The media and effete powers-that-be have been twisting themselves into Halal pretzels Islamsplainin’, rationalizing how a given Muslim terrorist attack isn’t really “Islamic” or isn’t significant. These contortions can become quite ridiculous, such as suggesting that recent Allahu Akbar-shouting Munich shooter Ali Sonboly might somehow have had “right-wing” motives because, among his violent passions, was an interest in Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik.
A more common (un)intellectual contortion is the minimizing tactic of claiming, as is politically correct authorities’ wont, that a given jihadist attacker “has no ties to IS” (the Islamic State), as if there’s nothing to see here if a man doesn’t provide notarized evidence of allegiance to the boogeyman du jour. Yet this is much as if we’d claimed during the Cold War that a Marxist terrorist attack wasn’t really a Marxist™ terrorist attack because we couldn’t find a connection to the Soviet Union. The issue and problem wasn’t primarily the Soviet Union but communism (Marxism birthed the USSR, not the other way around), an evil ideology that wreaks havoc wherever it takes hold. Likewise, the IS didn’t birth Islam; Islam birthed the IS.
Nonetheless, moderns will often use the misdirection of focusing inordinately on national or group associations when discussing terrorism. This is a dodge, one designed to help us avoid uncomfortable truths and which relegates us to playing an eternal game of whack-a-mole. The USSR is gone but communism is still a problem (witness North Korea and Cuba), and insofar as it’s less of a threat, it’s largely because its ideas have been discredited. Bad ideas’ standard bearers will change. But as long as the bad ideas remain tolerated and credible, they’ll always win converts.
In fact, the reality that today’s terrorists are diverse makes the point. They may be Iranian, Afghani, American, Albanian, German or from any nation whatsoever; they may be part of Hamas, IS, al Qaeda, the U.S. Army (Maj. Hassan), some other organization or no organization; they may be of any race or ethnicity, be rich or poor, and male or (occasionally) female. They only have one truly common thread: being Muslim.
The point is that, ultimately, this is a battle not of nations or organizations but of ideas, and ideas are powerful. Beliefs matter. Every action begins with a thought — or, at least, with a reflex response reflecting a world view that has shaped one’s thoughts and emotions.
Yet there’s more to understanding Muslim violence. A comprehensive German study of 45,000 immigrant youths, reported in 2010, found that while increasing religiosity among the Christian youths made them less violent, increasing religiosity among the Muslim youths actually made them more violent. Not more violent “if they join Islamic State” — but more violent, period. And while the study authors had their own, mostly politically correct explanations, I think I know a major reason why.
Becoming serious about a faith and digging into it generally means getting closer to its actual teachings. A lukewarm cradle Catholic may have little knowledge of even the Bible, but a devout one will likely have read that and the Church’s catechism. Likewise, an indifferent nominal Muslim (you know, the kind they call “moderate”) may not know much of the Koran, nine percent of which is devoted to political violence. Yet a pious Muslim may scour that book — and more. He may also imbibe the remaining 84 percent of the Islamic canon, the two books known as the Hadith and Sira.
And, respectively, 21 percent and 67 percent of their texts are devoted to political violence.
That’s what you call a full dose. Also note that while access to these two more obscure Islamic canonical texts was once limited, the Internet age places them at everyone’s fingertips. Couple this with the violent preaching of immigrant Imams and that Muslims consider violent warlord Mohammed “The Perfect Man” and thus the ultimate role model, and the German study’s findings are no mystery. Speaking of mysteries, though, the true effect of Islam will remain one unless we delve further — and break ourselves of certain misconceptions common to our times.
In the grip of religious-equivalence doctrine, many moderns have a habit of painting all faiths with the same brush; militant secularists hiss that they’re all bad while many conservatives will behave as if all “real” religions are good; consequently, conservatives sometimes reconcile dislike for Islam by insisting it is “not a religion.” But like ideology, “religion” is a category, not a creed; it contains the good, the bad and the ugly. So while religion isn’t bad, there is bad religion.
Now, most belief sets that have been embraced by man — whether we label them “ideology” or a “faith”; be they Nazism, communism, the Aztec religion involving mass human sacrifice or something else — have been what we today would call lacking to awful. This understanding lends perspective:
Islam is not an anomaly, historically speaking.
Rather, it aligns more closely with man’s default for belief sets: violence-enabling/tolerating wickedness. It is Christianity that is anomalous — as a real religion of peace.
Why does grasping this matter? The common assumption that a belief set labeled “religious” must involve generally peaceful injunctions is a result of projecting our own historically anomalous Christian standards onto other, often historically normal belief sets. This understanding can break us of the emotional reluctance to accept that what we call a “major religion” could be destructive. Instead of wrongly believing we must place Islam in a lonely, sparsely occupied “abnormal” category, we realize we merely have to accept that it’s closer to that oh-so tragic, bloody human norm. Now, there’s yet one more thing to consider about the impact of Islam.
When analyzing the effect of a religion, people understandably focus on its injunctions. What does it dictate? Yet such an analysis is insufficient because man’s default is not to be saintly but uncivilized; people will naturally display many if not all the Seven Deadly Sins and be generally barbaric unless some civilizing agency tempers their fallen nature. Thus, as with a person, the true measure of a religion is not just what it does but what it fails to do — its faults of omission, not just of commission.
It is clear to me that while Islam may be better than the Aztec and some other pagan religions, it nonetheless does a relatively poor job taming the beast. In fact, it apparently gives great license to our sinful nature. Considering greed, lust and sloth, why is it that many Muslims believe it’s licit to rob, rape and leech off kuffars (non-Muslims)? Does Islam do much to temper the envy and pridefulness inspiring so much anti-Western hatred? What of the officially approved bearing of false witness called taqiyya? Then there’s that father of violence, wrath. Danish psychologist Dr. Nicolai Sennels, who worked for years with incarcerated Muslim youth, points out that anger is highly accepted in Muslim cultures; moreover, the ability to intimidate, he writes, “is seen as strength and source of social status.” He concludes, “Islam and Muslim culture have certain psychological mechanisms that harm people’s development and increase criminal behaviour.”
Also note that the West’s foundational faith, Christianity, and its root, Judaism — the two faiths Westerners are best acquainted with and whose norms they may reflexively (and unwisely) project onto Islam — have as the basis of their moral law the Ten Commandments. Islam’s moral law is Sharia. And ne’er the twain shall meet.
In other words, even if given Muslims aren’t mindful of their canon’s violent injunctions, even if jihad is the furthest thing from their minds, they will as a group still be more prone to violence. That is, as long as their hearts and minds embody what Islam does, and what it fails to do.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/POPE-ISLAM-NON-VIOLENT-e1470250102648.jpg369640Selwyn Dukehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngSelwyn Duke2016-08-03 14:48:322016-08-03 14:48:32Whitewashing Muslim Violence and Blacklisting Reality
If you had just arrived from Mars to observe the Republican and Democratic conventions, one after the other, you undoubtedly would conclude that they were talking about two different countries.
One America recognizes real threats from foreign jihadi fighters who seek to eradicate our existence and to replace our freedoms with Islamic sharia law. It believes that economic revival — through tax reform, trade reform, and enforcing our borders and immigration laws – holds the key to future prosperity.
The other America believes we face no real foreign threats, the economy is doing great, and that our biggest challenge comes from crop failures, rising seas, and monster storms caused by — you guessed it, climate change.
Terrorism and Islamist ideology that seek to replace our democratic republic with a “superior” law written by Allah are a distraction from the real mission of Democrats in Philadelphia. As former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley put it: “to hell with Trump’s American nightmare.”
The Defense Department was ordered to follow suit, and under Obama’s direction, launched massive building programs at American naval bases to shelter them from rising seas.
President Obama squandered billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars in pursuit of an ideological agenda.
This past May, the CIA quietly shuttered its climate change initiative, since it was unable to find data to sustain the Left’s faith in its new religion that man-made climate change would destroy the earth, or significant portions of it.
Cyclical changes in our climate have always occurred and have had dramatic impacts in the past, long before the carbon emissions the Left blames for today’s droughts and tsunamis.
Hollywood actress Signourey Weaver, hair on fire, introduced a “scare-me” video by James Cameron and claimed that farmers in Kansas were losing their crops today because of climate change.
I understand that Ms. Weaver is too young to have lived through the Dust Bowl — so am I. But I would hope she isn’t too dumb to have read about it and to have understood that these things have happened before, and will happen again.
Government’s role, in such circumstances, is to extend a helping hand of solidarity to individuals who lose their livelihoods to disasters they had no way of foreseeing. Its role is not to preemptively cripple the nation with fantasy-driven regulations and shut down entire sectors of the economy.
Incapable of a sustained conversation about national security, we’re left with Sen. Harry Reid suggesting that the Director of National Intelligence should “fake” national security briefings to Donald Trump. Why? Because Trump suggested that perhaps the Russians might be able to find the 33,000 emails Hillary Clinton admitted she deleted from the private server even President Obama warned her not to use.
In Senator Reid’s mind, entrusting Mrs. Clinton with our national security secrets is just fine, even though FBI Director James Comey acknowledged she had been “extremely careless” by transmitting highly-classified intelligence information on her personal email server. Let’s not forget that the FBI still hasn’t found more than 2,000 classified emails Mrs. Clinton deleted.
Bill Clinton thought he had found a “trump” card that would earn his wife a place in the pantheon of national security heroes.
“She launched a team — and this is really important today — she launched a team to fight back against terrorists — online — and built a new global counterterrorism effort,” he said.
Think about that for a moment. In the words of her own husband, Mrs. Clinton’s main achievement in the war against the terrorists attacking us was to hire a few social media analysts whose advice she didn’t consult and in fact ignored when they informed her the Benghazi attacks had nothing to do with a YouTube video insulting Mohammad.
I’ve got news for the Clintons: our intelligence community has been focusing on social media for years. The biggest growth industry among the Beltway bandits is foreign language experts who can mine Facebook, Twitter and other social media sites for evidence of jihadi connections.
