Thursday, 2 February 2017

Trump threatens Mexico

Trump Threatened To Send Troops To Mexico To Stop The "Bad Hombres"


1 February, 2017


According to a transcript obtained by AP of the phone call which took place on Friday morning between President Trump and his Mexican counterpart, Enrique Pena Nieto, and which was intended to patch things up between the new president and his Mexican peer a day after Pena Nieto called off his visit to the US, Trump threatened to send U.S. troops to stop "bad hombres down there" unless the Mexican military does more to control them itself.

The excerpt of the call did not make clear who exactly Trump considered "bad hombres," - drug cartels, immigrants, or both - or the tone and context of the remark, made in a Friday morning phone call between the leaders. It also did not contain Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto's response. Nonetheless, the excerpt "offers a rare and striking look at how the new president is conducting diplomacy behind closed doors." As AP puts it, Trump's remark suggest he is using the same tough and blunt talk with world leaders that he used to rally crowds on the campaign tail.

"You have a bunch of bad hombres down there," Trump told Pena Nieto, according to the excerpt seen by the AP. "You aren't doing enough to stop them. I think your military is scared. Our military isn't, so I just might send them down to take care of it." The phone call between the leaders was meant to diffuse the escalating tension between Trump and Pena Nieto. The two have had a series of public spats over Trump's determination to have Mexico pay for the planned border wall, something Mexico steadfastly refuses to agree to.


A person with access to the official transcript of the phone call provided an excerpt to The Associated Press. The person gave it on condition of anonymity because the administration did not make the details of the call public. A Mexican reporter's similar account of Trump's comments was published on a Mexican website Tuesday. The reports described Trump as humiliating Pena Nieto in a confrontation conversation.

As Business Insider further adds, citing an interview between the Mexican news outlet Aristegui Noticias and Dolia Estevez, a journalist based in Washington, DC, who cited sources on both sides of the call, "It was a very offensive conversation where Trump humiliated Peña Nieto."

"I don't need the Mexicans. I don't need Mexico," Trump reportedly told the Mexican president. "We are going to build the wall and you all are going to pay for it, like it or not."

Trump hinted that the US would force Mexico to fund the wall with a 10% tax on Mexican exports "and of 35% on those exports that hurt Mexico the most," Estevez wrote in Proyecto Puente.







"He even complained of the bad role the [Mexican] army is playing in the fight against narco trafficking," Estevez, whowrites for Forbes and is close to the Mexican journalist and anchorwoman Carmen Aristegui, said during an interviewwith Aristegui's eponymous news outlet. Trump "even suggested to [Peña Nieto] that if they are incapable of combatting [narco trafficking] he may have to send troops to assume this task," she said.
 
The US president "said he would not permit the drugs coming from Mexico to continue massacring our cities," Estevez added. She said Trump went so far as to say, "I really didn't want to go to Mexico last August," referring to Trump's visit to the Mexican capital last year.
 
Peña Nieto was accompanied on the call by people from his country's foreign ministry, while Trump was joined by "the famous son-in-law," likely meaning senior adviser Jared Kushner, and chief strategist Steven Bannon. Kushner is reportedly close to Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray, and they were seen as the likely go-betweens for the two governments. 
 
"Before this unusual onslaught, Peña was not firm," Estevez said. "He was stammering."

This is where the AP's transcript comes in to fill in the remaining blanks.

* * *
As expected, Mexico's foreign relations department denied that account, saying it "is based on absolute falsehoods." The reason is obvious: if accurate, it shows just how little leverage the Mexican president has, if he allows Trump to talk in such a manner.

"The assertions that you make about said conversation do not correspond to the reality of it," the statement said. "The tone was constructive and it was agreed by the presidents to continue working and that the teams will continue to meet frequently to construct an agreement that is positive for Mexico and for the United States."

Trump has used the phrase "bad hombres" before. In an October presidential debate, he vowed to get rid the U.S. of "drug lords" and "bad people." "We have some bad hombres here, and we're going to get them out," he said. The phrase ricocheted on social media with Trump opponents saying he was denigrating immigrants.

Trump's comment was in line with the new administration's bullish stance on foreign policy matters in general, and the president's willingness to break long-standing norms around the globe.

