TV Interviews

MARTYR IDEOLOGY By Barry Webb, Senior Fellow at AIR

In a previous video interview with we discussed the phenomenon of human sacrifice in Islam as pertaining to the inclination of HAMAS and other Islamist groups (both Shi’a and Sunni) to deliberately put children and other civilians in harms way during wartime, and explained that justification by quoting Islamic jurisprudence (al-Masri, ‘umdat as-Salik pp. 583-584).
Then, we showed the pre-Islamic origins of that theology by tying it back to the ancient Canaanite/Phoenician/Carthaginian practices of sacrificing their infants to their deities during times of war.
Thus, it seems appropriate to make the obvious connection of that tradition of human sacrifice on behalf of deity to the modern jihadi compulsion to blow themselves up on behalf of deity.
The following Qur’an verses will help bring that to light:
“Do not imagine that those who are killed on behalf of Allah are dead, rather they are alive at their Lord’s side and they are provided with provisions” (Qur’an 3:169).
“And, if we had decreed for them: Lay down your lives or go forth from your dwellings, but few of them would have done it; though if they did what they are exhorted to do it would be better for them, and more strengthening” (Qur’an 4:66).
“Verily, the life of this world is nothing but a game and an entertainment. Far better is the hereafter for those who keep their duty to Allah. Do you not understand?” (Qur’an 6:32).
“Those who believe, and have migrated (haajirou) and performed jihad on behalf of Allah with their wealth and their lives, they have attained the highest degree at the side of Allah, and those are the victorious ones” (Qur’an 9:20).
“Among the believers are those men who have been true to their oath to Allah and among them are those who have paid their vow by death (in battle), and among them are those who are still waiting and they have not altered in the least” (Qur’an 33:23).
“Those who believe say ‘if only a surah was revealed’ (regarding battle), but when a decisive surah was revealed in which battle was mentioned you saw those in whose hearts was sickness look at you with the look of men fainting out of the fear of death, which would be more suitable for them” (Qur’an 47:20).
These are only a few examples of the many unabrogated verses in the Qur’an which define Islam as both a warrior cult and a death cult. Inspired by these verses Abu Bakr, Muhammad’s chief general and the first Caliph, is alleged to have said this to the Persians:
“You should know that I have come to you with an army of men that love death, as you love life.”
This “we love death as you love life” has become not only a common saying among jihadis, but an abiding principle.
Now, keeping all of these Qur’an verses, and Abu bakr’s boasting in mind, we can clearly see foundation for the motto of the modern day Muslim Brotherhood:
“God is our goal, the messenger (Muhammad) is our leader, the Qur’an is our constitution, Jihad is our way, and death on behalf of Allah is the loftiest of our desires.”
All prospective members of the Muslim Brotherhood must swear that oath to become a member. All Sunni terrorist groups from ansaar ash-shari’a to ISIS and al-Qaeda are essentially offshoots of the Brotherhood, and they too use the same oath to welcome members into their group.
Barry Webb served 25 years as an NSA Arabist, holds two MA degrees in related subject matter fields, and is the author of Confessions of an (EX) NSA spy: Why America and its Allies are Losing the War on Terror (2016). He is currently a senior fellow at Americans for Intelligence Reform His own website is

Open letter to President Trump, signed by many including Americans for Intelligence Reform

Stay the Course on China: An Open Letter to President Trump
Posted on July 18, 2019

Published by The Journal of Political Risk


Dear President Trump,

Over America’s exceptional history, successive generations have risen to the challenge of protecting and furthering our founding principles, and defeating existential threats to our liberties and those of our allies. Today, our generation is challenged to do the same by a virulent and increasingly dangerous threat to human freedoms – the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) through the nation it misrules: the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

The Chinese Communists’ stated ambitions are antithetical to America’s strategic interests, and the PRC is increasingly taking actions that imperil the United States and our allies. The past forty years during which America pursued an open policy of “engagement” with the PRC have contributed materially to the incremental erosion of U.S. national security.

This cannot be permitted to continue.

China is not as we wish it to be. In our political system, politics is the norm, and war is the exception. It is explicitly the opposite in the PRC’s worldview. Going forward, we must better understand and deal with this dangerous asymmetry.