That’s great, but it isn’t enough.
Former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta went overboard in his support for Mrs. Clinton, claiming that, if elected, she would take office as someone who “has the trust of our troops who know she will always have their back.”
But that’s the other America. The America of facts.
The differences of our two Americas are many. One America lionizes the mothers of young black men killed by the police – often after they had committed assaults of one sort or another. The other celebrates as heroes police officers gunned down by snipers seeking vengeance.
One America believes that women, illegal immigrants, invalids, minorities, and people with kaleidoscope glasses constitute grievance classes who deserve special treatment. The other believes that all Americans deserve equal treatment under the law and equal opportunity under our system.
As a life-long investigative reporter, I remain committed to the facts. But I recognize that the contest in November will be determined not by facts, but by faith, and by how many believers on each side come to the polls. That is the new reality of the two Americas of 2016.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/dnc-2016-e1470248094503.jpg340640Kenneth R. Timmermanhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngKenneth R. Timmerman2016-08-03 14:15:462016-08-03 14:27:50Democratic convention more about Fantasyland than America
Is Saudi Arabia trying to manipulate the U.S. presidential election? My latest in FrontPage:
Are the Saudis trying to make sure that the candidate of their choice is elected President of the United States this November?
Khizr Khan is more than just the father of slain Muslim U.S. serviceman Humayun Khan and the mainstream media’s flavor of the moment in its ongoing efforts to demonize and destroy Donald Trump. As far as the Obama administration and Hillary campaign are concerned, he is a living validation of the success of their strategy against “extremism”: by refusing to identify the enemy as having anything to do with Islam, they draw moderate Muslims to their side and move them to fight against terrorism. By contrast, Trump, in their view, alienates these moderates and drives them into the arms of the terrorists.
That all sounds great. There’s just one catch: Khizr Khan, and the Clinton campaign, have extensive ties to the Saudis – far more extensive than any possible connection that Donald Trump’s campaign may have had to Russia’s alleged involvement in the leak of emails that revealed that the entire Democratic Party presidential nominating process was rigged from the start. Not that the mainstream media will pause from speculating about Trump and the Russians long enough to tell you any facts about Khizr Khan, Hillary and the Saudis.
Intelius records that Khizr Khan has worked at Hogan Lovells Llp. According to the Washington Free Beacon, “Hogan Lovells LLP, another U.S. firm hired by the Saudis, is registered to work for the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia through 2016, disclosures show. Robert Kyle, a lobbyist from the firm, has bundled $50,850 for Clinton’s campaign.”
Khizr Khan
The Free Beacon added that the Saudi government has “supplied the Clinton Foundation with millions. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has given between $10 and $25 million to the foundation while Friends of Saudi Arabia has contributed between $1 and $5 million.”
And so we were treated to the spectacle of an employee of a firm that is registered to work for the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia lambasting Donald Trump at the Democratic National Convention, and then (lo and behold!) becoming a media darling as he excoriates Trump for his “black soul.”
Might the government of Saudi Arabia, which has spent countless bullions of dollars spreading the virulent and violent Wahhabi strain of Islam around the world, have any interest in making sure that a presidential candidate who speaks more forthrightly about the Islamic terror threat than any presidential candidate has since John Quincy Adams, and who has vowed to take concrete steps to counter that threat, is defeated? Is that why Khizr Khan, brimming with self-righteous indignation and misleading disinformation about the relationship of Islamic jihad terrorism to Islam, was not only featured at the Democratic National Convention but has dominated the news cycle ever since?
This has gone on long enough. The 28-page section of the 9/11 report detailing Saudi involvement in the September 11, 2001 jihad attacks were just finally released (albeit with substantial portions still redacted), after being kept classified for fifteen years by one President who held hands with the Saudi King and another who bowed to him. And for fifteen years, the U.S. has done little or nothing to free itself from dependence upon Saudi oil and develop alternative energy sources. Why not? We know the Saudis have kept the Clintons’ palms abundantly greased. Who else’s?
The big story of foreign influence in this presidential election is not some vague imaginings about the Russians supposedly hacking Democratic National Committee emails showing the Democrats engaged in indisputably unethical behavior. The real foreign influence story in this election involves the Saudis and the Democrats. Saudi influence in Washington must end. Khizr Khan represents an all-out effort by the mainstream media and the Democratic Party establishment to maintain that influence. In light of that, Donald Trump was right to answer his attacks, and should have been even stronger in his responses. It’s time for the United States of America to regain its independence.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/khizrkhan-e1470246357532.png348640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2016-08-03 13:47:442016-08-03 13:49:51Khizr Khan’s Saudi Ties
It isn’t that Howard Dean thinks Iran is full of Methodists. He just thinks that Islam is wonderful, and that the Islamic Republic of Iran is evil and oppressive, and so therefore it must not really be Islamic at all. How this misunderstanding of Islam has grown so strong as to be able to take over whole countries, he did not deign to explain.
Howard Dean
“Howard Dean: ‘I Don’t Consider Iran to Be a Muslim Country,’” by Adelle Nazarian, Breitbart News, August 1, 2016 (thanks to Bob):
PARIS — Former Vermont Governor Howard Dean told Breitbart News that “Iran is the farthest thing from an Islamic Republic” and that Iran is not “a Muslim country.”
Instead, Dean said, Iran is “a republic that’s been hijacked by thugs and murderers.” He explained that he does not know Muslims whom he respects and who behave the way the regime does.
Dean was speaking exclusively to Breitbart News from Paris last month during a conference hosted by the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI). The PMOI (also referred to as MEK) is an opposition movement that played an active role in overthrowing Iran’s last Shah while President Jimmy Carter was in power, and which was de-listed as a terrorist organization under Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
During the interview, Dean also pointed out his belief that the term “radical Islamic terrorism” is a manufactured phrase “for political, domestic consumption in America.”
The transcript of the interview follows (emphasis added):
Breitbart News:You don’t think [the Iran deal] was a good deal? Howard Dean: Look, I respect the president and I certainly didn’t oppose the deal but I don’t think it was “a good deal.” That is, I think we did give away a lot more than we needed to. And I think the Iranians are the largest sponsor of state terrorism in the world. And they are making lives very difficult for a lot of our allies. So I didn’t oppose the deal. I think it had its pluses and minuses, and I think we’re not going to know, for a few years, whether the deal makes any sense or not. And interestingly, I think the president’s reputation — as a good or not-so-good president — will depend on what happens with that deal.
Breitbart News: So — Saudi Arabia. Do you really think they are our allies, if I may ask… ?
Howard Dean: Yeah, I do think we are allies. I have my problems with [the] Saudis. One of the reasons I got involved with the resistance here is because I feel very strongly about human rights and the Saudis don’t respect human rights. So I’ve never personally thought that the alliance with Saudi Arabia was anything more than an alliance of convenience. But they are a key partner and they’re certainly not our enemy. So I don’t feel as strongly as some of the panel did.
Breitbart News: One more question regarding rhetoric on an international scale, do you find issue with the fact that our commander-in-chief and people within the administration (like Josh Earnest, and so forth) don’t actually use the term “radical Islamic terrorism’”?
Howard Dean: Well, That is actually something that I agree with … I think that most Muslims are not terrorists. In fact, I teach a foreign policy course at Yale. I had three Muslims sit in from other countries. And they pointed out to the class that their families were at greater risk from Daesh [ISIS] than ours because they live with them every day, around the corner.
So I think it’s important for us not to crank up a religious war. That, of course, falls into the hands of Daesh. So I think to call it Islamic terrorism is really just more for political, domestic consumption in America rather than something that you’d want to do in the world. I think these people are thugs, and they’re murderers. I don’t give them a cause. I don’t believe — I think they’re crazy, I think they’re lunatics, pathetic lunatics.
Breitbart News: There’s definitely a psychological aspect to it.
Howard Dean: Yes. I think they are deeply, psychologically disturbed, including the people who send them out there. So I wouldn’t want to give them any legitimacy by saying they have something to do with an organized religion. There is no organized religion which is a legitimate religion which condones this kind of behavior.
Breitbart News: I understand exactly where you’re coming from. But on the reverse side of that, you have the Islamic Republic of Iran which does use religion as a means to execute its citizens.
Howard Dean: I agree. And that’s exactly why I don’t want to do it. I think Iran is the farthest thing from an Islamic Republic, with some of the highest rates of execution in the world, torturing political prisoners, one of the worst human rights records in the world, a destructive force in the world. There’s nothing good about the Islamic Republic of Iran. And it’s not an Islamic republic; it’s a republic that’s been hijacked by thugs and murderers. And I think the legitimacy and the real government of Iran would be a secular government, which treated women equally with men.
Breitbart News: And just a follow up on that, do you think there is a nation that is governed by Islamic principles, or that considers itself to be majority Muslim, and that is truly an embodiment of what a Muslim nation should be like?
Howard Dean:I think Indonesia is close. There are terrorists in Indonesia but they’re not being embraced or being played footsie with by the government. I think there are other countries: Tunisia is one; Morocco has a better human rights record than most; it’s not a complete democracy. But there are nations where the people are overwhelmingly Muslims that don’t behave the way Iran does. I don’t consider Iran to be a Muslim country, because I don’t know Muslims who behave like that who I respect. And I think the vast majority of the billion Muslims in the world have no desire to live in Iran whatsoever because of the way their regime behaves.
Breitbart News: Or Saudi Arabia.
Howard Dean: Or Saudi Arabia. Although, I would say that Iran is far worse than Saudi Arabia … Although Saudi Arabia — I’m deeply disturbed by the financing of authoritarianism by the Saudis in countries where we didn’t have a problem, when now we do, in a place like Kosovo and the Balkans. So I’m not a big fan of Saudi Arabia. I think that was a marriage of convenience and that the Saudis have to clean up their act. The Saudis are, in part, responsible for terrorism, under the name of Islamic terrorism. And again, I don’t consider that — I think if you’re financing it elsewhere and it comes back into your own home, you bear some responsibility for that….