While prior to his inauguration, Trump irritated China when he spoke to the president of Taiwan, breaking long-standing U.S. policy, and his temporary ban on refugees and travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries caused consternation around the world, nothing has created the level of bickering as the border wall, a centerpiece of his campaign. Mexico has consistently said it would not pay for the wall and opposes it. Before the phone call, Pena Nieto canceled a planned visit to the United States.

The fresh fight with Mexico last week arose over trade as the White House proposed a 20 percent tax on imports from the key U.S. ally to finance the wall after Pena Nieto abruptly scrapped his Jan. 31 trip to Washington.

Trump has since tasked his son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner - a real estate executive with no foreign policy experience - with managing the ongoing dispute, according to an administration official with knowledge of the call. At a press conference with British Prime Minister Theresa May last week, Trump described his call with Pena Nieto as "friendly."

A White House spokesman did not respond to the AP's requests seeking a comment if Trump indeed threatened to invade Mexico.

Police Raid Standing Rock Camp

Police Raid Standing Rock Camp, Destroy Tipis and Are Burning What Remains

February 2, 2017

Following our earlier report from Standing Rock on the police raid of the Last Child camp, reports began to roll in that police had taken down tipis and burned whatever remained.

Some of the livestreaming of these incidences was blocked, but what we have been given is as follows.

Please watch and help us get the word out.

Johnny Danger live streamed from the site of this injustice…

Shiyé Bidzííl once again live streamed and related the following message…

Chase IronEyes has been arrested!!!! And the police have been taking down tipis on new camp!! Because its on private land.

That’s right, the police are trespassing to enforce Donald Trump’s illegal executive order allowing the Dakota Access Pipeline to move forward.

Following that livestream, Shiye reported that police were blocking roads and access to the main Oceti Sakowin camp, saying: “B.I.A. Has blocked road access to main camp by cannonball pit stop.”


Help get the word out and show that you STILL STAND WITH STANDING ROCK!




RT


Police raid Standing Rock camps as Army Corps moves forward on construction review


The Army Corps of Engineers is expected to grant the controversial $3.8 billion Dakota Access Pipeline its final easement to cross the Missouri River within days. Meanwhile, police have moved in on camps at Standing Rock in North Dakota and reportedly arrested water protectors there. RT America's Trinity Chavez has the story, and we'll also hear from Chase Iron Eyes, attorney for the Lakota People's Law Project.


Ukrainian offensive in Donbass

Kiev BUK missile hits Makeevka: Ukraine's Malaysian Boeing lie is now exposed (VIDEO)


February 1, 2017 - Fort Russ News
RusVesna - translated by J. Arnoldski -
NOTE from J. Arnoldski: Fort Russ guest analyst Dr. Eduard Popov has received confirmation of this report straight from Makeevka. 
Yesterday evening, January 31st, the tail section of a BUK missile launched by the Ukrainian army from the outskirts of Avdeevka fell in the residential sector of the city of Makeevka. 
The missile part fell right in the yard of a private home and caught fire.Employees of the Ministry for Emergency Situations of the Donetsk People’s Republic arrived at the scene upon calls from local residents and extinguished the fire

Russian Spring News would like to offer the following commentary:
At what target was this shot by such a Ukrainian anti-air defense complex which Ukraine has assured there are none of in the so-called Anti-Terrorist Operation zone in Donbass, and whose absence from the frontline is alleged to be the main reason why Ukraine couldn’t have shot down the Malaysian Boeing?
The target of the Ukrainian missile was a large unmanned aerial vehicle of the OSCE observatory mission which is recording Kiev's genocide against the peaceful civilians of Donbass and is thereby seriously hindering the Ukrainian Armed Forces from executing the criminal orders of the Kiev authorities.
Let’s see how Ukraine will comment on the presence of the infamous BUK complex in the Avdeevka area which, as it has assured, there is no such thing in Donbass


Ukraine - Coup Government Tries To Sabotage U.S.-Russia Rapprochement


Moon of Alabama,

1 February, 2017
Updated below
Fighting in east Ukraine has restarted. This is an attempt by "deep state" forces to prevent any rapprochement between the U.S. and Russia under the new Trump administration.