We the undersigned, are encouraged by the broad and coherent strategy of robust, alternative policies you have adopted to confront the PRC’s campaign to undermine the national interests of the United States and its allies. We encourage you to stay the course on your path of countering Communist China.

We acknowledge and support your robust National Security Strategy that properly sets forth why the United States must counter the PRC. Opposing the advance of tyranny is fully in keeping with the founding principles of America and our rich heritage of defending freedom and liberty, both at home and, where necessary, abroad.

We note the PRC does not recognize the principles and rules of the existing international order, which under a Pax Americana has enabled the greatest period of peace and global prosperity in mankind’s history. The PRC rejects this order both ideologically and in practice. China’s rulers openly proclaim and insist on a new set of rules to which other nations must conform, such as their efforts to dominate the East and South China Seas and the so-called “Belt and Road Initiative,” with its debt-trap diplomacy, designed to extend such hegemony worldwide. The only persistently defining principle of the CCP is the sustainment and expansion of its power.

Over the past forty years of Sino-American relations, many American foreign policy experts did not accurately assess the PRC’s intentions or attributed the CCP’s reprehensible conduct to the difficulties of governing a country of 1.3 billion people. American policymakers were told time and again by these adherents of the China-engagement school that the PRC would become a “responsible stakeholder” once a sufficient level of economic modernization was achieved. This did not happen and cannot so long as the CCP rules China.

The PRC routinely and systematically suppresses religious freedom and free speech, including the imprisonment of over one million citizens in Xinjiang and the growing suppression of Hong Kong’s autonomy. The PRC also routinely violates its obligations, as it does with the World Trade Organization, freedom of navigation and the protection of coral reefs in the South China Sea. Beijing then demands that its own people and the rest of the world accept their false narratives and justifications, demands aptly termed as “Orwellian nonsense.”

The PRC is not and never has been a peaceful regime. It uses economic and military force – what it calls its “comprehensive national power” – to bully and intimidate others. The PRC threatens to wage war against a free and democratically led Taiwan.

It is expanding its reach around the globe, co-opting our allies and other nations with the promise of economic gain, often with authoritarian capitalism posing as free commerce, corrupt business practices that go-unchecked, state-controlled entities posing as objective academic, scientific or media institutions and trade and development deals that lack reciprocity, transparency and sustainability. The CCP corrupts everything it touches.

This expansionism is not random or ephemeral. It is manifestly the unfolding of the CCP’s grand strategy. The Party’s ambitions have been given many names, most recently the “China Dream,” the “great rejuvenation” of China, or the “Community of Common Destiny.” The “Dream” envisioned by the Communist Party is a nightmare for the Chinese people and the rest of the world.

We firmly support the Chinese people, the vast majority of whom want to live peaceful lives.

But we do not support the Communist government of China, nor its control by the dangerous Xi Jinping clique. We welcome the measures you have taken to confront Xi’s government and selectively to decouple the U.S. economy from China’s insidious efforts to weaken it. No amount of U.S. diplomatic, economic, or military “engagement” will disrupt the CCP’s grand strategy.

If there is any sure guide to diplomatic success, it is that when America leads—other nations follow. If history has taught us anything it is that clarity and commitment of leadership in addressing existential threats, like from the PRC, will be followed by our allies when policy prescriptions such as yours become a reality. The PRC’s immediate strategy is to delay, stall, and otherwise wait out your presidency. Every effort must be made therefore to institutionalize now the policies and capabilities that can rebalance our economic relations with China, strengthen our alliances with like-minded democracies and ultimately to defeat the PRC’s global ambitions to suppress freedom and liberty.

Stay the Course!

Author of Letter

James E. Fanell
Captain, USN (Ret)
Former Director of Intelligence & Information Operations U.S. Pacific Fleet

To sign this letter and join the signatories below, click here and fill out a short form.

