly difficult to distinguish between remarks about Israel by Erdogan and those by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?

3. I like U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, Admiral Mike Mullen. He gets it. And he has to because his forces have the mission of fighting future wars and threats created by mistaken White House policies. Never forget that the official Quardennial Review of U.S . military plans, 92 pages of Politically Correct pap, doesn’t really mention Islamism, terrorism, Iran, and other real-world threats. Mullen’s 3.5 page letter at the end deals with all the real issues.

Now Mullen has had to say something pretty amazing. In Senate testimony he reported that “the Haqqani [terrorist[ network… acts as a veritable arm of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Agency.” Imagine: America’s highest military officer explains that the intelligence agency of a country receiving massive U.S. aid runs a Taliban-linked terrorist group that, on September 13, attacked the U.S. embassy in Pakistan. Twenty-five people died.

Can you imagine the uproar this should cause in any normal circumstance? There would be demands for congressional inquiries, front-page stories every day, attacks on a president who could run such a policy.

Instead: Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Add this to previous U.S. Defense Department warnings based on reliable intelligence:

–Iran is protecting and helping al-Qaida.

–Iran is training Taliban fighters in Afghanistan.

–Iran is training and supplying training, weapons, and explosives to kill Americans in Iraq. Mullen also spoke about that. He said: “They (the Iranians) have been warned about continuing it … that if they keep killing our troops, that will not be something we will sit idly by and watch.” Um, wow, does that raise the possibility of an armed confrontation with Iran? What is the White House going to do if Iran continues killing Americans–as I’m sure they will. My prediction is that they will do nothing. You know what that kind of empty threat followed by inaction does to credibility?

–Syria is running a war against America in Iraq.

But White House policies don’t want to deal with these issues.

Congress, do you have any response?


Experts, any response?


Media, any response?

4. Michael Ledeen has written an excellent article well-worth reading about the hunkered-down White House and its Ripley’s Believe it or Not policies. But I can’t resist adding a bit. Ledeen writes that the White house is awaiting, “The happy moment when Assad falls and Obama takes credit for it and Erdogan calls the White House to get his orders.”

Alas, most people in the region don’t think that Erdogan will be calling the White House to get his orders–the idea of anyone ordering around Erdogan doesn’t fit with his personality–but with Erdogan telling Obama how he’s arranged a great interim government in which the Muslim Brotherhood has all-too-much power.

5. Libya’s new Western-installed leader first announced that Sharia will be “the main source” for Libyan law in future, then a week later met with Obama who praised him as a great guy. A brief guide is in order here about how Muslim-majority countries do this sort of thing:

Option 1: Secular, based on Western law. You know, like Turkey used to be.

Option 2: Sharia is “a source” of legislation, not too bad, like Egypt used to be.

Option 3: Sharia is “the main source” of legislation. Uh-oh.

Option 4: Sharia is “the sole source” of legislation.” Is that a chador you’re wearing or are you just glad to see me? (Yes, I know that it doesnt make sense but this take-off of the famous Mae West line is sort of funny, I hope.)

Now, Turkey is moving from 1 through 2 and perhaps eventually to 3. Egypt from 2 to 3 and perhaps eventually to 4. Libya is starting off at 3. Iran and the Gaza Strip are at 4 with a bullet. That last point is record industry slang for a song headed up the charts. In this case it means, literally, a bullet in your head if you step out of line. Some time next year remind me to do a chart of where every country is at. One thing is for sure: they’re all headed in the same general direction.

6. Here’s the problem with the international community and with the “peace process.” The Paletinian Authority demands full UN membership without doing anything to deserve it, as an alternative to negotiations with Israel. The United States opposes; almost every other country supports. So France comes up with a compromise: Make them a non-member state, in other words moving them up a level. But the problem is not having Palestine as a UN member so much as it is having Palestine as a state, which can do whatever it wants in terms of foreign alliances, buying arms, inviting in foreign troops or advisors, and condemning Israel as occupier and aggressor if it defends itself from cross-border attacks or doesn’t leave all claimed Palestinian territory immediately.

So this is how it works: You don’t give the Palestinians everything they want as a unilateral concession; you just give them half of what they want as a unilateral concessions. Saving the rest as a unilateral concession for the next time they make a demand.