The west-Ukrainian forces under command of the coup government of President Poroshenko started a large attack against the Russian supported Ukrainian self-defense forces in Donetsk and Lugansk governate.

A ceasefire arranged after the Minsk II agreement provided for demilitarized zones along a line of separation. The Ukrainian government has so far avoided to fulfill the Minsk II agreement that would allow a reuniting of the country. An OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine (SMM), which includes officers from NATO countries as well as Russia, is supervising the ceasefire and issues daily reports.

On January 26 the SMM reported:
The SMM recorded more ceasefire violations [1] in Donetsk region, including about 420 explosions, compared with 228 in the previous reporting period. More than 160 explosions were recorded around the Svitlodarsk area, with exchanges of fire also recorded around Avdiivka and Yasynuvata.
...
The Mission revisited a Ukrainian Armed Forces permanent storage site, whose location corresponded with the relevant withdrawal lines and 
observed that 12 tanks (T-64) and four mortars (2B9 Vasilek, 82mm) were missing, as previously noted.
...

The SMM followed up on reports of a blockade of a railway track near government-controlled Hirske. The railway leads towards the “LPR”-controlled settlements of Donetskyi and Sentianivka (formerly Frunze) (49 and 44km west of Luhansk, respectively). The Mission had observed a train travelling east through Donetskyi on 23 January. The SMM observed that the tracks had been blocked by tree trunks under a bridge on the southern edge of the settlement. About 20 unarmed men wearing camouflage clothing told the Mission that they were veterans from former volunteer battalions. The SMM observed a tent near the blockade site.
The observations on the 26th pointed to the preparation of a full attack which was launched on January 28:
The SMM recorded fewer ceasefire violations in Donetsk region between the evenings of 27 and 28 January compared with the previous reporting period (including about 330 explosions compared with about 520).[1] In the following 24 hours, however, the SMM recorded over 2,300 explosions, primarily in the Avdiivka-Yasynuvata-Donetsk airport area.
The SMM observed that the intense artillery barrage was launched north to south originating from the government held area.

The NAZI volunteer battalions from west-Ukrainian Galicia are spearheading the attack. There is ongoing fighting with intense artillery usage on several points along the ceasefire line (map). One main battle ground is the city of Avdeevka in the demilitarized zone north-west of Donetzk city.

The U.S. government propaganda site RFERL sees a "creeping offensive" initiated by the government side. Even the belligerent and anti-Russian Washington Post editors have to acknowledge that the Ukrainian government started this round. While unreasonably blaming Russia they observes:
Ukrainian commanders acknowledge that in recent weeks their forces had moved some positions forward in the no-man’s land between the front lines.
During the last two years the Ukrainian army experienced a massive build up. New equipment came in from the U.S. and other NATO countries and U.S. training missions tried to teach some basic fighting tactics. But while the newly conscripted 250,000 men army looks big on paper it still lacks any coherence and will to fight for the coup government and its U.S. overlords. Only the NAZI "volunteer battalions" have some fighting spirit but they are up against people defending their immediate homes. Any large offense from the government side will thus fail.

The fight was planned and started just after the inauguration of the new U.S. president Trump. Trump has acknowledged that Crimea is part of Russia as its population is overwhelmingly Russian. He has announced to seek good relations with Moscow. He will likely eliminate sanctions against Russia.

For the Ukrainian coup government and its neo-conservative supporters this marks the end of their dreams. If it loses U.S. and NATO support the Ukraine must declare bankruptcy, the government will be kicked out and the country will, over time, move naturally back into the Russian sphere.

To prevent that Poroshenko was ordered to launch a new attack while blaming Russia. He did as his mentors told him and traveled to Berlin in the hope of German support. But such is not coming. The German government let it know that it sees through his games and has no interest in them. The government friendly daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung "leaked" (translated here) that Berlin knows that Poroshenko started the fight to influence Trump and to prevent any sanction relief for Russia. But Berlin believes that the gimmick will fail and Merkel fears that Poroshenko will end up losing another round of the war while Russia will still get the better relations it seeks.