List of U.S. Signatures (Alphabetically as of July 18, 2019)

Willard Anderson

Clarence Anthony
Lieutenant Colonel, USMC (Ret)

Rod Azama
Director The Chancellor Group

Bob Baker
Former US Army Intelligence Analyst

Tim Beard
Rear Admiral, USN (Ret)

Michael Bender
Commander, USN (Ret)

Kenneth Benway
Lieutenant Colonel, USA (Ret)
U.S. Army Special Forces

Paul Berkowitz
Former Staff Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee

Joseph Bosco
Retired Department of Defense

E. Bostwick Jr.
Senior Intelligence Officer, GS-15 (Ret) USPACOM

Christopher Brassard
President Ten Eyck Group

Robert Brodsky
Captain, USN (Ret)

Nick Buck
Captain, USN (Ret)

Naushard Cader
Board Member/Director
Center for War and Peace Studies

Roger Canfield
Author and

Kevin Carrico
Senior Lecturer
Monash University

Dennis Carroll

Gordon Chang

Edward Connelly, Ph.D.
Chinese, Australian National University
Independent Translator

David Connelly III
Captain, USN (Ret)

Henry F. Cooper
Ambassador, former Chief Defense & Space Negotiator with the Soviet Union, SDI Director

Anders Corr, Ph.D.
Publisher Journal of Political Risk

Demetrius Cox
Lieutenant Commander, USN (Ret)
U.S. Pacific Fleet Veteran Intelligence Officer

Michael Craven

Iara Celeste Diaz

Kenneth deGraffenreid
Former Special Assistant to the President, Senior Director of Intelligence Programs, Ronald Reagan National Security Council

Donny DeLeon
Filipino American Human Rights Alliance

Chuck DeVore
Lieutenant Colonel, USAR (Ret)
California State Assemblyman, 2004-2010; Special Assistant for Foreign Affairs, Office of the Secretary of Defense, 1986-1988

Markham Dossett
Commander, USNR (ret)

June Teufel-Dreyer
Professor of Political Science University of Miami

Ian Easton
Research Fellow Project 2049 Institute

Robert D. Eldridge
The Eldridge Think Tank

Richard Fisher

Nels Frye

Art Furtney
Major, USMC, (Ret)

Frank J. Gaffney
Vice Chairman Committee on the Present Danger: China

Samantha Gay

Kerry K. Gershaneck
Professor & Senior Research Associate Thammasat University Faculty of Law (CPG)

Bill Gertz
Author “Deceiving the Sky: Inside Communist China’s Drive for Global Supremacy”

Paul Giarra
Commander, U.S. Navy (Ret)

Jose Gonzalez

Chadwick Gore
Former Staff Director House Foreign Affairs Europe, Eurasia, Emerging Threats subcommittee

James Grundvig
Freelance Investigative Journalist

Ilango Gurusamy
Owner, Freedom on Wheels LLC and Propellant Software

Lianchao Han
Vice-President Citizen Power Initiatives for China

Heath Hansen
Specialist, USA (Ret)
Veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan

William Hawkins
President Hamilton Center for National Strategy

Donald Henry
Captain, USN, (Ret)

William C. Horn
Captain, USN (Ret)

Bradley Johnson
President Americans for Intelligence Reform

Frank Kelly
Captain, USN (Ret)

James D. Kelly
Rear Admiral, USN (Ret)
President Center for International Exchange-US (NPO)

Miles Killoch

Roy Kirvan, Ph.D.
U.S. Intelligence Community (Ret)

Ted Kresge
Lieutenant General, USAF (Ret)
Former Vice Commander U.S. Pacific Air Forces

Emil Levine
Captain, USNR, (Ret)

Steve Lewandowski

Claire Lopez
VP for Research & Analysis
Center for Security Policy

Ben Lowsen
China Strategist U.S. Air Force / Sawdey Solution Services, LLC

Holly Lynch
Democrat Candidate for NY’s 10th Congressional District

Tim Lyon
Captain, USN (Ret)

Victor Mair
Professor University of Pennsylvania

Rod Martin
Founder & CEO The Martin Organization, Inc.

Tidal W. McCoy
Former Acting Secretary of the U.S. Air Force

Thomas G. McInerney
Lieutenant General, USAF (Ret)
Assistant Vice Chief of Staff U.S. Air Force

Randy McSmith
Master Chief Petty Officer, USN (Ret)

John Mengel
Captain, USN (Ret)

Paul Midler
Author “What’s Wrong with China”

John Mills
Colonel, USAR (Ret)
Director (Ret) Cybersecurity Policy, Strategy, and International Affairs

James Mishina
Lieutenant Colonel, USA (Ret)
U.S. Tax Payer

Wayne Morris
Colonel, USMC (Ret)
Numerous Military Veteran Associations

Steven Mosher
President Population Research Institute

Denis Muller
Lieutenant Colonel, USMC (Ret)