7. The great peace initiative contest! What can Israel give to prove it wants peace and isn’t sabotaging a diplomatic resolution? Come up with ideas. Important rule: Israel cannot ask for anything in exchange because if it does then the Palestinians will reject it and we are back where we began.

Warning: failure to come up with an entry means you are a right-wing extremist who opposes peace and is clinging on to an untenable status quo. Only unilateral concessions will be considered! In case of near-duplicate entries the proposal in which Israel gives up more in exchange for nothing will be judged the winner.

8. As for Israel being isolated and on the ropes, the IMF has just increased its positive evaluation of the Israeli economy to predict it will grow at a rate of 4.8 percent this year. That’s triple the average for the developed economies and is number three in the world (after city-states Hong Kong and Singapore). There are, of course, problems (it wouldn’t be Israel if there weren’t) but this detailed evaluation in Businessweek is quite upbeat. (h/t Martin Kramer).

Meanwhile, a number of Arab states–notably Egypt–are facing major economic problems and there are some very dire forecasts for Turkey. I wish everyone was doing well and countries with economic probles can resort to war and aggression as a way out. Still, Israel’s prosperity means it will continue to be strong. What about the social protests (prices too high; wages too low)? We will see if the government takes corrective action but Israel is not going to follow the Greek model, that’s for sure.

Barry Rubin
Sept. 23, 2011

Related link –

The Price of Oil Today

September 24, 2011 Leave a comment

Oil is around $85.92 per barrel. This works out to $1.56 per gallon of oil. The general rule of thumb is to add one dollar to get into the neighborhood of what the cost of gas should be at the pump. Based on that logic, we should only be paying $2.56 per gallon. But, we are far from that, aren’t we? I am paying $3.60, roughly, per gallon. Let’s take this price and back track it with the Rule of Thumb math we just went over. First, subtract a dollar to get $2.60 now multiply this by 55 for the price of one barrel of oil. This gets us $143 for a barrel of oil. Why is it that, if this general rule holds, we are paying $143 per barrel prices when the market is $85.92 dollars per barrel? Shouldn’t we be paying $2.56 or so?

A number of factors go into breaking down the cost of each barrel, taxes being the big one for the government and feeding the industry beast is the other portion. I found an article at which broke the costs down by percentages, and this seems to hold true on other sites.

68% is the cost of the oil
13% is refining
12% is taxes
7% is marketing and distribution

With the current price of $85.92 per barrel, the actual cost of the oil is $58.42. The cost of refining that is $11.17. The taxes, give to Caesar what is Caesars’, comes out to be $10.31. The marketing and distribution portion of this comes to $6.01 per barrel.

It seems that someone is getting a raw deal! Seriously, where is that extra one dollar per gallon going? –The Federal Trade Commission wants to know that, too. The FTC appears to feel that Price Gouging is afoot. The view that there is anti-competition activity or a plot to boost profits is one that, for now, is held mostly by democrats, according The FTC is also going to look at refinery outputs and maintenance schedules. The International Energy Agency disagrees with pricing gouging, rather it feels that supply and demand is the answer for the cost of gas.

Won’t our oil fields keep us going for 60 to 100 years? That is what some emails would have us believe. That we could run ourselves completely on US oil and natural gas for several decades on our potential is not in question, what the realistic numbers are is the question. information shows there is enough oil available in the Bakken (North Dakota, South Dakota, and Montana) Area to answer the US demand for oil for one year. It did not, as I recall, cover the oil fields in Texas, the Gulf of Mexico, our continental shelves, and so forth. We have roughly 112 billion barrels of untapped oil potential and 656 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. This could keep us going for another 100 to 120 years; provided we do not refine our methods of using the fuel and develop other sources of driving our country.

The Snopes article leans towards a timeline of 20 years to have the technology available to extract all of the oil reserves we currently have. I believe that we should start extracting and refining now so that we can stay on top of or ahead of the technologic curve to which snopes refers.

We, as a nation, import just over 50% of the oil we use. The overall amount of petroleum used in America has gone down over the last five years. So, the demand is dropping and the market responds by increasing prices to offset the profit loss. This market opinion is what the IEA believes is going on. Based on that theory, I bought a 2005 Prius and have put more than 160,000 thousand miles on it. Due to the market supply/demand factor I burn less fuel per mile, my demand has decreased while the supply remains the unchanged. More people are using less fuel for driving and home heating and industry. So, if the demand decreases in the system and supply remains unchanged, shouldn’t the price drop? It seems to me that the FTC is onto something.

