Posts

Russian Reactions to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s Visit

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s visit to Moscow on April 11-12, 2017 came against the backdrop of a recent U.S. missile strike on a Syrian airbase that was followed by political tensions between Russia and the U.S.[1] At the G7 meeting in Italy just prior to his trip to Moscow, Tillerson had stated: “I think it’s also worth thinking about Russia has [sic] really aligned itself with the Assad regime, the Iranians, and Hizbullah. Is that a long-term alliance that serves Russia’s interest, or would Russia prefer to realign with the United States, with other Western countries and Middle East countries who are seeking to resolve the Syrian crisis? We want to relieve the suffering of the Syrian people. We want to create a future for Syria that is stable and secure. And so Russia can be a part of that future and play an important role, or Russia can maintain its alliance with this group, which we believe is not going to serve Russia’s interest longer-term. But only Russia can answer that question.”[2]

Commenting on Tillerson’s words, Russia Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said: “It’s useless to come to us with ultimatums, it’s just counterproductive.”[3] However, the meeting between Tillerson and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov changed Russia’s internal mood. Maxim Usim, columnist for the Russian daily Kommersant, noted that Tillerson’s language was not confrontational and that this had enabled him to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin just before his departure from Moscow.

The following are reactions to U.S. Secretary of State Tillerson’s Moscow visit:

tillerson russia

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. (Source: State.gov)

Senator Kosachev: “The American Did Not Come With Absurd Proposals… None Of The Parties… Have A Desire To Further Exacerbate The Situation”

Russian Federation Council International Affairs Committee chairman Konstantin Kosachev wrote on his Facebook page: “The first impression is quite positive. No breakthrough occurred, and no one expected it. However, the two sides were able to avoid the temptation of the overstated expectations, and the modest results of the meeting are still positive.” Kosachev stressed that a meaningful result was the Russian and U.S. commitment to maintaining the dialogue by “institutionalizing it in the format of special representatives.”

He added: “The two sides now have a better understanding of the possible and impossible limits in the prospects for bilateral relations and in the interpretation of international problems. The Americans obviously did not come with some absurd proposals similar to exchanging (Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad) for G7 membership, Ukraine for Syria and so on, and also not only with moralizing and ultimatums.”

He stressed: “Otherwise, the meeting with (Russian President Vladimir Putin) would have not taken place, as wasting time on empty words is not his style.”

Kosachev also said that Russia “unambiguously confirmed its willingness to restore cooperation, provided that the two sides could do without the notorious American mentoring and arrogance. Anyway, none of the parties seems to have a desire to further exacerbate the situation, and everyone believes that it is not hopeless.”

(Tass.com, April 13, 2017)

(Source: Sputniknews.com, April 12, 2017)

Kommersant Columnist: Tillerson’s Moderate Language Enabled Meeting With Putin

Maxim Usim, a columnist for the Russian daily Kommersant, wrote that Tillerson’s meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was not confrontational, but rather business oriented. According to Usim, Tillerson avoided using harsh language regarding Russian policies, while Lavrov was reserved and diplomatic. The impression, wrote Usim, is that both sides want to minimize the damage to bilateral relations by “Trump’s Syrian escapade,” adding that the mere fact that Tillerson avoided “speaking in terms of sanctions and ultimatums” made the meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin possible.

(Kommersant.ru, April 12, 2017)

Izvestia: “The First Attempt To Get Along May Be Considered Productive, Even If Not Fully Successful”

The Russian daily Izvestia summarized Tillerson’s the visit as follows: “The most important thing is that during this very short but very intense visit the sides succeeded in reaching an agreement regarding further steps to be taken in order to get rid of the bilateral crisis. At the same time, the visit’s message to the world was: The first attempt to ‘get along’ may be considered productive, even if not fully successful.”

(Izvestia.ru, April 13, 2017)

Duma International Affairs Committee Chairman: “There Was No Ultimatum”

Duma International Affairs Committee chairman Leonid Slutsky stated: “One of the visit’s results is the failed prognosis regarding some kinds of U.S. ultimatum. There was no ultimatum. On the contrary, the sides agreed on establishing a joint group in order to look into the most complicated questions of the Russia-U.S. agenda.”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Tillerson: “We want to relieve the suffering of the Iraq… Ouch… Liby… Ouch… Syrian people.” The cartoon was published prior to Tillerson’s visit. (Ria.ru, April 11, 2017)

Senator Klintzevich: “It Is Now Obvious That Tillerson’s Visit Was Not A Waste Of Time”

