Iranian agent Pentagon Chief of Staff: is there a connection to the 3 dead soldiers?

Why in the world did the Biden administration allow Ariane Tabatabai, an Iranian immigrant who in September 2023, had been accused of having worked as an agent of the Tehran regime, to be hired as Pentagon Chief of Staff? 

How were the terrorists able to perfectly time their drone attack to coincide with the return of an American drone in order to confuse our military into believing it was friendly? How could they do it without inside information?

Dissident media outlets produced emails that appeared to show that Tabatabai had joined an initiative by the Iranian Foreign Ministry as a way to coordinate operations and that she had even run her congressional testimony on Iran’s nuclear program past the head of an Iranian Foreign Ministry think tank. 

Holy cow!

The David Horowitz Freedom Center and Front Page Magazine had been among those to take the lead in warning about the potential danger posed by her and enemy agents in the Pentagon.

[H/T JihadWatch.org]

Tabatabai, a Shi'a Muslima, had served under Biden's Iran Envoy, Robert Malley.

Malley, in turn, had been suspended from the Obama campaign for his backchannel contacts with Hamas, and has been under investigation for mishandling classified documents. But the emails appeared to show that Tabatabai had personally worked for Iran and its influence operations aimed at the U.S. government.

Despite that she continued to be promoted until she is now the Chief of Staff to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict (SO/LIC). 

This month, Iranian-backed terrorists launched their most successful single attack against an American base to date and three young soldiers died. The bastards targeted the living quarters where U.S military personnel were stationed on an obscure support base in the Jordanian desert known as Tower 22. The two women and one man who died, were killed in their beds, 30 more were wounded.

Normally, the drone would have been intercepted, but somehow, some way, the Iranian-backed terrorists had the timing of the arrival of their weapon perfectly timed, making anyone tracking it think it was ours.

How did the Iranians know the location of the living quarters on the base as well as knowing what our procedures for drone arrivals and departures were, and when one of our drones would be returning?

Tower 22 is located close to Syria and Iraq. It was one of the bases that we helped Jordan build up during the Syrian Civil War. Under President Barack Hussein Obama, it was a key element for supporting the Syrian Sunni rebels, while under Trump, it focused on fighting ISIS forces in Syria. 

Syrian Sunnis fleeing the country passed by, some were allowed to enter Jordan, while most, including some Sunni Jihadis, had to remain in what became known as the Rukban refugee camp.

The proximity of the Rukban camp to Tower 22 and the nearby Al-Tanf base would provide plenty of options for “refugees” to monitor and track the movements of American drones. But Tabatabai’s presence in Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict raises another troubling possibility. Tower 22 was used as a jumping off point by special operators and the U.S. presence in that area falls under the shadow of the SO/LIC office--her domain.

Special operators had been stationed at Al-Tanf and the SO/LIC office would have potentially had access to a great deal of information about what was going on at Al-Tanf and Tower 22. This is probably why she ended up in the office, not in spite of her ties to Iran, but directly because of her ties.

Tabatabai could have been seen as a potentially useful backchannel for an office that was likely unofficially coordinating with Iran anyway. That would explain her initial role as a senior advisor.

But by elevating a former Iranian agent to a chief of staff of an office overseeing special operations, the Biden administration, the Pentagon and the SO/LIC may have been gambling that they could control that backchannel and that would have been a catastrophic mistake.

Late last year, 30 Senate members had urged the Pentagon to suspend her security clearance. Guess whih Party they belonged to.

“Iran continues to threaten U.S. military personnel in the Middle East and remains intent on assassinating American citizens here in the United States. Given these facts, we find it simply unconscionable that a senior Department official would continue to hold a sensitive position despite her alleged participation in an Iranian government information operation,” the Senators warned.

“Dr. Tabatabai was thoroughly and properly vetted as a condition of her employment with the Department of Defense,” a Pentagon spokesman claimed. “We are honored to have her serve.”

You can take that honor and, you know where to shove it.

When the lives of our brave military personnel are on the line and there are doubts as to their safety based on doubts of the personnel in place to help ensure their safety, then it is far better to err on the side of caution.

And it is later discovered that Tabatabai was involved in their deaths based on intelligence she may have provided the enemy, then a firing squad would be in order.

Tweet

A Racist Twit

If the story went like this:

Boston University has a new incoming assistant professor of sociology and African-American studies who will be starting to teach there in June. Her name is Saida Grundy.

She is the first white professor to teach African-American studies and recently her Twitter account tweets were exposed by someone from another school. The tweets went like this: "Black masculinity isn't a problem for america's (sic) colleges. White masculinity is THE problem for america's (sic) colleges."

There would be outrage and Grundy would be fired quicker than a Bill Clinton pickup line in a sorority house.

But Grundy is black and she wasn't tweeting about black masculinity, she was tweeting about white masculinity. So, no harm, no foul, in the liberal mind. In fact, on Friday, the school's spokesman, Colin Riley (not to be confused with Anus O'Toole who runs the debate club) told FoxNews.com that Grundy was "exercising her right to free speech and we respect her right to do so."