Merle Mulvaney
Lieutenant Colonel, USA (Ret)
Member, Red Star Rising

Charles “Chuck” Nash
Captain USN (Ret)

Jim Newman
Captain, USN (Ret)

Grant Newsham
Colonel, USMCR (retired)
Visiting Scholar, National Chengchi University, Taiwan

Roscoe Nicholson II
International Consultant

Peter O’Brien
Captain, USN (Ret)

Edward O’Dowd
PhD & Colonel, USA, (Ret)

Kyle Olbert
Director of Operations East Turkistan National Awakening Movement

Don Oliphant
DWO Enterprises

Robert Oster
Private Investor

Rebeca Page
SD Metro Magazine

Robert Page
Chairman/CEO REP Publishing, Inc.

Russ Penniman
Rear Admiral, USN (Ret)
Former Reserve Deputy Commander U.S. Pacific Fleet

Lawrence Peter
Lieutenant Commander, USN (Ret)

Peter Pry
Dr. & Director EMP Task Force

Robert Rector

Eric Reddig
U.S. Navy Veteran

J.R. Reddig
Captain, USN, (Ret)

Louis Riggio

Eric Rohrbach

Robert Rohrer

Gerard Roncolato
Captain, USN (Ret.)

Warren Henry Rothman

Robert Rubel
Captain, USN (Ret)

Mark Safranski

Junko Sakamoto

Michael Schauf
Captain USN (Ret)
Military Intelligence

Stuart Schippereit
Commander, USN (Ret)
Former naval intelligence analyst

Paul Schmehl

Suzanne Scholte
President Defense Forum Foundation

Carl Schuster
Captain, USN (Ret)
Adjunct Faculty, Hawaii Pacific University

Dan Seesholtz
Captain, USN (Ret)

Lawrence Sellin
Colonel, USAR (Ret)
Iraq and Afghanistan veteran

William Sharp
Former Host, Asia in Review

Stephen Sherman
Director RADIX Foundation

Scott Shipman
Owner B.B. Hoss, Inc.

Joseph Smith
President (Ret) Parke-Davis Pharmaceuticals

Fred Smith
Captain, USN (Ret)
Lecturer, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

Peter Smith
Captain, USN (Ret)

Pete Speer
Lieutenant Commander, USN (Ret)
Member, Red Star Rising

William A. Stanton
Former Director of the American Institute in Taiwan

Guy Stitt
CEO AMI International

Duane Stober
Captain, USNR, (Ret)
Former Reserve Intelligence Coordinator Area One

Mark Stokes
Executive Director Project 2049 Institute

Fred Stratton
Commander, USN (Ret)

Gary Stubblefield
Commander, USN (Ret)

John Tate
Commander, USN (Ret)

Bradley Thayer
Professor University of Texas San Antonio

Mark Tiernan
Captain, USNR (Ret)

John J. Tkacik
Director, Future Asia Project International Assessment and Strategy Center

Don Tse
Lead researcher SinoInsider

Paul Valleley
Major General, USA (Ret)
Chairman Stand Up America

John E. Vinson
Captain USN, (Ret)

Thomas Wade

Arthur Waldron
Lauder Professor of international Relations
University of Pennsylvania

Yana Way
Educator, Way Tutoring

Toshi Yoshihara
PhD, Author “Red Star Over the Pacific”

James Zumwalt
Lieutenant Colonel, USMC (Ret)

Jennifer Zeng
Author of “Witnessing History: One Woman’s Fight for Freedom and Falun Gong”

Foreign Signatures (As of July 18, 2019)

Terence Russell
Senior Scholar University of Manitoba

Doris Liu
Independent documentary journalist

Jianli Yang
Founder & President Citizen Power Initiatives for China

Elena Bernini
CEO Oxford Omnia International

Satoshi Nishihata
Washington Bureau Chief The Liberty, Happy Science USA

Larry Ong
Senior analyst SinoInsider

Chu-cheng Ming
Senior researcher SinoInsider

Senior fellow at AIR, Chris Hull PhD published in The Epoch Times.