Senator Franz Klintsevich, deputy chair of the Federation Council Defense and Security Committee, commented: “It is now obvious that Tillerson’s visit was not a waste of time. Reiterating the mutual commitment to fight international terror is the maximum which could have been achieved, given the recent negative developments. At the moment, it’s quite stupid to discuss who won and who lost as the result of the meeting, who saved face and who lost face… The sides opted for mutual compromise, but as a result they secured the chance to really cooperate against ISIS. That’s what is really important.”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Ivan Melnikov, Communist Party, Vice-speaker of Duma: “Given the unpredicted U.S. actions influencing the situation, we may judge only by the deeds rather than by the words and intentions. Mr. Tillerson leaves good impression, and speaks respectfully about Russia as a superpower – but what if the principles of the American imperialism remain in force?”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Ruling Party United Russia MP Sergey Zheleznyak: “The meeting demonstrated that despite the differences, our countries are interested in cooperation concerning various areas – solving burning international crises as well as renewing economic cooperation. We’ll see how Tillerson’s words in Moscow will coincide with the administration’s actions and then we’ll draw our conclusions.”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Senator Pushkov: The Meeting Was “The Start Of Dialogue”

Senator Alexey Pushkov tweeted: “Frontal confrontation has been cancelled. Russia and the U.S. proceed from the war of words towards exchanging opinions, controlling the differences and cautious dialogue.”

(Twitter.com/Alexey_Pushkov, April 12, 2017)

Pushkov also tweeted: “The summary of the negotiations in Moscow: Not yet a breakthrough, but the start of dialogue and an attempt to strengthen the mutual trust after serious tensions erupted.”

(Twitter.com/Alexey_Pushkov, April 12, 2017)

According to a Russian Defense Ministry source quoted in the Vedomosti newspaper, Moscow is ready for dialogue and does not consider a dangerous direct confrontation with the U.S. to be inevitable. Simultaneously, Moscow demonstrates its readiness to strengthen its military positions in Syria – this is the message delivered by the deployment of the frigate Admiral Grigorovich to the Mediterranean.

(Vedomosti.ru, April 13, 2017)

REFERENCES:

[1] See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 6866, Russia’s Reactions To The U.S. Missile Strike In Syria, April 10, 2017.

[2] State.gov, April 11, 2017.

[3] Ria.ru, April 12, 2017.

Cyber Warfare — A Clear and Present Danger

In a January 2014 column titled “The Cyber Attacks are coming, the Cyber Attacks are coming!” I wrote:

According to experts like John Jorgenson, CEO and founding partner of the Sylint Group, our government is woefully behind the times in capability and capacity to deal with the threat of cyber attacks let alone the cyber warfare being conducted on a global scale by nation states such as China, Russia, North Korea and Iran.

[ … ]

“Nothing of substance to protect commercial industry, the countries infrastructure, or the citizen has come out of the [Obama] White House. From the attacks being made on the United States on the Cyber Battlefield our advisories are taking Cyber Warfare seriously while we can’t find a credible Field Marshall let alone decide what needs to be done,” notes Jorgenson.

Read more…

On February 26th, 2016 I was interviewed by Denise Simon on The Denise Simon Experience regarding the issue of cyber warfare. I spoke about the clear and present dangers of enemies, both foreign and domestic, using technology to commit crimes, steal national secrets and impact our way of life.

Denise called cyber attacks “the poor man’s nuclear weapon.”

I talked about the current threat (attacks from nation states, cyber hackers and groups like Anonymous) to the looming future threat of cyborgs, chipping and Internables.

Internables are internal sensors that measure well-being in our bodies may become the new wearables. According to Ericsson’s ConsumerLab eight out of 10 consumers would like to use technology to enhance sensory perceptions and cognitive abilities such as vision, memory and hearing.

Fast forward to December 2016 and the media’s obsession with the successful phishing of the DNC and release of John Podesta’s emails. What they are missing is:

  1. As technology has become ubiquitous, cyber warfare has become the preferred method of attacking one’s enemies.
  2. President Obama turned over control of the Internet to the United Nations in October of 2016, which increases the cyber warfare threat against U.S. public and private entities.
  3. All nation states, with the exception of the U.S., conduct offensive cyber warfare as a matter of public policy including: China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, and ISIS to name a few.
  4. The Obama administration has made neither cyber security nor cyber warfare a priority during the past 8 years.

My greatest concern is that the United States government is only conducting defensive operations against the threat, and not doing that very well. The Obama administration does not conduct effective offensive operations against our enemies which include: China, Russia, Iran, the Islamic State, North Korea and many others.

Our warnings went unheeded by the U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate and the White House.

So who really is to blame for these unrelenting cyber attacks?

Why its U.S.!