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/iranian-money.jpg378640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2016-08-03 09:26:442016-08-03 09:29:57Howard Dean: ‘I don’t consider Iran to be a Muslim country’
You would almost think he has something to hide. Along with the Democratic Party. And the Saudis.
Khizr Khan
“Panic Mode: Khizr Khan Deletes Law Firm Website that Specialized in Muslim Immigration,” by Matthew Boyle, Breitbart, August 2, 2016:
Khizr Khan, the Muslim Gold Star father that Democrats and their allies media wide have been using to hammer GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump, has deleted his law firm’s website from the Internet.
This development is significant, as his website proved—as Breitbart News and others have reported—that he financially benefits from unfettered pay-to-play Muslim migration into America.
A snapshot of his now deleted website, as captured by the Wayback Machine which takes snapshots archiving various websites on the Internet, shows that as a lawyer he engages in procurement of EB5 immigration visas and other “Related Immigration Services.”
The website is completely removed from the Internet, and instead directs visitors to the URL at which it once was to a page parking the URL run by GoDaddy.
The EB5 program, which helps wealthy foreigners usually from the Middle East essentially buy their way into America, is fraught with corruption. U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has detailed such corruption over the past several months, and in February issued a blistering statement about it.
“Maybe it is only here on Capitol Hill—on this island surrounded by reality—that we can choose to plug our ears and refuse to listen to commonly accepted facts,” Grassley said in a statement earlier this year. “The Government Accountability Office, the media, industry experts, members of congress, and federal agency officials, have concurred that the program is a serious problem with serious vulnerabilities. Allow me to mention a few of the flaws.”
Grassley’s statement even noted that the program Khan celebrated on his website has posed national security risks.
“There are also classified reports that detail the national security, fraud and abuse. Our committee has received numerous briefings and classified documents to show this side of the story,” Grassley said in the early February 2016 statement. “The enforcement arm of the Department of Homeland Security wrote an internal memo that raises significant concerns about the program. One section of the memo outlines concerns that it could be used by Iranian operatives to infiltrate the United States. The memo identifies seven main areas of program vulnerability, including the export of sensitive technology, economic espionage, use by foreign government agents and terrorists, investment fraud, illicit finance and money laundering.”…
What’s perhaps interesting is that also on this website that he has now deleted, Khan revealed that he spent nearly a decade working for the mega-D.C. law firm Hogan & Hartson—now Hogan Lovells LLP—which connects him directly with the government of Saudi Arabia and the Clintons themselves. Saudi Arabia, which has retained the firm that Khan worked at for years, has donated between $10 million and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation. Hillary Clinton, despite the repeated urging of Trump, has refused to return the Clinton Cash money to the Saudis. What’s more, Hogan Lovells also did Hillary Clinton’s taxes—and helped acquire the patents for parts of the technology she used in crafting her illicit home-brew email server that the FBI director called “extremely careless” in handling classified information….
Having attended the Republican National Convention (RNC) in Cleveland two weeks ago and having intently watched the Democratic National Convention (DNC) on TV last week, I couldn’t help but notice how distorted both conventions were, especially in terms of the media’s coverage of them.
In the Black community, when grandma said, “boy, you telling a tale,” she meant that you were telling a lie. So, a tale of two conventions can easily be translated to mean a lie of two conventions.
There is no debating that the Democratic convention had much more production value than the Republican convention, which made for better TV. There is also no debating that the Republican convention was much more substantive than the Democratic convention.
The Democrat’s convention was put together like the Hollywood production that it was, but there was absolutely no substance to it. All the speakers rattled off the typical liberal mantras: higher taxes on the rich, more government regulations, tons of “free” stuff, increase in the minimum wage, homosexual entitlements, amnesty for illegals, etc.
But like all things Hollywood, it was all make believe.
For President Obama to describe Hillary Clinton as the most qualified candidate in the history of America is quite insulting, as well as an outright lie, but of course lying is consistent with Clinton’s M.O.
One need not go back one hundred years to disprove Obama’s statement about Clinton, one need only go back to former presidential candidate George H.W. Bush. He was a Navy fighter pilot during World War II, former Congressman from Houston, Ambassador to the United Nations, chairman of the Republican National Committee, Envoy to China, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), chairman of the Executive Committee of the First International Bank of Houston, professor at Rice University, director of the Council on Foreign Relations and two term vice president of the United States.
There can be absolutely no doubt that George H.W. Bush is by far the most qualified person to ever seek the office of the presidency. For Obama and the media to perpetuate this lie about Hillary’s qualifications is political and journalistic malpractice.
The media is in bed with the Clinton campaign in particular and with Democrats in general. No honest person would even argue that point.
The RNC was not as polished as the DNC, there is no doubt, but there can be no argument that Trump and the Republicans presented more substance at their convention.
Democrats and the media refused to separate the messages coming out of the RNC from their dislike of Trump and all things Republican.
Everyone knows that Trump is against amnesty for those in the country illegally, against these horrible trade deals that Obama and Hillary are promoting, having more stringent vetting of those wanting to come to the U.S. from certain countries, rethinking the U.S.’s relationship with NATO, etc.
The philosopher, Socrates, taught us that asking questions is the beginning of understanding. Trump has challenged the status quo by forcing us to question the usual way we have done things.
Why do we allow NATO members not to pay their dues? Why spend millions of dollars with the same ole mercenary consultants that go from one losing campaign to another? Why do we allow American companies to move overseas and export their products back to the U.S. without consequences? Why do we allow anyone to come into our country illegally and then demand all sorts of rights and benefits? Why do we go around the world and defend our allies when they put no skin in the game?
The Democratic convention was four days of uttering the usual automatic party ticks of how the government is the solution to every problem, whereas the Republican convention, with our nominee Trump, forced the nation to question everything that we are doing.
Fundamental change never comes without first posing a question?
Herein lies Hillary Clinton’s Achilles heel. Almost 70 percent of the American people say the country is headed in the wrong direction. Clinton claims to be the agent of change, but all she’s offering is the same Obama policies on steroids. She cannot reconcile these diametrically opposing ideas, and that’s why the election is basically tied right now.
Trump has successfully tapped into this desire for change that seems to confound the liberal media. They are still trying to figure out why the public believes in “The National Enquirer” more than the mainstream media.
The Democratic convention was very predictable, with no surprises. They got people charged up and ready to go with no underlying roadmap as to where the party wants to take them.
The Republican convention was very unpredictable, but you knew what direction they wanted to take you, one could argue whether the destination was where the majority of the public wanted to go.
But there is absolutely no arguing that under Trump, the country will go in a different direction.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/hillary-trump-two-conventions-e1470225476191.jpg373640Raynard Jacksonhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRaynard Jackson2016-08-03 07:54:062016-08-03 07:58:11A Tale of Two Conventions
Washington, D.C. – As the savage attacks claimed by the Islamic State (IS) seem to follow on one another at an ever-increasing pace, too many still do not understand what this group is, where it came from, who its leaders are, and most important of all, why they do what they do. Whether the IS-controlled territory called “The Caliphate” survives in its current form or not, the totalitarian ideology Islamic supremacists call Sharia and the jihad it impels will cause adherent fighters, followers and supporters around the world to fight on and, unless decisively defeated, to continue to metastasize.
In the absence of such a defeat, the Islamic State continues to add new groups to its growing franchise. And individual jihadists from nearly every continent continue to step forward to pledge allegiance to IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as they carry out murderous attacks on innocent civilians. Unfortunately, too many at the top levels of U.S. national security, the media, academia and other elites still fail to understand this enemy, typically approaching it as a mere “terrorist organization” or purveyor of “violent extremism.” In particular, unless and until there is a much better appreciation for the phenomenon that is spawning and intensifying Islamic supremacism as practiced by IS, Americans and other freedom-loving peoples will be in mortal peril.
Vice President for Research and Analysis Clare Lopez introduces the Center’s new book
In the hope of enabling such an appreciation, the Center for Security Policy is pleased to present the first monograph in its “Terror Jihad Reader Series”:Jihad! Understanding the Threat of the Islamic State to America, by Ilana Freedman. This publication delves into IS’ inspirational Islamist identity and describes the real threat it consequently poses to the United States. Ms. Freedman brings to bear her rigorous scholarship and sober analysis in order to define this enemy accurately and illuminate its abilities, intentions and motivations.
Speaking on the timeliness of this critical new book, Center for Security Policy President Frank J. Gaffney noted:
For much of the past fifteen years, the United States has been preoccupied with the threat posed by al Qaeda (AQ). More recently, attention has preponderantly shifted to what began as an AQ splinter group, the Islamic State. Ilana Freeman’s new monograph, Jihad!, makes plain why the object of this new focus needs both to be better understood, utterly crushed and recognized as just one part of the global jihad movement – which must get the same treatment. It should be considered required reading, especially for those who seek to be our next Commander-in-Chief and charged with protecting this country against such enemies, both foreign and domestic.
Jihad! Understanding the Threat of the Islamic State to America is available for purchase in Kindle and paperback format at Amazon.com. As with all of the Center’s other publications, this one can also be downloaded for free at www.SecureFreedom.org. A video describing this new monograph featuring its editor, Clare Lopez, is here:
The Center for Security Policy is a non-profit, non-partisan national security organization that specializes in identifying policies, actions, and resource needs that are vital to American security and then ensures that such issues are the subject of both focused, principled examination and effective action by recognized policy experts, appropriate officials, opinion leaders, and the general public. For more information visit www.securefreedom.org
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/islamic-state-in-america-e1448624178469.png354640Clare Lopezhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngClare Lopez2016-08-02 20:19:122016-08-02 20:19:12Understanding the Threat of the Islamic State to America
The auspicious beginning of our nation may have begun with rebellion and war; however, the events that led to the birth of our freedom would not have been successful without a unified belief that the colonists were fighting for a righteous cause. George Washington believed in this cause and used every tactic and all his wits to win.