Majority of Voters Want Trump to Declassify Russia Documents

Majority of Voters Want Trump to Declassify Russia Documents

WASHINGTON—A new poll indicates that a majority of registered voters want President Donald Trump to declassify documents for public release pertaining to the probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

The survey found that 59 percent of registered voters polled want Trump to declassify the Russia-related documents.

The results skewed along party and ideological lines. Only 48 percent of Republicans but 73 percent of Democrats polled want the president to release the documents, a 25 percentage point gap. Furthermore, only 46 percent of self-identified strong conservatives but 76 percent of strong liberals polled support the document dump.

By contrast, 64 percent of men but only 54 percent of women want the president to release Russia documents, notwithstanding the traditional gender gap.

The public’s appetite for such a release is understandable. The Mueller investigation into Russian meddling in our election now ranks among the most expensive in history. The preceding FBI investigation appears to have itself been scandal-ridden. And part of that scandal has been the failure of the FBI to mount an effective investigation into what appears to have been corruption by the Clintons of unprecedented scope.

The public wants to know what is going on.

Mueller’s Investigation
Special counsel Robert Mueller’s indictment of 13 Russians alleged that the so-called Internet Research Agency budget devoted to U.S. election interference had risen to $1.25 million per month by September 2016, under which specialists had been instructed in February to “use any opportunity to criticize Hillary and the rest (except Sanders and Trump—we support them).”

The Mueller investigation has so far consumed $25 million, though it has also yielded approximately $48 million in revenue, mostly from Paul Manafort’s $42–46 million asset forfeiture, all of it unrelated to Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

As of Nov. 29, 2018, Mueller had indicted or received guilty pleas from 33 people and three companies, including pleas from five former Trump aides. The investigation has also led to the resignation of then-national security advisor Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.

Yet Mueller has yet to issue a single allegation that Trump advisers conspired with Russian officials to impact the election.

Trouble at the Top
In fact, the investigation into Russian interference has arguably created more collateral damage among those involved in conducting it, as the investigation has involved the investigators in conduct that is, at least, inappropriate.

The first resignation was that of John Carlin, assistant attorney general and head of the Department of Justice (DOJ) National Security Division, who announced his resignation on Sept. 27, 2016, after filing the government’s proposed 2016 Section 702 certifications without disclosing known FISA abuses, though Carlin was aware the National Security Agency was conducting a compliance review which would, and did, uncover such abuse.

After Trump’s election, Sally Yates, deputy attorney general and acting attorney general, was fired Jan. 30, 2017, for insubordination for refusing to defend a Trump Administration policy, but it has subsequently come to light that she was also intimately involved in monitoring the 2016 Trump campaign.

Carlin’s replacement, Mary McCord, acting assistant attorney general and acting head of the National Security Division, announced her own resignation on April 17, 2017.

Then, on May 9, 2017, Trump fired James Comey, the FBI director who oversaw the exoneration of Hillary Clinton and the Trump investigation.

On July 27, 2017, Justice Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz discovered inflammatory anti-Trump and pro-Clinton texts sent by Peter Strzok, the deputy assistant director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division, who conducted much of the work on both the Clinton exoneration and Trump investigation, and Lisa Page, an FBI attorney and Peter Strzok’s alleged mistress who also worked on the Mueller team.

Subsequently, Strzok was removed from Mueller’s team, demoted to the FBI Human Resources Division on Aug. 16, 2017, and ultimately fired. Page was likewise forced off Mueller’s team and demoted Aug. 16, 2017.

Later that year on Dec. 6, 2017, Bruce Ohr, the associate deputy attorney general who served as the unofficial liaison between the DOJ, FBI, and opposition researcher Fusion GPS, was demoted and stripped of his title.

Soon thereafter, on Dec. 20, 2017, James Baker, the FBI general counsel who allegedly participated in the “insurance policy” working group with Page and Strzok, was demoted and reassigned. In one text Strzok had said an insurance policy was needed in the unlikely event that Trump got elected.

Three days later, Andrew McCabe, the deputy FBI director mentioned repeatedly by Strzok and Page in their texts, announced his retirement effective March 22, 2018. Then on Jan. 8, 2018, Ohr was demoted a second time, removed as head of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force.

Likewise James Rybicki, chief of staff for FBI Director James Comey and his successor Christopher Wray and another alleged member of the “insurance policy” working group, resigned after being forced out on Jan. 23, 2018.