Tell Me Who You Are and I Will Tell You What Is At Stake For You

“The more people chant about their freedom and how free they are, the more loudly I hear their chains rattling” – GEORGE ORWELL

ARE YOU A MAN?

If you are a man, your entire being, the appreciation of it, and the idea of your importance are at stake. Hillary takes any opportunity she can to eviscerate and emasculate men. I mean, we shouldn’t blame her, look who she married. Nonetheless, under a Hillary administration, affirmative action will be set up to target men. She will, without a doubt, come after you with a vengeance. Do not be surprised if men began to abandon their country in response to the persecution that she will unleash upon you for nothing else other than your gender. A globalist president would seek out to emasculate the country as a way to bring us down a notch, or two, or three in order to put us on an even playing field rather than the rest of the world, so why not begin with the men at home?

With Hillary, we will live in a nation that will have gone from “no means no” to even “yes means no” and every man guilty of having consensual sex with a woman will also potentially be guilty of rape as well for no other reason than that he is a man and men are rapists in Hillary’s America. Think I am being dramatic? Don’t risk it. This election has come down to self-defense and preservation of your rights and treatment as a man; do not let go of that just because society has been programmed to make you feel bad about it. Fight for yourselves. Take this country back. As a man, to cast a vote for her would be to vote to wage a war against yourself.

ARE YOU A WOMAN?

If you are a woman, you are a pawn to Hillary in her game of lies and deceit. She is using you. She is using you because you’re the easier target against her opponent. Although she wants you to think that you need her, she would be nothing without her ability to manipulate your support. She knows that Obama was the race president and she wants, very desperately, to be the gender president. Compare race relations and what is happening to the African-American population under Barack “The Race President Obama. Look at the beginning of Obama’s time in office to now, do you want to see the same thing happen to you as a woman just because Hillary wants to use you as a platform?

She wants to go down in history and a feminist trailblazer at any cost; even if that means women have to pay the price without even realizing it. She wants you to think that abortion is liberation, that the “wage gap” is strictly due to sexism, and that you’re a walking victim no matter where you go or what you do—which immediately puts you at a disadvantage at all times. How can you say you are empowering someone if you are always making that person the victim? Think about it.

ARE YOU AFRICAN-AMERICAN?

If you are an African-American, let me ask you, what do you have to lose? I mean that in the most respectful way possible but really, what has the current administration done or has Hillary promised to help heal the race relations in this country? Hillary Clinton has expressed her profound admiration for Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood. Sanger was a leader in the eugenics movement in which she promoted the reduction of sexual reproduction and the sterilization of those individuals that she believed had “undesirable traits”. She fervently, yet discreetly, worked to place most of her clinics in primarily African-American neighborhoods. She undoubtedly believed in white supremacy and once wrote, “It is said that the aboriginal Australian, the lowest known species of the human family, just a step higher than the chimpanzee in brain development, has so little sexual control that police authority alone prevents him from obtaining sexual satisfaction on the streets.” It is important to know the origins of the people and the things we are supporting before we do so. Planned Parenthood was born out of the idea of white supremacy; do you want to support the candidate who admires the woman responsible for that?

I know that the media has instilled the idea that a white male president couldn’t possibly unify the country, but look what one of color has done in just eight years. People are worried that Donald Trump is going to take us back to a 1960’s America but, racially, we are already there, or at least on our way there, aren’t we? Agitating this race war is getting African-American people killed in the streets on what seems to be a daily basis.

Donald Trump has not only promised to work to heal the unruly situation between cops and the African-American community, but all crime against blacks—including black on black crime, which is the number one killer of black people in the united states. If black lives matter then they have to matter all across the board, not just the black lives taken by different races, but the black lives taken. Period. We can all agree that race relations in this country need to be healed, but protests and violence are not the ways to do it.

You are being crippled by the welfare state, making it possible for fathers to be taken out of your homes, for providers to be essentially useless and replaced by the government so that you’re forced to depend upon them rather than yourselves—the opposite of empowerment. FDR once said, about welfare, “The lessons of history, confirmed by evidence immediately before me, show conclusively that continued dependence on relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber.  To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit.  It is inimical to the dictates of sound policy.  It is a violation of the traditions of America.” Donald Trump wants to take you off the narcotic that is welfare and has said repeatedly that he will work tirelessly to bring jobs to the inner cities as well as give you and your children the option to go to the best schools in the area you live.

Vote to heal this country, vote for unity.

ARE YOU A LEGAL IMMIGRANT?

I may be preaching to the choir here because you know what it means to abide by the laws and to work for what you get, but voting for Hillary means voting for open borders. Voting to open the borders and flooding the country with immigrants just invalidates the work and dedication that it took you to become a proud citizen of this country. It also makes it extremely difficult for you and your fellow immigrants to assimilate into the America you have a right live in.