Even before the city of Boston was under siege, Washington had planned to impact the supply lines and hit the British where it hurt. The opportunity presented itself when the standoff in Boston was at a stalemate. Washington had the idea that, by creating a fleet of cruisers (small schooners) to essentially sneak up and take command of British ships, pillaging their supplies, it would serve three purposes.
First, it would weaken the British. They were relying on provisions taken from American vessels, and Washington knew of these difficulties. The vessels had no chance of fighting back, but perhaps he could counter their influence by doing the same thing.
By taking the British supplies, he could reinforce the troops surrounding the city, while simultaneously attacking the red coats from the sea. With all the problems the British were encountering while cornered and surrounded in Boston, Washington’s decision to exploit those weaknesses from every angle possible.
Lastly, creating the nation’s first naval force would help turn the tide of battle to the Americans. Washington needed seasoned seamen, ones who he could trust to not only fight for the cause, but who knew how to navigate the dangerous Atlantic Ocean, known for its stormy seas.
Because the Continental Congress was hesitant to commission a formal navy, Washington took it upon himself to pay for small schooners to be converted into cruisers. Thus, Washington’s Cruisers was born, and this necessary step allowed Washington to attack the British on land and sea. He looked to the north shore of Massachusetts for veteran sea captains to begin outfitting the first of seven cruisers, recruiting from the township of Marblehead.
On the recommendation of Colonel John Glover, Washington promoted Captain Nicholas Broughton to command the ship, Hannah, the first small schooner that was converted into a cruiser and named after Colonel Glover’s wife. The Hannah was the first cruiser of the fleet in Washington’s Cruisers.
“Washington was detailed and specific: Broughton was to sail at once against “such vessels as may be found on the High Seas or elsewhere, bound inward and outward to and from Boston, in the service of the ministerial Army, and to take and seize all such vessels … ” Any prizes were to be sent into a port near the Army, under a careful prize master who was to immediately notify Washington. Broughton was to diligently search for enemy mall, and to forward any found which might give warning of enemy intentions to Washington. Prisoners were to be treated kindly, nor were their private goods to be seized, and all prisoners were to be turned over to headquarters when port was made. Engagement with the enemy was to be avoided, for “the Design of this Enterprize, being to intercept the Supplies of the Enemy … will be defeated by your running into unnecessary engagements.” Broughton was strictly charged to be “extremely careful and frugal” with his ammunition, which was very scarce.
Each one of the cruisers flew the standard that became known as the Washington Cruiser’s Flag. With a white field and a large pine tree in the center, the idea came from Colonel Joseph Reed, Washington’s aide. The pine tree had become a popular symbol for freedom in the colonies, and is often referred to as the Liberty Tree. Other flags, such as the Bunker Hill flag and the Continental flag, had the Liberty Tree symbol incorporated in their designs, as well.
At the top of the flag, the words “Appeal to Heaven” were written, essentially expressing their trust in God that they would win their freedom from the tyranny of British rule. The phrase is said to come from Second Treatise on Government by John Locke. After the battles at Lexington and Concord, a letter from Dr. John Warren, which included the same phrase, was sent to the citizens of England, denoting the barbarousness of the British forces:
“…to the persecution and tyranny of his cruel ministry, we will not tamely submit; appealing to Heaven for the justice of our cause, “we determine to die, or be free.”
The Hannah ran aground early in her commission, but six more ships were already being outfitted or on mission. The other ships, Franklin, Hancock, Lynch, Washington, Lee, and Harrison, all wreaked havoc on British supply ships over the course of the next year. In addition to these cruisers, Washington had batteries built on the Charles River that could be floated down into the middle of the city, attacking with their muskets and larger guns. On October 26, 1775, the batteries attacked Boston, causing damage and instilling fear.
The Washington Cruiser flag began to have a reputation for instilling fear in the British soldiers. With a righteous cause to fight for, and the blessings of God, the militia kept their momentum going until they won or died for their cause. If you are interested in owning this flag, you can find it at www.americanflags.com, where they sell flags made in America by Americans. They have many rare flags from our illustrious nation’s history, all with the same quality and attention to detail as the originals.
With the benefit of hindsight, we now know how truly brilliant a general Washington was, with his decisive and calculated risk-taking strategies, that led us to the freedom we have today in our beloved United States of America. Flags unite people for a cause, for patriotism, and for an overall sense of belonging to something bigger than we are. The Washington Cruiser flag’s message apparently reached the ears of Heaven.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/AmericanLibertyAssoc_AppealToHeaven_Flag_Web-e1470182302289.jpg363640American Flagshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAmerican Flags2016-08-02 20:04:192016-08-02 20:04:19Washington’s Cruisers: An Appeal to Heaven
Our nation’s immigration laws are completely blind as to race, religion and ethnicity, and were enacted to protect national security and the lives and livelihoods of Americans.
My previous post for CAPS, “Hillary Clinton’s Immigration Goals Make Her Economic Promises Impossible to Achieve,” focused on how providing potentially tens of millions of illegal aliens with an equal standing in the overflowing labor pool of unemployed or underemployed American and lawful immigrant workers would exacerbate the plight of these desperate workers and their families.
Today my focus will be on how Hillary Clinton’s proposal to provide millions of illegal aliens with lawful status would do irreparable harm to national security and public safety.
Hillary has made much of having been Secretary of State. During her acceptance speech at the DNC she said, in part, “We will not build a wall,” thereby echoing the remarks of her successor at the State Department, John Kerry who, in his commencement address at Northeastern University several months ago, said, in part, that America could not remain great by hiding behind walls.
One of the critical roles of the State Department is to issue visas to aliens who seek entry into the United States. The visa process came under scrutiny by the 9/11 Commission. It identified failures in border security and failures of the visa process that enabled the 19 terrorists in the 9/11 hijackings and terrorists who preceded them. Visa fraud was a means to enter the U.S., allowing them to embed themselves in the country as they went about their deadly preparations.
Given this, any journalist who interviews Hillary Clinton should ask if she has read “The 9/11 Commission Report.”
That report should be required reading for the president of the U.S., all high-ranking members of the administration and every member of Congress.
The official government report, “9/11 and Terrorist Travel – Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States,” focused specifically on the ability of the terrorists to travel around the world, enter the U.S. and ultimately embed themselves here as they went about their deadly preparations to carry out an attack. The preface of this report begins with the following paragraph:
“It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.”
The U.S. admits approximately one million lawful immigrants each year. These are aliens from around the world who are immediately placed on the pathway to U.S. citizenship when they are granted lawful immigrant status and provided with an Alien Registration Receipt Card to provide documentary evidence of their lawful immigrant status.
Such aliens are supposed to be carefully screened to prevent criminals and terrorists from gaining entry into the U.S. That system lacks sufficient resources, however, to properly screen them all. In some instances, terrorists such as the Tsarnaev brothers, who carried out the Boston terror attack, had been granted lawful immigrant status, and one of them had become a naturalized citizen.
Faisal Shahzad, the “Times Square Bomber” who detonated a car bomb in Times Square in 2010, also had naturalized prior to carrying out his attack.
Other terrorists had been granted political asylum or participated in the previous amnesty program. Yet Hillary Clinton promises to greatly increase the number of Syrian refugees admitted into the U.S. even though, according to FBI Director James Comey, they cannot be vetted. I wrote about this issue in “How Obama’s Refugee Policies Undermine National Security.”
The U.S. also admits tens of millions of nonimmigrant alien visitors – aliens who are admitted for a temporary period as tourists, students, workers or for other lawful purposes.
However, every American should be concerned about providing millions – perhaps, indeed, tens of millions – of aliens who evaded the vetting process conducted at ports of entry by entering the U.S. without inspection. There are no resources to interview them and no resources to conduct any field investigations. We could not be certain of their identities, their backgrounds or even how long they have been present in the U.S.
While the open borders anarchists blithely refer to these aliens as being undocumented, they are un-inspected.
Think of it this way, you cannot tell a “good guy” from a “bad guy” without a scorecard.
“Undocumented” aliens have no scorecards!
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/hillary-elitist-1-e1475397152494.jpg336640Michael Cutlerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMichael Cutler2016-08-02 19:39:272016-08-02 19:39:27Hillary Clinton’s Immigration Goals Would Irrevocably Undermine National Security
I always thought that James Comey was a company man. As it happens, the company he heads is among the most influential, powerful and scary companies in the world––the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
But still, a company guy. Whether working for a president on the moderate-to-conservative spectrum like G.W. Bush or for the far-left current occupant of the Oval Office, Barack Obama, makes absolutely no difference to this type of obedient––and now we know, subservient––accommodator.
The red flag of skepticism should have gone up years ago to the American public when lavish praise was heaped on Comey by people who revile each other. While the spin insists that Comey is a lot of virtuous things––“straight-shooter,” ”unbiased,” “fair-minded,” “non-partisan” “man of his word”–– don’t be fooled. That’s Orwellian newspeak for someone who will do and say anything to keep his job, including, as Comey did in the latest Clinton fiasco case, (1) create out of whole cloth an “intent” criterion in federal law to let a clearly corrupt politician off the hook, and (2) appropriate the job of the Attorney General in announcing what the outcome of the FBI’s investigation should be.
While citing Hillary’s “extreme negligence” in handling classified information, a virtual litany of illegal acts committed by the then-Secretary of State, and the fact that hostile foreign operatives may have accessed her e-mail account, Comey said he would not refer criminal charges to Attorney General Loretta Lynch and the Justice Department. Hillary, he said, was “extremely careless” and “unsophisticated,” among other spitballs he hurled in her direction before completely letting her off the hook!
Comey’s friend and colleague, Andrew C. McCarthy, says that the FBI director’s decision is tantamount to sleight-of-hand trickery. “There is no way of getting around this,” McCarthy writes. “Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation…in essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require.”
Thomas Lifson, editor and publisher of AmericanThinker.com, wrapped the entire debacle up neatly, saying that “the director of the FBI offered 15 of the most puzzling minutes in the history of American law enforcement. James Comey spent the first 12 minutes or so laying out a devastating case dismantling Hillary Clinton’s email defense. Then, “in a whiplash-inducing change of narrative, he announced that `no reasonable prosecutor’ would bring the case he had just outlined, an assertion that was contradicted within hours by luminaries including former U.S. attorney (and NY City mayor) Rudy Giuliani and James Kallstrom, former head of the FBI’s New York office.”