One would hope so. There is nothing to win for western-Europe, or anyone else, in another fight with Russia.

Neither the Trump administration nor the EU has blamed any side for relaunching the conflict. The civil NATO head Stoltenbergstayed within the official line blaming neither side. That surely is not to Poroshenko's favor.

The massive buildup of U.S. and NATO troops along the Russian border as well as the renewed fighting in Ukraine are part of the imperial plan initiated under Obama to squeeze Russia into a minor global role. It is an extremely dangerous endeavor. Russian history shows that it will not allow such. Trump will hopefully reverse the Obama plans and, as far as one can currently tell, seeks to arrange friendly cooperation with Russia wherever feasible.

The destination of the last official foreign visit of former Vice President Biden was Ukraine. The World War III promoting Senator McCain visited Kiev on New Years eve. Both were heavily involved in the earlier coup against the constitutional Ukrainian government. Biden's son is involved in natural gas business in Ukraine. Did they leave directives or suggestions?

The current attempts in Ukraine to sabotage a U.S. Russian rapprochement will probably not be the only ones. Some "accident" in the Baltic or "mistake" in Syria could surely be arranged by "deep state" rogue force. If such happens nether side should fall for it.

Update:

Politico wrote about the John McCain / Lindsey Graham New Year visit to Ukraine a month ago. Notice what they said:
I admire the fact that you will fight for your homeland,” Graham told Ukraine’s 36th Separate Marine Brigade in the town of Shyrokyne,about four kilometers from the line of contact, according to a video released Monday by the Ukrainian presidency.
Your fight is our fight,” Graham said during the visit on Saturday alongside President Petro Poroshenko. “2017 will be the year of offense,” he continued. “All of us will go back to Washington and we will push the case against Russia. ..."
...
McCain, a former Republican presidential candidate and prisoner of war in Vietnam, said: 
“I believe you will win. I am convinced you will win and we will do everything we can to provide you with what you need to win. ..."
That is obviously incitement to start a new war. But with their opposition to Trump McCain and Lindsay are out of the decision circles in Washington DC. They can write as many furious op-eds as they want but no one is going to read them and start a war with Russia.

Ukraine War Rages On Alarming UN Security Council


Israeli News Live

UN security Council has meet over the escalation of the Ukrainian War, as some are calling this the "Unforgotten War". MSM still plays its part in making the separatist look like the aggressor with Russian President Putin pulling all the strings, but it seems far deeper than just this.
UN: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukr...
BBC: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-...
Donetsk: https://twitter.com/vicktop55/status/...
Syria: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-medi...




From the Guardian. Not so much "it's all Putin's fault" but "it's all Trump's fault"


Ukraine clashes leave several dead and test Trump's Russia stance



Both sides accuse the other of shelling, and water and power shortages in -18C weather raise fears of humanitarian crisis

Trump administration threatens Iran

Iran put on notice’ after ballistic missile test – White House National Security Advisor


‘Iran put on notice’ after ballistic missile test – White House National Security Advisor
National security adviser General Michael Flynn © Carlos Barria / Reuters

RT,
1 February, 2017

Washington has put Tehran on ‘official notice’ over its recent ballistic missile test, with White House National Security Advisor, Mike Flynn describing it as provocative and destabilizing the situation across the Middle East.

The Trump administration "condemns such actions by Iran that undermine security, prosperity and stability throughout and beyond the Middle East that puts American lives at risk," Flynn told reporters Wednesday.

Reuters reported that an anonymous White House official said the missile test was carried out on Sunday from a site near Semnan, east of Tehran.

A White House statement released by Flynn said the missile test was in defiance of UN Security Council Resolution 2231 which called upon the country “not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles.”

Iranian officials on Tuesday, however, insisted that the country has complied with the restrictions imposed in the Iran nuclear deal, according to Al Jazeera.
The Russian deputy foreign minister also concurred the test does not contravene the UN resolution.

"Such actions, if they took place, do not breach the resolution," Sergei Ryabkov, the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister, told Interfax news agency, saying demands for UN talks were aimed at "heating up the situation".