I wish that I knew who was getting that missing one extra dollar per gallon. With 4,304.533 barrels imported into the US in 2010 that is a good amount of money I would like to get my fingers on.

The question, sadly, remains unanswered as to why we are paying $3.56 per gallon when, based on the actual cost, we should be paying $2.56 per gallon.

Spet. 22, 2011

Related link –

Slavery and Sex Slavery in Islam

September 23, 2011 Leave a comment

Does Islam condone slavery? Does Islamic teaching allow Muslim men to keep women as sex slaves?
Summary Answer:
Islam neither ignores nor condemns slavery. In fact, a large part of the Sharia is dedicated to the practice.

Muslims are encouraged to live in the way of Muhammad, who was a slave owner and trader. He captured slaves in battle. He had sex with his slaves. And he instructed his men to do the same. The Qur’an actually devotes more verses to making sure that Muslim men know they can keep women as sex slaves than it does to telling them to pray five times a day.

The Qur’an:
Qur’an (33:50) – “O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee” This is one of several personal-sounding verses “from Allah” narrated by Muhammad – in this case allowing himself a virtually unlimited supply of sex partners. Others are restrained to four wives, but may also have sex with any number of slaves, as the following verse make clear:

Qur’an (23:5-6) – “..who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess…” This verse permits the slave-owner to have sex with his slaves. See also Qur’an (70:29-30).

Qur’an (4:24) – “And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.” Even sex with married slaves is permissible.

Qur’an (8:69) – “But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good” A reference to war booty, of which slaves were a part. The Muslim slave master may enjoy his “catch” because (according to verse 71) “Allah gave you mastery over them.”

Qur’an (24:32) – “And marry those among you who are single and those who are fit among your male slaves and your female slaves…” Breeding slaves based on fitness.

Qur’an (2:178) – “O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female.” The message of this verse, which prescribes the rules of retaliation for murder, is that all humans are not created equal. The human value of a slave is less than that of a free person (and a woman’s worth is also distinguished from that of a man’s).

Qur’an (16:75) – “Allah sets forth the Parable (of two men: one) a slave under the dominion of another; He has no power of any sort; and (the other) a man on whom We have bestowed goodly favours from Ourselves, and he spends thereof (freely), privately and publicly: are the two equal? (By no means;) praise be to Allah.” Yet another confirmation that the slave is is not equal to the master. In this case it is plain that the slave owes his status to Allah’s will. (According to 16:71, the owner should be careful about insulting Allah by bestowing Allah’s gifts on slaves – those whom the god of Islam has not favored).

From the Hadith:
Bukhari (80:753) – “The Prophet said, ‘The freed slave belongs to the people who have freed him.'”

Bukhari (52:255) – The slave who accepts Islam and continues serving his Muslim master will receive a double reward in heaven.

Bukhari (41.598) – Slaves are property. They cannot be freed if an owner has outstanding debt, but can be used to pay off the debt.

Bukhari (62:137) – An account of women taken as slaves in battle by Muhammad’s men after their husbands and fathers were killed. The woman were raped with Muhammad’s approval.

Bukhari (34:432) – Another account of females taken captive and raped with Muhammad’s approval. In this case it is evident that the Muslims intend on selling the women after raping them because they are concerned about devaluing their price by impregnating them. Muhammad is asked about coitus interruptus.

Bukhari (47.765) – A woman is rebuked by Muhammad for freeing a slave girl. The prophet tells her that she would have gotten a greater heavenly reward by giving her to a relative (as a slave).

Bukhari (34:351) – Muhammad sells a slave for money. He was thus a slave trader.

Bukhari (72:734) – Some contemporary Muslims in the West, where slavery is believed to be a horrible crime, are reluctant to believe that Muhammad owned slaves. This is just one of many places in the Hadith where a reference is made to a human being owned by Muhammad. In this case, the slave is of African descent.

Muslim 3901 – Muhammad trades away two black slaves for one Muslim slave.

Muslim 4112 – A man freed six slaves on the event of his death, but Muhammad reversed the emancipation and kept four in slavery to himself. He cast lots to determine which two to free.

Bukhari (47:743) – Muhammad’s own pulpit – from which he preached Islam – was built with slave labor on his command.