Which begs the question: Why would Comey act contrary to the wisdom of virtually every legal scholar who has written or spoken about this case?
It is certainly not because he wasn’t taught by his upstanding parents the difference between right and wrong, good and bad, moral and immoral. One could make the case––and many have––that he is as close to a moral man as it gets in public life. According to his bio in Wikipedia, Comey, a lawyer, majored in religion at the College of William and Mary, and wrote his thesis about the liberal theologian Reinhold Niebuhr and the conservative televangelist Jerry Falwell, emphasizing their common belief in public action.
THE LOOKING-THE-OTHER-WAY FACTOR
That’s what company guys do. According to blogger, lawyer, and movie critic Debbie Schlussel, Comey has a history of looking the other way. Elaborating on her claim, Schlussel says:
Comey led the team to free four Islamic terrorists––Farouk Ali-Haimoud, Ahmed Hannan, Karim Koubriti, and Abdel Ilah Elmardoud, who were known as the “Detroit Terror Cell”…the four men had plots [to] poison water in Michigan and Ohio, blow up cites in Disneyland and Vegas hotels [and] blow up the U.S. Air Force base in Incirlik, Turkey, from which American and Israeli military planes took off, and also to bomb the Queen Alia Hospital in Jordan. The terrorists’ video surveillance of Disneyland featured them singing about jihad and destroying America in the background.
Because of James Comey, all four of these men are now U.S. citizens. He freed these Islamic terrorists, got them citizenship, and prosecuted the federal officers who pursued them.
Schlussel maintains that Hillary was never going to be indicted, “but having James Comey lead the `investigation’ of her sealed her free-as-a-bird card.”
“Comey would see no evil…when it came to the Clintons,” Schlussel says. “[He] worked overtime to free these four convicted terrorists, the same way he worked overtime to keep Hillary Clinton free.”
In 2004, Corsi says, Comey was a deputy attorney general in the Justice Department when he “apparently limited the scope of the criminal investigation of Sandy Berger…[and Berger’s] removal and destruction of classified records from the National Archives. The documents were relevant to accusations that the Clinton administration was negligent in the build-up to the 9/11 terrorist attack.”
“Curiously,” Corsi continues, “Berger, Lynch and Cheryl Mills (Hillary’s longtime advisor and Chief of Staff during her years as Sec. of State) all worked as partners in the Washington law firm Hogan & Hartson, which prepared tax returns for the Clintons and did patent work for a software firm that played a role in the private email server Hillary Clinton used when she was secretary of state.”
Corsi said that “various statements Comey made about Berger’s mishandling of classified documents bear comparison to his comments regarding Hillary Clinton’s email server” and that Berger, “a convicted thief of classified documents, had been advising Clinton while she served as secretary of state and had access to emails containing classified information.”
Yep… a company guy. As an editorial in The Wall St. Journal stated: “Three days after James Comey’s soliloquy absolving Hillary Clinton of criminal misuse of classified information, the big winner is—James Comey. He often poses as the deliverer of `hard truths,’ and the hard truth is that he has helped himself politically but not the cause of equal treatment under the law.”
Indeed, recommending that she be indicted would have been bad for––ta da––James Comey! “Doing that, however,” the editorial goes on, “would have courted fury among Democrats and their media friends. And if Mrs. Clinton later won the election, Mr. Comey might have had to resign before his 10-year term expires in 2023. Otherwise he’d risk becoming persona non grata as Louis Freeh was under Bill Clinton.”
The entire, protracted, and fraudulent investigation seems now like a dog-and-pony show for the American public. Here, journalist Bill Still says that during Hillary’s interview with the FBI, not only was Comey not present, but it wasn’t recorded and she was not under oath!
Let’s take another upstanding guy, the once-esteemed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, conservative John Roberts. Did I say “conservative”? Silly me. At midnight on Christmas Eve in 2009, the Democrats voted unanimously––without one Republican vote––for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, to inflict the proven-failure of socialized medicine on the American public.
When the constitutionality of the legislation was challenged up to the Supreme Court, a vote of 5–4 affirmed that the individual mandate was constitutional under Congress’s taxation powers. It was Roberts who tipped the balance, sending shockwaves of disbelief throughout the country––much like the reaction to Comey’s incomprehensible decision on Hillary.
At the time, there was talk of Roberts’ “caving” because “someone” had “reached” him and threatened to expose the fact that his two young children had been adopted illegally, a revelation that, if true, would have effectively forced him to resign in ignominy for lying under oath about the adoption. I have no idea if that allegation is true or not, but it made sense to me at the time, particularly because his decision made no sense.
I was also aware of the many allegations listed in websites like Clinton Body Count (and this one too), Bush Body Count, and Obama Body Count, which detail the many people who have gone missing, been killed, had “accidents,” or “committed suicide” under each president’s tenure, the implication being, of course, that each of these chief executives had a personal “hit” squad to, ahem, remove anyone who threatened their tenure in office, or, more seriously, could land them in prison. Oh, let’s not forget the Hillary list compiled by noted radio host Tami Jackson.
Around the time of Comey’s colossal whitewash of Hillary’s e-mail scandal, the prominent former President of the United Nations General Assembly, John Ashe, died when a barbell dropped on his throat and crushed his larynx. Coincidentally, that very day he was scheduled to testify in a trial about “Chinagate” (of Bill Clinton fame) and, specifically, of the bribery charge against Chinese businessman Ng Lap Seng, and even more specifically of Hillary’s links to Seng.
I’ve followed the persuasion factor not only through “The Godfather” and other mafia-themed movies, but in real life watching Rudy Giuliani deal with and decimate the mob, first as Associate Attorney General under President Reagan and later as mayor of New York.
It’s really quite simple how the thug culture works, be it in the Mafia or in government: Find out what a person values and then home in on that vulnerability. Isn’t that how Obamacare passed? Here Perry Peterson, a retired auditor and tax accountant, documents the many backroom deals that persuaded various politicians to sign on, such as Nebraska’s Senator Ben Nelson, who was promised the “Cornhusker kickback” that would pay the full price of expanded Medicaid coverage in Nebraska forever, or Senator Mary L. Landrieu’s agreement to sell her vote in the “Louisiana Purchase” for $300,000,000.00 that would flood into her state through added benefits in the Obamacare bill, on and on and on.
There’s more hardball persuasion, to be sure, like reminding the target that you know that his daughter just moved to an off-campus apartment, or that his wife would feel terrible learning about his girlfriend.
What “persuasion” could possibly be employed on a rich, successful guy like Comey? This cartoon says it all!
THE CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST FACTOR
Well whaddaya know? According to Investment Watchdog, “It seems that our beloved FBI Director is or until very recently was a director and board member of HSBC, which is tightly connected to the Clinton Foundation…this is the same HSBC [Swiss bank] that was accused of laundering drug cartel money, was heavily involved in the LIBOR scandal, and who knows what else, and all while our esteemed FBI Director was part of the senior leadership.”
Writer Kim McLendon elaborates upon a report issued by one of the few major whistleblowers about the foundation, Wall St. analyst Charles Ortel, who exposed AIG as well as the massive discrepancies in General Electric’s finances in 2008. Ortel found more massive discrepancies “between what some of the major donors say they gave to the Clinton Foundation…and what the Clinton Foundation said they got from the donors and what they did with it.” The letter he sent to donors, charity regulators, and investigative journalists labeled the charity “the largest charity fraud ever attempted– that being the network of illegal activities worldwide, whose heart is the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation.”
Ortel goes on to say: “The Clinton Foundation…has been part of an international charity fraud whose entire cumulative scale (counting inflows and outflows) approaches and may even exceed $100 billion measured from 1997 forward. Yet state, federal and foreign government authorities, that should be keenly aware of this massive set of criminal frauds, so far, move at a snail’s pace, perhaps waiting for the Federal Bureau of Investigation to reveal the scope of its work and the nature of any findings.”
Aha! “Perhaps” the powers-that-be are “waiting for the FBI” to investigate this international con game. And wouldn’t that be one James Comey? Is there indeed a conflict of interest that prevents the esteemed director from looking into this ostensibly criminal enterprise?
Writer Tim Brown says that just because Comey was a Director with HSBC “does not assume corruption.” But it’s notable, he adds, that according to The Guardian, the “Clinton foundation received up to $81 million from clients of controversial HSBC bank.”
In March, Judicial Watch documented the piles of money taken in by The Clinton Foundation, and reported: “Our lawsuit had previously forced the disclosure of documents that provided a road map for over 200 conflict-of-interest rulings that led to at least $48 million in speaking fees for the Clintons during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state.
All of this and more led InfoWars reporter Kit Daniels to conclude, “Comey may be on the periphery of Clinton’s use of foreign policy to raise money for her foundation, but his position at HSBC may explain in part why she received kid glove treatment while others accused of similar crimes were prosecuted. His connection, however tenuous, should be reason enough to revisit the case and appoint a special prosecutor, as Rep. Matt Salmon of Arizona has demanded.”
According to a report by Investors Research Dynamics, “in 2003, Comey became the deputy attorney general at the Department of Justice (DOJ). In 2005 he signed on to serve as general counsel and senior vice president at defense contractor Lockheed Martin. In 2010 he joined Bridgewater Associates, a Connecticut-based investment fund, as its general counsel. On September 4, 2013, James B. Comey was sworn in as the seventh Director of the FBI. Talk about the revolving door in and out of government! A shill for the private defense industry and later a Wall Street investment firm, two of the groups that support Hillary’s ascent to the Throne.”
Meanwhile, last month, the IRS preempted the FBI by launching an investigation into what appears to be a full-blown, multi-tentacled criminal enterprise that spans the globe. Was this timed to let Comey slither away untarnished?