Six days later, following an uproar over McCabe being allowed to wait until his pension took effect to resign, was forced to resign effective immediately.

In addition, David Laufman of the DOJ National Security Division and deputy assistant attorney general in charge of counterintelligence, who “played a leading role in the Clinton email server and Russian hacking investigations,” resigned on Feb. 7, 2018.

Two days later, Rachel Brand, the associate attorney general and No. 3 three official behind Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein who “played a critical role in Congress’ re-authorization” of section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, also resigned.

In all, at least a dozen senior DOJ and FBI officials have resigned, been demoted, or been fired in connection with the Clinton exoneration and Trump investigation.

Understandably, the American people want to know why.

The survey that indicated a majority of registered voters want Trump to declassify Russia documents, conducted online Dec. 26–27 by HarrisX for The Hill, polled 1000 registered voters.

Christopher C. Hull holds a doctorate in government from Georgetown University. He is president of Issue Management, Inc., distinguished senior fellow at the Gatestone Institute, senior fellow at Americans for Intelligence Reform, and author of “Grassroots Rules” (Stanford, 2007).

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

QATAR SPECIAL REPORT By Barry Webb, weapons sales to Qatar

Saudi and Egyptian news media are all up in arms today (15-16 July) over American and European arms sales to Qatar. These reports come in the wake of reports out of Italy that Italian authorities have busted a neo-Nazi group and found in their possession a French Matra (air-to-air) missile.
The group has no Airforce but they were looking to sell the missile on the black market.
This particular missile was one that France had sold to Qatar. In conjunction with this, Italy is accusing Qatar of selling NATO weapons to Iran.
Egyptian and Saudi media are concerned that NATO weapons sold to Qatar will end up not only in in the hands of Iran but also in the hands of the various terrorist groups operating in the region.
These Arab media figures are also extremely concerned over President Trump’s selling of “tens of Billions of dollars worth of weapons to Qatar” during the Emir of Qatar’s recent visit to Washington. In this regard Egyptian talk show host ‘Amru Adeeb pointed out that Qatar’s armed forces do not have the capacity to absorb all the armaments they’ve been purchasing. So he asked rhetorically: “Where are the weapons?” (Implying that Qatar is either selling them to Iran or giving them to terrorist groups like those fighting in Libya).
COMMENT: The White House is apparently oblivious to the fact that not only does Qatar financially support the Muslim Brotherhood and other terrorist groups active in the Middle East, and supplies them with arms, but is also a close ally with Turkey and Iran, the top two state sponsors of terrorism in the world (with Qatar being #3). Trump was also unaware that Qatar routinely violates the embargo on Iran, the selling of weapons of which is only one.
These failures of judgment can be directly attributed to the failure on the part of our intelligence agencies to provide the president with the latest intelligence out of the world’s most volatile region—and is yet another example of why we need a comprehensive reform of our intelligence agencies.
Barry Webb had a 25-year career as an Arabic translator for the NSA, hold two MA degrees in related subject matter, and is currently a senior fellow with Americans for Intelligence Reform. He is the author of Confessions of an (ex) NSA spy: Why America and its Allies are Losing the War on Terror. His website is:

Weekly Arabic language news reporting by Barry Webb, 15 July 2019

On 12 July, the al-arabiyya TV show sin’at al-mawt (Industry of death) featured an interview with a European counter terrorism expert. According to this individual, ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Iran are all active in Europe. However, some Europeans who fought in Iraq and Syria for ISIS went to Libya, others to Afghanistan, and yet others to the Philippines.

COMMENT: We reported previously on this site that Arabic news sources had revealed that Turkey has been transporting ISIS fighters from Syria to Libya to help prop-up the Turkey/Qatar supported Muslim Brotherhood government in Tripoli.

As for the ISIS fighters going to the mostly Catholic country of the Philippines, you can bet that they’re not going there to become Sunday school teachers. ISIS already has a strong presence in the predominantly Muslim portions of the southern Philippines.


Amru Adeeb, talk show host of the al-hakaya (the story) program on MBC-Egypt, ranted extensively on Iran. He was under the impression that the majority of Egyptians commenting on social media indicated that the average Egyptian considers Iran to be a Gulf problem, or an American problem. Mr. Adeeb’s rant was to try to explain to the public that Iran is not just a danger to the Gulf and the international oil trade, but is a threat to the entire region, including Egypt.