Bukhari (59:637) – “The Prophet sent Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus (of the booty) and I hated Ali, and Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave-girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, ‘Don’t you see this (i.e. Ali)?’ When we reached the Prophet I mentioned that to him. He said, ‘O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?’ I said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumlus.'” Muhammad approved of his men having sex with slaves, as this episode involving his son-in-law, Ali, clearly proves. This hadith refutes the modern apologists who pretend that slaves were really “wives,” since Muhammad had forbidden Ali from marrying another woman as long as Fatima (his favorite daughter) was living.

Abu Dawud (2150) – “The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Qur’an 4:24) ‘And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.'” This is the background for verse 4:24 of the Qur’an. Not only does Allah grant permission for women to be captured and raped, but allows it to even be done in front of their husbands.

Ibn Ishaq (734) – A slave girl is given a “violent beating” by Ali in the presence of Muhammad, who does nothing about it.

Ibn Ishaq (693) – “Then the apostle sent Sa-d b. Zayd al-Ansari, brother of Abdu’l-Ashal with some of the captive women of Banu Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horses and weapons.” Muhammad trades away women captured from the Banu Qurayza tribe to non-Muslim slave traders for property. (Their men had been executed after surrendering peacefully without a fight).

Umdat al-Salik (Reliance of the Traveller) (o9.13) – According to Sharia, when a child or woman is taken captive by Muslims, they become slaves by the mere fact of their capture. A captured woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.

Additional Notes:
Slavery is deeply embedded in Islamic law and tradition. Although a slave-owner is cautioned against treating slaves harshly, basic human rights are not obliged. The very fact that only non-Muslims may be taken as slaves is evidence of Islam’s supremacist doctrine.

Of the five references to freeing a slave in the Qur’an, three are prescribed as punitive measures against the slaveholder for unrelated sin, and limits the emancipation to just a single slave. Another (24:33) appears to allow a slave to buy their own freedom if they are “good.” This is in keeping with the traditional Islamic practice of wealth-building through the taking and ransoming of hostages, which began under Muhammad.

A tiny verse in one of the earliest chapters, 90:13, does say that freeing a slave is good, however, this was “revealed” at a time when the Muslim community was miniscule and several of their new and potential recruits were either actual slaves or newly freed slaves. Many of these same people, and Muhammad himself, later went on to become owners and traders of slaves, both male and female, as they acquired the power to do so. The language of the Qur’an changed to accommodate slavery, which is why this early verse has had negligible impact on slavery in the Islamic world.

Contrary to popular belief, converting to Islam does not automatically earn a slave his freedom, although doing so is said to increase a slave master’s heavenly reward (Muslim slaves are implied in Qur’an (4:92)). As far as the Islamic courts are concerned, a master may treat his slaves however he chooses without fear of punishment.

By contrast, Christianity was a major impetus in the movement to abolish the age-old institution of slavery. Yet, abolition had to be imposed on the Islamic world by the European West.

Given that there have never been abolitionary movement within the Islamic world, it is astonishing to see contemporary Muslims write their religion into the history of abolition. The lie – that the eradication of slavery had something to do with Islam – has been repeated so often that those who parrot are blissfully ignorant of its lack of factual foundation.

There was no William Wilberforce or Bartoleme de las Casas in Islam. As mentioned, Muhammad, the most revered figure in the religion, practiced and approved of slavery. Even his own pulpit was built with slave labor. The second caliph, a companion of the prophet, was stabbed to death by a slave whose liberty he refused to grant. Caliphs since have had harems of hundreds, sometimes thousands of young girls and women brought from Christian, Hindu and African lands to serve Islam’s religious equivalent of the pope in the most demeaning fashion.

Modern day apologists, in defending slavery under Islam, generally ignore the basic fact that reducing people to property is dehumanizing. Instead, they distract from this by comparing the theoretical treatment of slaves under Sharia with the worst examples of abuse from the era of European slavery.

The first problem with this rosy scenario is that the actual practice of Muslim slavery was often remarkably at odds with the relatively humane treatment prescribed by Sharia. For example, according to the Ghanan scholar John Azumah, nearly three times as many captured Africans died in harsh circumstances related to their transport to Muslim lands than were ever even enslaved by Europeans.