Is that why Comey failed to ask Hillary even one question about her Foundation and its seemingly nefarious Kremlin connections, about the indictments (as reported by Michael Sainato) of several of her superdelegates for corruption and ethics violations involving huge sums of money and of her closest aides for funny money vis-à-vis the Clinton Foundation, about the 181 Clinton Foundation donors who lobbied the State Department while Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state about State Department favors for weapons manufacturers and foreign governments, about how Hillary’s campaign chairman John Podesta bagged $35 million but failed to fully disclose this windfall, or about how Hillary showed remarkable disinterest in going after the murderous butchers of Boko Haram (as reported by Mindy Belz and J.C. Derrick in WORLD Magazine) because, allegedly, millions of dollars in donations were given to the Clinton Foundation by Nigerian billionaires with oil interests in northern Nigeria? On and on and on.
Do any of these (and other) “dots” connect to Comey? Did he ever wonder if any of the 33-thousand e-mails that Hillary destroyed involved these explosive subjects? Is he just an incurious guy, or does his high position with HSBC and its oh-so-close Clinton Foundation connection make the conflict-of-interest suggestion too uncomfortably plausible?
THE STINKING FISH FACTOR
Whether it’s in industry or the military or sports or show business, if failure occurs, it’s always the top dog who is accountable. Not the assembly line worker or the buck private or the third baseman or the ingénue, but the one who calls the shots, who occupies the ultimate seat of power. Look at what just happened at the Democratic National Committee…the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief of Communications, and Chairwoman all resigned because of the hacking that proved the DNC to be both crooked and racist.
That is why they say that the fish stinks from the head, or, in the DNC case, the hydra-headed monster. And the same is true in politics. Which may be the real reason why Comey punted, taking the coward’s way out in steadfastly refusing to do what both the law and morality demanded of him.
No matter how you look at Hillary’s e-mail scandal, as well as the murders of Ambassador Christopher Stevens, information Officer Sean Smith, and CIA operatives Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods in Benghazi—and for all we know, a dozen paths to the Clinton Foundation—they all lead directly to the Oval Office and to one Barack Obama. Reminds me of the cards in a Monopoly game: Go to Jail, Go Directly to Jail, Do not Pass Go!
Aaah! According to my politically astute West Coast friend, Charlotte Baker, “Maybe Comeyknew all about this Russian connection and so was willing to fall on his sword to appear to ‘save’ Hillary, taking a big disapproval hit, but confident she would go down in flames by mid-October at the latest, or maybe even in mid-September, when he’ll announce that criminal charges under RICO statutes are being ‘highly recommended’ against the racket that these gangsters, I mean politicians, have been running for 15 years. While he may have willfully bent to the Clinton machine in July, he may already have sufficient multiple violations of criminal activity on them and the associates of the ‘Foundation’ and will unleash his findings at a time when the DNC cannot reorganize or recover. Maybe that’s his game: “Okay. I’ll give you a pass now, but I’ll then do what’s right, what the law demands, come September.”
Legal scholar Henry Mark Holzer reminds us that,” Hillary was not under oath when she testified before Comey’s FBI investigators. Seems to get her off the hook, doesn’t it? But under 18 United States Code Section 1001, it is a five-year felony to lie to an FBI agent (and other government officials) about a material fact relevant to an investigation. The federal criminal dockets are loaded with convictions of people who beat the underlying charge only to be convicted of an 18 USC 1001 offense. If Hillary loses the election, keep an eye out for an Obama pardon, to choke off a retributive indictment by a Trump Department of Justice. There is a long road ahead for Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton before the statutes of limitations expire on her crimes.”
Whether or not it’s the stinking fish factor or something else that compelled James Comey to cave to the Obama Justice Department and the Clinton Machine will be for historians to determine. Personally, however, I can’t imagine a man of James Comey’s stature tolerating the fact that history will include obituaries of him that state in their opening paragraphs that he was the first Director of the FBI who took a fall.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/jamescomey.jpg360640Joan Swirskyhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJoan Swirsky2016-08-02 19:23:442016-08-02 19:33:18James Comey and the Stinking Fish Factor
Christian Ziegler, State Committeeman, Sarasota County, in an email writes:
Just when I thought that the Federal Government couldn’t act more ridiculous than allowing “Sanctuary Cities” to harbor law-breakers, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency recently put out a “How To” guide to avoid enforcement by instituting “Safe Zones” for illegal aliens. These “Safe Zones” have been put in place to allow law-breakers the ability to “participate in activities” or “utilize services” in our country “without fear or hesitation”.
Yes, you read that right. Our Federal Government has put out instructions on how to avoid justice for committing a federal crime. The continued encouragement of lawlessness and refusal to hold individuals accountable for their actions by our Federal Government is both concerning and infuriating.
It’s time that we do something about this and it’s just another reason why we must elect Donald Trump and defeat Hillary Clinton in November. Of all of the issues discussed during this election cycle, I believe that the illegal immigration issue is one of the most important issues facing our country. And while Donald Trump has made it clear that we must build a wall and hold illegal aliens accountable for breaking our laws, Hillary Clinton allowed numerous illegal aliens, including one facing a deportation order, to speak during the DNC Convention and made it clear she’s running for Obama’s 3rd term.
Please take a moment to read the article (below) and reply back with any thoughts that you may have on this issue!
U.S. Border Protection Agcy. Advertises SAFE ZONES for Illegal Aliens
Just about any illegal alien can avoid arrest by following these simple rules, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) advertises in a post on its website’s homepage.
Providing a virtual “how-to” guide for illegal aliens in its “Sensitive Locations FAQs,” CBP explains that immigration laws are not to be enforced at any of a wide range of designated “sensitive locations” – so that illegal aliens may be “free” to live their lives “without fear or hesitation”:
“The policies provide that enforcement actions at or focused on sensitive locations such as schools, places of worship, and hospitals should generally be avoided, and that such actions may only take place when (a) prior approval is obtained from an appropriate supervisory official, or (b) there are exigent circumstances necessitating immediate action without supervisor approval. The policies are meant to ensure that ICE and CBP officers and agents exercise sound judgment when enforcing federal law at or focused on sensitive locations, to enhance the public understanding and trust, and to ensure that people seeking toparticipate in activities or utilize services provided at any sensitive location are free to do so, without fear or hesitation.”
“This policy is designed to ensure that these enforcement actions do not occurat nor are focused on sensitive locations such as schools and churches” without meeting special exceptions, the ICE Sensitive Locations Policy states.
Locations covered by these policies include, but not be limited to:
Schools, such as known and licensed daycares, pre-schools and other early learning programs; primary schools; secondary schools; post-secondary schools up to and including colleges and universities; as well as scholastic or education-related activities or events, and school bus stopsthat are marked and/or known to the officer, during periods when school children are present at the stop;
Medical treatment and health care facilities, such as hospitals, doctors’ offices, accredited health clinics, and emergent or urgent care facilities;
Places of worship, such as churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples;
Religious or civil ceremonies or observances, such as funerals and weddings; and
During public demonstration, such as a march, rally, or parade.
So, just almost any illegal alien can escape arrest by either walking with a second person (a march), attending some type of class, or finding a nearby church, medical facility or school bus stop.
“The enforcement actions covered by this policy are (1) arrests; (2) interviews; (3) searches; and (4) for the purposes of immigration enforcement only, surveillance,” the ICE policy says.
Each “FAQ” answer is accompanied by a translation for Spanish-speaking illegal aliens – but, not in any other foreign language.
The CBP website also provides a toll-free number and email address to enable illegal aliens report immigration enforcement efforts taking place at any of the “sensitive locations.”
DNC shames an American hero. Democrats turned their backs to a Medal Of Honor recipient and other veterans on stage at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia.
Democrats begin yelling ‘No more war! No more war!” as retired U.S. Marine Corps General John Allen, who with other military veterans, were on stage to speak and endorse Hillary Clinton.
A U.S. Marine and Navy veteran writes about the comments made by Kamran Khan at the Democratic National Convention:
Dear Mr. Khan,
I want to preface this letter by stating that I respect your son’s sacrifice for this great nation. By all accounts, he is a true hero that sacrificed himself in service to our country. For that I am thankful.
As a veteran, I watched your comments at the Democratic National Convention with a mixture of sadness, and anger. The United States has a military comprised of volunteers. Every single member has made the conscious choice to join the military and serve. There is not a single service member who has been forced into service. It is important for all service members (and apparently, their families) to understand that service to this great nation does not imbue one with special privileges or rights. I found your comments troubling when you said: “Have you ever been to Arlington cemetery? Go look at the graves of brave patriots who died defending the United States of America. You will see all faiths, genders and ethnicities. You have sacrificed nothing and no one.”
Does it matter whether Mr. Trump has sacrificed “…nothing and no one?”…has Ms. Clinton “..sacrificed” for this nation? How about Mr. Obama? Your comment stating that Mr. Trump “…has sacrifice no one” is alarming. Are you intimating that YOU sacrificed? Sir, your son willingly sacrificed himself. As a father I cannot imagine the pain you must feel but his sacrifice is his own. He was not forced to serve.
I am troubled that you would allow a party that has little more than contempt for the US Service Member to parade you into the DNC to denounce Donald Trump. Did you watch when protesters at the DNC booed and heckled Medal of Honor recipient Capt. Florent Groberg? Did you notice your party interrupting the moment of silence for slain police officers? Your own hypocrisy in not denouncing these acts and instead using the DNC as a platform to make a political point is disgraceful. The simple fact is that whether one served or sacrificed does not give greater power to their statements. One vote is as valuable as another. That sir, is why our Country is great. Your condemnation of one person for a statement while standing idly as your party disparages veterans and police officers is the height of hypocrisy.
To conflate the need to prevent potential terrorists from entering our country with the belief that ‘all Muslims’ should be banned is simply wrong and disingenuous. As a reminder, Mr. Trump said: ” “Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life,” The irony of your son’s own death at the hands of these very people in Iraq should not be ignored. I have little doubt that your son would have recognized the need to protect our country from these very people. In fact, he held is own troops back so that he could check on a suspicious car. Your son understood sacrifice and how to protect “his people”…’his soldiers’….’his fellow Americans’…
As you continue to make the media circuit and bask in the glow of affection cast upon you by a party that has little regard for your son’s own sacrifice, and veterans in general, I would ask you to consider your comments and your position more closely.