COMMENT: Amru Adeeb’s political views generally reflect the official Egyptian government position. So, his rant about Iran appeared to me to possibly be an effort to not only wake the Egyptian people up, but to position public opinion more firmly behind the government’s policy of strategic alliance with Saudi Arabia and the UAE (both of whom help to keep Egypt’s economy propped up). The question remains, though, of how much military support would Egypt be willing to offer should a new Gulf war breakout?


On 14 July, al-arabiyya TV reported that Kuwait has arrested eight Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood terrorists on its soil and was preparing to extradite them to Egypt.

But on the 15th of July al-arabiyya TV reported that Egypt had not yet asked for their extradition.

COMMENT: Of the six countries that have so far declared the Muslim Brotherhood to be a terrorist organization, Kuwait is not one of them, while Egypt is, having made that declaration in 2013 after the Obama/Hillary-supported MB government was deposed.
In the ongoing feud between Saudi Arabia and its allies vs. Qatar over its support of the MB and other terrorist groups, Kuwait had heretofore maintained a strict neutrality. So, this raises the question as to whether or not Kuwait might be reconsidering its stance on one, or both, of these issues. Could Kuwait soon become the 7th country to recognize the MB as a terrorist organization?

NOTE: The U.S. still a glaring no-show on that list.


The split developing in Turkey’s ruling AKP party is lifting the spirits of old Cold Warriors and NATO-philes in the West. These folks seem to think that Turkey’s rogue behavior is all the fault of Erdogan, and that once he is replaced Turkey will return back to its “normal” democratic, pro-West, NATO-loving self.

My response: Don’t hold your breath. Erdogan’s AKP party is a clone of the Muslim Brotherhood, so any split that occurs in the AKP is only a reflection of a new breed of Islamist trying to wrest control from Islamist Erdogan–but they will still be as Islamist, and as racist and Islamofascist as Erdogan.

This dissatisfaction with Erdogan has nothing to do with his imperial designs and yearning to restore the Ottoman Caliphate. It has everything to do with a slumping economy and a fear on the part of other Islamists and Turko-fascists that Erdogan was acquiring too much cult-like personal power for himself.

This view was shared by commentators contributing to al-arabiyya’s popular tafaalkom show.


During the 2014-15 election cycle in Nigeria, the Muslim (and former Military Dictator) Muhammad Buhari ran against the sitting, and democratically elected) President Goodluck Jonathan (a Christian).

U.S. President Obama tilted the scale in favor of Buhari by denying arms shipments to the sitting Christian President Goodluck Jonathan because Jonathan wanted to use these weapons against the terrorist group Boko Haram that was ravaging his country. Obama’s purpose was to make Jonathan look weak vis-à-vis terrorism so that Buhari could win the election.

Once Buhari was in power, his Fulani tribe began acting strangely like Boko Haram in terms of practicing genocide against Christian villages (surprise, surprise!). President Trump then doubled down on Obama’s perfidy by granting Buhari a warm reception in Washington in the spring of 2018.

Our media presented this visit as a great victory for Trump, when in reality it was a great victory for terrorism and the genocide of Africa’s remaining Christians. This is because Trump made a “nice” weapons deal with Buhari. Meanwhile, back in Africa, Buhari’s soldiers are using these weapons to aide Buhari’s Fulani tribesmen in exterminating Nigeria’s Christians.

But it gets worse, much worse. The Fulani tribe also spills over into nearby Bukino Faso. The Fulani tribe in Burkino Faso is openly allied to al-Qaeda and ISIS.

The Fulani tribe in Nigeria is famous for being very devout Muslims, and they produce the best Imams in sub-Saharan Africa.

Get the connection? Devout fundamentalist Muslims and Imams virtually across the border from their fellow tribesmen openly supporting al-Qaeda and ISIS . . . and in both countries you have persecution and genocide of Christians. Selling these people weapons is the last thing you want to do.


Barry Webb has logged a 25-year career as an Arabist for the NSA, has two MA degrees in related subject matter, and is currently a Senior Fellow with Americans for Intelligence Reform. He is the author of Confessions of an (ex) NSA spy: Why America and its Allies are Losing the War on Terror. His website is