AP reported that a defense official said the missile test ended with a “failed” re-entry into the earth’s atmosphere but had no details on the type of missile.
Flynn included with his criticism of a recent attack against a Saudi naval vessel “conducted by Iran-supported Houthi militants.”

Flynn stated, "Iran is now feeling emboldened," and criticized the Obama administration.

The Obama Administration failed to respond adequately to Tehran’s malign actions—including weapons transfers, support for terrorism, and other violations of international norms,” said Flynn in the statement.

Flynn added that the Trump administration “condemns such actions by Iran,” and "we are officially putting Iran on notice," although it's not clear what he meant.


As Iran Dumps Dollar, Congress Quietly Slips in Bill for ‘Use of Force Against Iran’


1 Febraury, 2017


On March 21, The Islamic Republic of Iran will cease using the U.S. dollar in all of its financial reporting. The decision to stop using the dollar as a reference has been in the works for some time but was expedited after the Trump administration decided to include Iran as one of the seven countries banned from entering the United States.

Iranian PressTV reported, “Valiollah Seif, the governor of the Central Bank of Iran, was quoted by domestic media as saying that Iran would either replace the US dollar with a new common foreign currency or use a basket of currencies in all official financial and foreign exchange reports.”

Seif reportedly stated the country of Iran needs a much more stable foreign currency, that the dollar is insignificantly found in exchange houses throughout the country, and Iran would be better-suited trading in European Union Euros, Chinese Yen, or in United Arab Emirates Dirham.
Following Trump’s plan, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen have all been banned from entering the US for a period of at least 90 days. The decision has angered globalists who see borders as just one more man-made obstacle to freedom to travel the world, as well as anyone with family or conducting business in those countries.

Even with all the angst and outrage, if Iran goes ahead with its plan to replace the dollar in its monetary system, the country’s theocratic leaders run the risk of falling victim to U.S. vengeance.
In fact, the United States is already preparing for potential conflict with Iran, the US has introduced H.J.Res.10 – Authorization of Use of Force Against Iran Resolution


This resolution was quietly introduced last month with absolutely no media attention in spite of the fact that it“authorizes the President to use the U.S. Armed forces as necessary in order to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.”

Other countries and their leaders have attempted to do the same thing as Iran, but it backfired in their faces and they were subsequently invaded by the US. 
TFTP’s Jay Syrmopoulos reported in January, NATO’s involvement in Libya, “was not for the protection of the people, but instead it was to thwart Gaddafi’s attempt to create a gold-backed African currency to compete with the Western central banking monopoly.”

Likewise, the involvement of the USA in Libya’s affairs, “was also driven by a desire to gain access to a greater share of Libyan oil production, and to undermine a long term plan by Gaddafi to supplant France as the dominant power in the Francophone Africa region.”
Just as in Libya, Iraq’s Saddam Hussein waded into the currency controversy when he announced Iraq would no longer sell Iraqi oil in dollars. According to The New American, “Iraqi despot Saddam Hussein, once armed by the U.S. government to make war on Iran, was threatening to start selling oil in currencies other than the dollar just prior to the Bush administration’s ‘regime change’ (George W. Bush) mission.” The year 2000 Timearticle stated Saddam’s purpose for making the change was for Iraq to no longer deal “in the currency of the enemy”.

In 2006, just prior to Syria’s Bashar Al-Assad being called by U.S. officials as a genocidal war criminal who needs to step down, the Chicago Tribune reported “Syria has switched the primary hard currency it uses for foreign goods and services from the U.S. dollar to the euro in a bid to make it less vulnerable to pressure from Washington. The decree signed by Syrian Prime Minister Naji al-Otari on Monday ordered government bodies and public-sector companies to use euros to pay for foreign transactions.” The announcement may seem insignificant, but it may have been the last straw in an already chilly relationship with Syria. After all, Syria had made business arrangements with nearly all of America’s foes and major competitors; Cuba, Venezuela, Argentina, Iran, Russia, and China.