Respectfully,
Chris Mark
U.S. Marine and Navy Veteran.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/General-John-Allen-at-dnc.jpg392640Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2016-08-02 07:33:542016-08-02 07:55:32VIDEO: Democrats Turn Their Collective Backs to Medal of Honor Recipient
Are you laughing at how CNN, MSNBC and ABC are going after Donald Trump for what he said about the Kahn’s?
Khizr Muazzam Kahn, father of the Muslim war hero, is either misguided, being used or if Walid Shoebat is half right, Mr. Kahn is a Muslim Brother operative, which actually makes a lot of sense. Apparently Khizr Kahn runs his own New York law firm which does a lot of work with immigrants.
The MSM and the Kahn have been using convoluted concepts, like the U.S. Constitution prohibits religious tests on non-Americans who want to enter America! Then, based upon that false premise, they move to accuse Trump of not understanding the Constitution…and the MSM eats up every silly tear-drenched non-sequitur. If you really want to use contorted reasoning, maybe Mr. Kahn should be THANKING Trump because Mr. Kahn’s son was killed by Islamists in an Islamic country in a war supported by Hillary Clinton.
What The Media Is Not Telling You About The Muslim Who Attacked Donald Trump: He Is A Muslim Brotherhood Agent Who Wants To Advance Sharia Law And Bring Muslims Into The United States
By Theodore Shoebat and Walid Shoebat
The Muslim who attacked Donald Trump, Khizr Muazzam Khan, is a Muslim Brotherhood agent, working to bring Muslims into the United States. After reading what we discovered so far, it becomes obvious that Khan wanted to ‘trump’ Trump’s Muslim immigration policy of limiting Muslim immigration into the U.S.
But not so fast. Trump we have your back.
Khizr Muazzam Khan graduated in Punjab University Law College, as the New York Times confirms. He specialized in International Trade Law in Saudi Arabia. An interest lawyer for Islamic oil companies Khan wrote a paper, called In Defense of OPEC to defend the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), an intergovernmental oil company consisting of mainly Islamic countries.
But more than this, Khan is a promoter of Islamic Sharia Law in the U.S. He was a co-founder of the Journal of Contemporary Issues in Muslim Law (Islamic Sharia). Khan’s fascination with Islamic Sharia stems from his life in Saudi Arabia. During the eighties Khan wrote a paper titled Juristic Classification of Islamic [Sharia] Law. In it he elucidated on the system of Sharia law expressing his reverence for “The Sunnah [the works of Muhammad] — authentic tradition of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him).” A snapshot of his essay can be seen here:
But Khan’s fascination with Islam isn’t the only issue lest they say he was a “moderate Muslim”. What is more worrisome is that at the bottom of the intro, Khan shows his appreciation and the source of his work and gives credit to an icon of the Muslim Brotherhood:
“The contribution to this article of S. Ramadan’s writing is gratefully acknowledged.”
This alone speaks volumes. Khan used the works of S. Ramadan to lay his foundation for his inspiration regarding the promotion of Sharia. S. Ramadan is Said Ramadan, head of the Islamic Center in Geneva and a major icon of the Muslim Brotherhood, the grandson of Hassan Al-Banna the founder and hero of the Muslim Brotherhood which spread terrorism throughout the world.
UPDATE: Due to too many American bickering for “more evidence” we read through Khan’s work (and will continue to post excerpts) to only find a treasure trove on how Khan describes Sharia. He denounces any modern reforms stating that Sharia is fixed. Firstly, it is obvious that Khan instructs Muslims to submit to Sharia:
In the same writing, Khan promotes the Al-Muwatta, the oldest book on Islamic law, written by Muwatta Imam Malik:
The Muwatta is full of references and exhortations to Islamic Jihad and martyrdom ideology. (See Source 1). Khan’s argument about Sharia is that it has no room for adjustment no “right” to have “new source of legislation”. “The Sunnah [Muhammad’s sayings]” according to Khan’s quoting from Islamic history that when it comes to law, a Muslim used the Quran and Sunnah to conclude:
“it vividly demonstrates that the structure of Islamic law–the Shari’ah–was completed during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad, in the Quran and the Sunnah“.
He even refers to Al-Wathaiq Al-Siyasiyah (Political Documents, see Sources #2) regarding “Islam and politics” by Dr. M. Hamidullah which records 250 documents that includes Jihad in Islam amongst all other things that pertains to fundamental Shariah from an Islamist point of view. Any search on Al-Wathaiq Al-Siyasiyah from the Arabic would yield a library on violent Jihad and its promotion which Khan also promotes. This should shut up our critics, Khan’s work pegs that Sharia is fundamental, fixed, with little or no room for any wiggle. [END OF UPDATE]
Said Ramadan, Muslim Brotherhood agent.
All of this leads us to the source for Khan’s work, Khan’s icon and who Said Ramadan was.
Ramadan was a writer who wrote material for the Muslim Youth Movement of Malaysia, an organization that has been promoting Islamic revivalism and indoctrination to recruit young people in Malaysia to jihadism. It is actually a Malaysian branch of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. Khan’s fascination for Muslim Brotherhood icon and Islamic Sharia stems from Ramadan’s book Islamic Law: Its Scope and Equity, which Khan gleaned from to do his work giving credit to Ramadan. A version of it was published for the Malaysian Muslim Youth Movement (a branch of WAMY).
WAMY is the World Association of Muslim Youth which was created through the collaboration of the Wahhabist and Muslim Brotherhood led by Said Ramadan who was, again, the son-in-law of Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood including Ahmad Bahefzallah, the boss of Huma Abedin (Hillary Clinton’s aid) and her parents Sayed Z. Abedin (father) and Saleha Mahmoud Abedin (mother). It was also financed by the wealthy Abdullah Omar Naseef, another boss of the Abedin family who was an Al-Qaeda financier.
Again, Khan wrote his Sharia Law supporting work in the eighties while he was in Saudi Arabia, the motherland of Wahhabism. This would never be possible unless Khan clearly had the support of the Saudi Wahhabist religious institution. We took a snapshot of the text:
While there is so much to glean from his work, time is of the essence, but Khan’s travel according to a recent report, he moved from Pakistan to the United Arab Emirates, a hotbed for the Muslim Brotherhood. Currently he runs a law firm in New York City calledKM Khan Law Office. According to the website, the the law firm specializes in “immigration services” to bring Muslims into the U.S., which presents a clash with Trump’s suggested policy to limit Muslim immigration into the U.S.
To understand the inception of Muslim immigration one must study the Muslim Minority Affairs, a paradigm and an Islamic jurisprudence created by Saudi Arabia which sparked during the times Khan lived in Saudi Arabia while collaborating with the Saudi kingdom.
Khan needs further study and analysis to see how his connect with Hillary Clinton’s campaign since he serves the interest of Muslim oil companies as well as Muslim immigration into the U.S. Intelius reveals Khizr M. Khan used to work for Hogan & Hartson and Lovells, which has ties to the Clinton Foundation:
“Hogan Lovells LLP, another U.S. firm hired by the Saudis, is registered to work for the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia through 2016, disclosures show. Robert Kyle, a lobbyist from the firm, has bundled $50,850 for Clinton’s campaign”
“Many lawyers at Hogan Lovells remember the week in 2004 when U.S. Army Capt. Humayun Khan lost his life to a suicide bomber. Then-Hogan & Hartson attorneys mourned the death because the soldier’s father, Khizr Khan, a Muslim American immigrant, was among their beloved colleagues”
Saudi interests with using Khan to advance Muslim immigration and advance Muslim Sharia is a lengthy subject which has ties to Hillary Clinton’s aid Huma Abedin as well. It will take hours of reading just to cover this topic on how it was The House of Saud’s “Muslim Minority Affairs” and the Abedins (Huma Abedin and family) that played a central role in using Muslim immigration to infiltrate the west with Wahhbi agenda. The House of Saud had used Huma’s father Sayed Zaynul Abedin’s work regarding the Muslim Minority Affairs in the West, published in 1998 as part of 29 works to construct a plan to conquer the U.S. with Islam. It is obvious that Khan is upset, that a Trump victory will eliminate and destroy decades of hard work to bring in Islamic immigration into the United States which was spearheaded by agents in Saudi Arabia like Khan and Huma Abedin and family (Sayed Z. Abedin) which we translated excerpts from his work.
In regards to his son and his sacrifice, on the other side of the coin, many were the ‘Muslim martyrs’ who joined the US military. Ali Abdul Saoud Mohamed, for example, enlisted in the Special Forces of the US Army; he was a double agent for Al-Qaeda. How about Hasan K. Akbar, a Muslim American soldier who murdered and injured fifteen soldiers. There was Bowe Bergdahl, an American Muslim soldier who deserted his men to join the Taliban, a desertion which led to six American being ambushed and killed while they were on the search looking for him. And of course the example of Nidal Malik Hassan, who murdered fourteen Americans in cold blood in Fort Hood. What about infiltration into the U.S. military like Taha Jaber Al-Alwani, a major Muslim thinker for theMuslim Minority Affairs, an icon of the Abedin family (Hillary’s aid Huma) who, while he served in U.S. military, called on arming Muslims to fight the U.S? Al-Alwani is an IMMA (Institute of Muslims Minority Affairs) favorite, Taha Jaber al-Alwani, whom Hillary’s aid Huma Abedin credit Al-Alwani as the source for their doctrine (it can’t get any better than this) also see Abedins-Mein-Kampf. Al-Alwani is an ardent anti-Semite who by the way, runs the United States Department of Defense program (out of all places) for training Muslim military chaplains in the U.S. military.