I'm all for free speech, even when I don't want to hear what the liberal exercising that right is saying. But let's face it, if Grundy was white making the exact statements about black men on campus, she would have been told to go elsewhere to teach her racist hatred.

She has also tweeted more racist crap incorrectly claiming that only whites had enslaved entire generations of people. "Deal with your white shit, white people. slavery is *YALL* thing."

Grundy does not seem to like white folks very much, I believe.

On Saturday, the school had been inundated by angry emails. Some of these emails were from former donors to the so-called institution of higher learning stating they would no longer donate to the school.

So after the brave staff of Boston University finished peeing in their skivvies, the tune changed: "The University does not condone racism or bigotry in any form and we are deeply saddened when anyone makes such offensive statements." the university's Colin said with a tremble in his voice.

Nick Pappas, a student at the University of Massachusetts Amherst was the person who discovered the tweets and posted Grundy's racist tweets on his website SoCawledge.com.

Pappas questioned how she could teach a diverse group of students when she holds racial hostility toward an entire group of people. "You have to teach college-aged white males eventually, no? . . . this seems like you are unqualified to grade their work as you clearly demonstrate some kind of special bias against them," he wrote.

When the fertilizer hit the proverbial fan, this was when alumni and donors wrote to complain. 

Riley doubled-down stating: " . . . the opinions expressed by Dr. Grundy, in what were seemingly private electronic messages, constitutes her opinion and we must recognize her right to have that opinion whether or not we agree."

True, we all have equal dibs on the First Amendment.

But the school does not have to hire her if her opinion is racist, vile and likely to interfere with her ability to grade students fairly. Also, the "seemingly private electronic messages" were not so private that Nick Pappas was unable to retrieve them from social media.

Grundy didn't respond to requests for comment from FoxNews.com and has now made her Twitter account private, which proves my point about it.

David Horowitz, who runs the website FrontPageMagazine.com and is the author of "Reforming our Universities," told FoxNews.com that "Anti-white racism is rampant in Black Studies programs." 

He also pointed out how the school's reaction to the blowback betrays double-standards on race. "If she were a white racist rather than an anti-white racist, she would never be hired. Professors are supposed to be experts in some scholarly field and professionals in their classroom discourse. They don't have a license to indoctrinate students in their prejudices--whether those prejudices are right or left," Horowitz said.

Let me repeat: I am all for free speech. We all have the right to express our opinions. But if I work for Burger King and tweeted that I believe their burgers taste like the leather of a bicycle seat on a hot summer day after Michael Moore rode it, I would expect to be looking for work at McDonalds very soon thereafter.

Tweet

On Burning: One Muslim's Infidel is Another Muslim's Holy Muslim

Claiming the Islamic State is not Islamic or doesn't represent what Islam is really all about only says that you are either Islam-ignorant, lying for the sake of Islam (called Taqiyya) or that you belong to a different sect of Islam than the Muslim you claim is un-Islamic.

Sunnis believe the Shia's are infidels, and the feeling is mutual. Both believe Sufis are infidels, but the Sufis just keep on dancing anyway. Sunnis and Shia's hate the Jews because the Koran tells them to, and neither sect particularly likes anyone outside their own tight group.

When the Jordanian fighter pilot, Muah al-Kaseasbeh, was savagely burned to death by ISIS, a Jordanian spokesman told Fox News that it was totally un-Islamic to do so. 

How Obama Supports Global Jihad

It's one thing to circumvent the Constitution of the United States, and quite another thing to support an enemy of the United States. The former is the strategy of a would-be dictator; the latter is the behavior of a traitor. Obama appears to be both.

In a scathing report by Raymond Ibrahim in Front Page Magazine a case is made that the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama have maintained close ties in Egypt, Syria, Libya and Tunisia as well as other less prominent nations. Obama, it shows, is even more intimately tied to this terror organization, according to a recent Gulf News posting.

Before the Arab Spring, an assessment of the Muslim Brotherhood was conducted in 2010 and 2011 by the Obama administration and shows that Obama personally issued Presidential Study Directive 11 (PSD-11) in 2010. Obama ordered an assessment of the Muslim Brotherhood along with other "political Islamist" movements. The result of PSD-11 concluded the United States should shift from supporting the Middle East and North Africa "stability" and instead, back the "moderate" Islamic political movements. 

First Amendment: What, He Worry?

Should the Federal Communications Commission have the right to monitor American newsrooms? Sure, if you believe they have the right to redefine the US Constitution. Think of the FCC as your Big Brother who knows what's best for you. Not.

Here's the deal. The FCC wants to launch a new study so that they can decide what you news you "need" to hear. Your opinion doesn't matter. These FCC clowns will conduct a "General Population Survey" to "measure what your real needs are versus what you think they are." So, what you perceive you need to know is not the same as what the GOVERNMENT says you need to know.