A more insurmountable problem for the Muslim apologist who insists that slavery is “different” under Islam is presented by the many examples of Muhammad and his companions selling captured slaves to non-Muslim traders for material goods. The welfare of the slave was obviously of no consequence.

Another myth about Islamic slavery is that it was not race-based. In fact it was. Muhammad’s father-in-law, Umar, in his role as caliph, declared that Arabs could not be taken as slaves and even had all Arab slaves freed on his deathbed. This helped propel the vast Islamic campaign to capture slaves in Africa, Europe and Asia for importing into the Middle East.

Literally millions of Christians were captured into slavery during the many centuries of Jihad. So pervasive were the incursions by the Turks into Eastern Europe, that the English word for slave is based on Slav. Muslim slave raiders even operated as far north as England. In 1631, a French cleric in Algiers observed the sale of nearly 300 men, women and children, taken from a peaceful English fishing village:

“It was a pitiful sight to see them exposed in the market…Women were separated from their husbands and the children from their fathers…on one side a husband was sold; on the other his wife; and her daughter was torn from her arms without the hope that they’d ever see each other again.” (from the book, White Gold, which also details the story of English slave, Thomas Pellow, who was beaten, starved and tortured into embracing Islam).

The Indian and Persian people suffered mightily as well – as did Africans. At least 17 million slaves (mostly black women and children) were brought out of Africa by Islamic traders – far more than the 11 million that were taken by the Europeans. However, these were only the survivors. As many as 85 million other Africans were thought to have died en route.

Most telling, perhaps, is that slavery is still practiced in the Sudan, Niger, Mauritania and a few other corners of the Muslim world – and you won’t see any of those Muslim apologists (who shamelessly repeat the lie that Islam abolished slavery) doing or saying anything about it!

In fact, a fatwa was recently issued from a mainstream Islamic source reminding Muslim males of their divine right to rape female slaves and “discipline” resisters in “whatever manner he thinks is appropriate”. Not one peep of protest from Islamic apologists was recorded.

In 2011, what passes for a women’s rights activist in Kuwait suggested that Russian women be taken captive in battle and turned into sex slaves in order to keep Muslim husbands from committing adultery.

Since Muhammad was a slave owner and slavery is permitted by the Qur’an, the Muslim world has never apologized for this dehumanizing practice. Even Muslims in the West will often try to justify slavery under Islam, since it is a part of the Qur’an.

Excerpt is taken from 

Related link –

Raising Middle East Tensions

September 22, 2011 Leave a comment

The problems of the Middle East continue to plague an administration which struggled all summer to put foreign policy on the backburner. Now, Israel is in the hot spot. On the one hand, Israeliisat are odds with Turkey. The days when the two countries shared cordial relations and common interests appear to be over. Turkey’s government has threatened to dispatch its navy to escort ships in breaking a blockade established by the Israeli’s to prevent weapons smuggling into Gaza. On the other, Israel faces a provocative move by the Palestinians to seek recognition of statehood in the UN Security Council, a move designed to not only pressure the Israelis, but also to embarrass the United States and inflame public opinion in the Middle East.

Frankly, the White House has no one to blame but itself for the current state of affairs. From the start, the centerpiece of Obama’s strategy for dealing with the Middle East was to broker a peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians by distancing itself from the US-Israeli alliance. The results have been all too predictable. Israel looks alone and isolated. Rather than advance the cause for peace, the administration has fostered an environment of confrontation and uncertainty.

At the outbreak of the Arab Spring the very first step the White House should have taken was to reaffirm the importance of the US-Israeli alliance and adopt a peace plan that was practical and realistic. Instead of an all-out push for a comprehensivesettlement, which is impossible as long as Hamas controls Gaza, Washington should have pressed for incremental progress on security arrangements, confidence-building measures, and bolstering the welfare of Palestinians on the West Bank. This would have helped shore up support for the Palestinian Authority at the expense of Hamas, which has transformed Gaza into a repressive base for terrorism.

Israel is the most dependable and capable ally the US has in that part of the world, by putting the Israelis at risk the White House has jeopardized America’s interests. For that reason, the president’s grade for the week has to be “D” for disappointing. Contributing Editor James Jay Carafano, Ph.D., is a leading expert in defense affairs, intelligence, and strategy, military operations and homeland security at the Heritage Foundation.

James Carafano, PhD
Sept. 22, 2011