Alwani runs GSISS (Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences) GSISS is a United States Department of Defense program for training Muslim military chaplains. It was the GSISS that produced the United States Marine Corps’ first Muslim chaplain. Alawani even writes Nazi-style, anti-Semitic studies depicting Jews as the “Golden Calf” while condemning the United States: “…the Zionist leaders made this calf a model for today’s world so they can be able to control it. Today’s world with its secularism and its phony democracy and alongside its free and controlled trade and national legitimacy and all these other subjects that bellows…”
“… it [MMA, Muslim Minority Affairs] is a Jurisprudence for a group confned to its special circumstances which is allowed what others are not. Its exercise needs an understanding of social sciences, especially sociology, economics, political science and international relations… for the fundamentals of success for the Muslim Minority Jurisprudence it must adhere to the collective earth concept.” [link from Arabic here]
The movement is an “international relations” issue which means linking to politicians in the U.S. Alwani, a double agent, is a man commissioned by our government, even calls for a soon-to-be military conquest (literal Jihad) on U.S. soil and provides an offcial fatwa in preparation for the use of force against the U.S.:
“Commitment to the Quranic concept of Geography: The land belongs to Allah, his religion is Islam, and every country is already in the House of Islam—now in the present time—since they will be in the House of Islam by force in the near future. The whole of humanity is a Muslim Nation: it is either ‘the religion of the nation’ which has embraced this religion [Islam], or a ‘proselyte nation’ we are obliged to conquer.” (Alwani, The Jurisprudence of Muslim Minority Affairs. No. 7, translated from Arabic by Shoebat.com)
What part of “they will be in the House of Islam by force in the near future” don’t these democrats understand? Do the democrats want more dead Americans?
Even the Abedins’ Journal for Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA ) confrms that their program stems from these same extremist sources including the notorious Taha Jaber Al-Alwani as well as the spiritual head of the Muslim Brotherhood, Sheikh Yousuf Al-Qaradawi. Huma Abedin, Hillary’s aid wrote:
“The theory of the Jurisprudence of Muslim Minorities is most easily clarified by shedding light on its founders” which the notes state are none other than Muslim Brotherhood “Yusuf al-Qaradawi” and “Taha Jabir al-Alwani”.
In a nutshell, The Muslim Minority Affairs program is part of a grand plan to destroy America from within, exactly as what the Muslim Brotherhood planned, which was exposed in the HLF (Holy Land Foundation) trial.
I can go on and on. Muslims in general wanted a war in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan where Islamists clearly participated in such wars with U.S. aid since the time of Ronald Reagan. If Khan wanted his son’s life preserved he would avoid such wars and will stand with Trump, pure and simple, unless of course, the U.S. was clearing the runway for a greater cause, a cause we have seen brewing for decades which needs no evidence here on how Islamists do not mind collaborating with the U.S. To each his agenda.
These Muslim soldiers were “heroes” of course, until the snow melted later on. Is it likely that Khan’s son was killed before the snow melted? Only another type of investigation will determine that. Does Hillary’s man ever mention how many soldiers have died because of Muslim traitors? Do they ever bring up how many Christians in the US military were killed? Yet the modernists and homosexuals continue to attack Christians.
But soon everything we need to know will be uncovered as a Middle Eastern proverb says: the snow always melts and the sh*t under it will soon be revealed.
Source #1: Here are snapshots of Al-Muwatta, showing its jihadist exhortations:
Source #2
Excerpt from Khan’s recommendation to follow the 250 documents from Al-Wathaiq Al-Siyasiyah. In it, it states “What was said the proclamation on Jihad warfare amongst Islamist writers. Many Islamist too this subject. They spoke of Islamic conquests and the reason it spread and succeeded in lightening speed. What concern us are the reasons for declaring Jihad along the Islamic borders or in provinces where the enemy was crushed which expanded due to Jihad movement which included all fronts”
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Khizr-Muazzam-Khan-who-attacked-Trump-is-a-Muslim-Brotherhood-agent-990x510.jpg510990Defend The Borderhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDefend The Border2016-08-02 06:48:162016-08-02 07:11:56What The Media Is Not Telling You About The Muslim Who Attacked Donald Trump
On Sunday, September 11th, 2016 at the Patriot Plaza amphitheater of the Sarasota National Cemetery, thousands will gather to “Stand With Our 9/11 Fallen” at 6:00 p.m EST.
This event is unique in that this is the 15th anniversary of 9/11 and it allows those who attend the opportunity to adopt a person who died on that day via an Adopt A Fallen website. Those who attend will read the name of the person they have chosen to adopt during the ceremony.
In an email Rev. Dr. Tom Pfaff, President, Sarasota Ministerial Association asks:
Consider being listed in the 9/11 Fifteen Year Commemoration program among the “Organizations Standing With Our Fallen,” by choosing to do two things.
ONE: Invite the members and friends of your congregation/organization to ADOPT A FALLEN for the Commemoration by going to the following link, http://bit.ly/29R65gP.
TWO: Invite the members and friends of your congregation/organization to check out the various volunteer opportunities, such as Ushers and Choir, for the Commemoration by going to the following link, http://bit.ly/2a61F60.
All 2,977 names of our Fallen are listed alphabetically, so opening the ADOPT A FALLEN link completely, showing all the names, will take a minute or two. The volunteer link opens slowly at first too.
Organizations may go to http://bit.ly/2a61F60 to join other organizations who are “Standing With Our Fallen.”
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/911_Memorial_flag-e1470131956300.png377640Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2016-08-02 06:00:542016-09-10 04:09:45Florida: ‘Standing With Our Fallen’ 9/11 Ceremony at Sarasota National Cemetery
U.S. Army Pfc. John Casey, a military dog handler assigned to the 4th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division, and his partner, Roxy, pose for the camera at the conclusion of their training. Photo: Wikicommons
Eric Bonner, a military K9 handler, posted the following on his Facebook page. His comments have gone viral.
I’m not Voting for Clinton.
It has nothing to do with her views. It really doesn’t even matter about all the laws she broke.
It’s because She actually talked to me once. Almost a sentence. But first, some background.
Being a K9 handler in the Military I got to do a few details involving Distinguished Visitors. Mostly Generals, DOD Officials, and Secretaries of Defense. I was lucky enough to pull two awesome details. George W Bush, and Obama.
GW looked at me, said “Man, who’d you piss off” high fived me, and continued on. I was climbing down from a catwalk I stood on for 4 hours with nothing but Dust and a radio to keep me company. The radio died early on. It was pretty sweet.
Obama, as he was walking out to his plane in Turkey, said “What the hell kind of dog is that?!” In reference to Suli.
One of my Last details was for Hillary when she was Secretary of State. She was in Turkey for whatever rneason. I helped with sweeps of her DV Quarters and staff vehicles. Her words to me? “Get that Fucking dog away from me.” Then she turns to her Security Detail and berates them up and down about why that animal was in her quarters. For the next 20 minutes while I sit there waiting to be released she lays into her detail, slamming the door in their faces when she’s done. The Detail lead walks over apologizes and releases me. I apologize to him for getting him in trouble. His words “Happens every day, Brother”
Hillary doesn’t care about anyone but Hillary.
UPDATE FACEBOOK POST FROM ERIC:
Strange Morning……
I went to bed last night thinking things calmed down. I was at 5600ish shares when my head hit the pillow. I woke up at 6 am with about 8200 shares, which was far less a pace considering I slept 6 hours. Just looked, 11K Shares. More on that in a few…..
My Facebook message inbox was full of messages of praise and support. Regular people thanking me for my service. People offering a lot of beer, and a few good meals. There were also fellow handlers past and present telling similar stories to mine. I did receive one negative message calling me a liar and asking why I’d make a story like that up. To those strangers that offered up messages of support I want you to know I really appreciate it.
I jumped in the shower a short time later. When I got out I had a message from a good friend asking what happened to my account. He couldn’t Facebook Message me or see anything I had posted…. EVER. I opened Facebook to find my account had been suspended. Why? My name.
About a year ago, out of an abundance of caution due to what I did for a living, I changed how my name was displayed on Facebook. While no specific threats were made, there were plenty of general threats that I had a hard time ignoring. I would be devastated if harm came to my family or friends because of my chosen profession.
Facebook suspended my account until my name could be Verified. The timing of it was interesting. They wanted me to provide government ID. Which ultimately I did not end up providing. End Result? As you can see my profile is back up and running. However, I feel like this won’t be the end of this type of “Contact.”
Finally, I’d like to speak to my motivations two nights ago. I posted that Hillary encounter while watching her speech at the DNC. I was typing as she spoke. I was simply telling a story I have told a hundred times. Never did I think I would reach this level of popularity. Let me reiterate from earlier posts…. I do not support any candidate for President. I can’t envision any candidate doing the job at the level that the American people deserve. I’m still waiting for a Candidate to earn my vote. This regrettably may not happen in 2016.
TL;DR My post went kinda sorta viral, Facebook suspended my account because I had a funky name, I don’t support a Presidential candidate.
Eric confirms what others have written about their experiences with Hillary Clinton and her demeanor. Bernie Sanders is right when he said Hillary is not “qualified to be president.”
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Uli-Mitra-e1470129048904.jpg387640Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2016-08-02 05:09:552016-08-03 06:42:37Hillary to Military K9 Handler: ‘Get that F__king dog away from me.’
Are the Saudis trying to make sure that the candidate of their choice is elected President of the United States this November?
Washington, D.C. – As the savage attacks claimed by the Islamic State (IS) seem to follow on one another at an ever-increasing pace, too many still do not understand what this group is, where it came from, who its leaders are, and most important of all, why they do what they do. Whether the IS-controlled territory called “The Caliphate” survives in its current form or not, the totalitarian ideology Islamic supremacists call Sharia and the jihad it impels will cause adherent fighters, followers and supporters around the world to fight on and, unless decisively defeated, to continue to metastasize.
The auspicious beginning of our nation may have begun with rebellion and war; however, the events that led to the birth of our freedom would not have been successful without a unified belief that the colonists were fighting for a righteous cause. George Washington believed in this cause and used every tactic and all his wits to win.
Hillary has made much of having been Secretary of State. During her 
On Sunday, 