That plan backfired quickly after the U.S. targeted Assad for removal, going so far as to provide arms and cash to Sunni rebels in a proxy war against Syria’s Assad.
Donald Trump has said he may pursue a more diplomatic solution. However, that is yet to be seen. For the moment, he’s simply banning all immigration from Syria amid talk of establishing “safe zones” for Syrians to be able to remain in their homeland. It remains to be seen if the terms “safe zone” are equivalent to what the previous Bush administrations called “no-fly zones,” a tactical move which led to air superiority over Iraq and Libya, later leading to those countries’ downfalls.
As The Free Thought Project has reported on numerous occasions, Muammar Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, and Bashar Al-Assad all attempted to move away from the dollar and replace it with another currency. All three saw their countries destroyed. Only Assad remains in power for the moment, protected only by Russia, and Syrian ally Iran. But after Russia withdraws, one could only expect the conflict to resume, with the expressed intents and purposes of overthrowing Syria and allowing for Western companies to enter and exploit Syria’s natural resources, and establish a more dollar-friendly national currency.
Make no mistake, the US has no problem invading Iran and will do so on a whim — all the while, maintain support of the citizens — in the name of spreading freedom. 



House bill would allow Trump to wage preventive war on Iran

1 February, 2017

Washington - A joint resolution introduced in the House of Representatives last month authorizes preventive war against Iran to stop the Islamic Republic from developing nuclear weapons.

H.J. Res. 10, the “Authorization of Use of Force Against Iran Resolution," is sponsored by Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) and permits the president to wage war as he sees fit, with the goal of thwarting Iran's alleged nuclear ambitions.

"The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as the President determines necessary and appropriate in order to achieve the goal of preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons," the measure states, adding that any such action is subject to the War Powers Resolution, which limits military action to 60 days unless Congress offers the Commander-in-Chief an authorization for use of military force (AUMF) or a declaration of war.

"The United States must do all that is necessary to ensure that all of Iran’s pathways to obtaining a nuclear weapon are blocked," the resolution declares, adding that "Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapon is a threat not only to the United States but also to our allies in the region" and "Iran’s sincerity in forgoing the procurement of a nuclear weapon has created legitimate cause for concern."
The last national intelligence assessment showed consensus among all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies that Iran is not trying to develop nuclear weapons, a conclusion also reached by leading Israeli intelligence officials. Despite this, Republican lawmakers have long called for a U.S. war on Iran. Perhaps most alarmingly, Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) called for a nuclear attack against Iranian nuclear sites.

"If you have to hit Iran, you don't put boots on the ground," Hunter said in 2013. "You do it with tactical nuclear devices and you set them back a decade or two or three. I think there's a way to do it with a massive aerial bombardment campaign."

The United States is the only nation to have ever waged nuclear war, killing hundreds of thousands of Japanese at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 and for years to come from radiation, cancer and other ailments.
Iran has not initiated a war in nearly 200 years, although the Islamic Republic does sponsor groups considered terrorists by the United States, Israel and other Western nations. The U.S., Israel and others also sponsor their own campaigns of state terrorism against Iran, allegedly launching cyberattacks against the nation's nuclear facilities and assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists. The U.S. also trained and supports the Iranian exile terrorist group MEK, which has carried out attacks against regime targets for decades. Crippling economic sanctions have hamstrung the Iranian economy and hurt ordinary Iranians the most.

The concept of preventive war gained popularity within the George W. Bush administration following the Islamist terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. While military experts say there are times when preemptive war may be necessary to thwart an immediate foreign threat, the far more nebulous notion of preventive war — waged on the mere possibility that a threat may one day emerge — is much more dubious. The infamous 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was a textbook preventive strike, meant to eliminate the U.S. Navy threat in the Pacific and thus avert the type of war that eventually led to the destruction of much of Japan.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower, faced with calls for a preventive attack on the Soviet Union, scoffed: “All of us have heard this term ‘preventive war’ since the earliest days of Hitler... I don’t believe there is such a thing; and, frankly, I wouldn’t even listen to anyone seriously that came in and talked about such a thing.”

Bush's determination to wage preventive war in Iraq — a nation which had nothing to do with 9/11 and which had long ago given up developing weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) — is widely considered one of the most disastrous decisions in U.S. history, resulting in hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians and thousands of U.S. troops killed and a country left in ruins and ripe for exploitation by Islamist extremist groups like Islamic State.