ARE YOU A HOMOSEXUAL, BISEXUAL, OR TRANSGENDER?

Let’s face it; the LGBT community has been told, for much too long, that they had to vote democrat for in order to vote for equality. Things are different for you in this election. You are now in a post-Marriage Equality era, which means you no longer need to feel pressed to vote for all of the other damaging policies that fall under the umbrella of the liberal “equality” train. There are so many more important issues facing you today and there is a lot at stake for you in what may come next. You fought so hard for you rights but you can’t have rights if you don’t have a life. Hillary wants to bring in 550% more unvetted Muslim refugees into this country. Many of who are practicing a 9th century form of Islam that believes homosexuality is a sin. However, this is different than the Christian belief that homosexuality is a sin. What you have to remember with the Islamic faith is that it is not only a set of beliefs and teaching, it is a legal system as well. What does that mean? It means that, under their legal system of Sharia Law, it goes from a sin to a crime.

Now, let me preface what I am about to say by saying, I do not think all Muslims engage in the type of Islamic practice I am about to describe. There is such a thing as a moderate Muslim, one who follows a civilized form of their faith. However, there are many Muslims who don’t follow a civilized form, but a radical one. This is why Donald Trump has called for extreme vetting of refugees in order to keep us safe as well as protect law abiding Muslims in this country. With that being said, as a homosexual, bisexual, or transgender you need to understand that those who believe in the most extreme teachings of their Islamic faith believe that you should be thrown from rooftops, stoned, or even have “a wall toppled upon you as an evil-doer” according to the teachings of Abu Bakr.

Remember, just because the LGBT community has primarily voted democrat doesn’t mean that you can’t be the change in this election. Do not be shackled by the past. Embrace the candidate whose first priority is national security in order to preserve your safety to preserve your rights—your future depends on it.

ARE YOU A POLICE OFFICER?

Just for fun, I decided to Google “Cops for Clinton” and “Cops for Trump” and not surprisingly, I found nothing for the former and plenty for the latter. Maybe I am, again, preaching to the choir but humor me for a moment. Voting for Hillary will continue the disarmament of you and your fellow brothers and sisters in blue. If you value your lives and your jobs, do not give the most powerful position this country has to offer to a woman who has repeatedly vilified you for nothing more than doing your job. Recently, in Chicago, a female officer responded to a call for a car crash when she was savagely and ferociously beaten by a man under the influence of drugs, yet refused to use her weapon for fear of public backlash. This is a direct result of the war that the Obama administration has waged against police officers in America—the same war Hillary Clinton has begun to fight and will continue to fight if she wins on November 8th. Vote to protect yourself and your brothers and sisters.

ARE YOU IN THE MILITARY?

If you are in the military, most likely you, more than anyone else, do not wish to go into World War III. You probably understand, better than anyone else, that over the last eight years, our military has been depleted and weakened. Putting the Benghazi situation aside, it is as simple as voting for war or voting for peace.

Hillary Clinton’s gross inaction as Secretary of State should be enough to disqualify her for the presidency altogether but since there can be no way you haven’t already thought of that, think of this: Do you want war? Or do you want peace? It’s as simple as that. Donald Trump, on Monday, said he would meet with Vladimir Putin as soon as November if he were to be elected. This shows leadership that would be unfathomable to the Clinton campaign. She relentlessly insults Putin and is salivating at the thought of sending you and your comrades off to war. We are not ready for a nuclear war with Russia, nor do we want that. You get to decide who will command you and who will fight for you rather than who will only ask you to fight for her. What will you choose?

ARE YOU A STUDENT?

Are you a college student working hard to educate yourself and acquire an education that will better your future? What if I told you that soon, there would be students who don’t have to work for what you are working to give yourself? What if I told you that the free tuition that Hillary Clinton is promising would nullify the degree you’re working towards? How would that make you feel?

Everything you have worked for or are working toward will be much nearly useless if it’s handed out like candy under another Clinton administration. Vote to preserve the work you’ve put in and the pride that comes with knowing that you created that opportunity for yourself out of hard work and dedication.

ARE YOU A CHRISTIAN?

Christian values are traditional values. Although Donald Trump has had a rocky past as far as marriage goes, the man he is now represents traditional values. He will fight for religious liberty rather than persecution of the values we’ve held tight to since the birth of the nation. Hillary Clinton has proven herself to be a lying, murderous thief who has no respect for the sanctity of life. She ridicules Trump for denying that global warming is a problem, citing that he must not understand science. How could a woman who denies that there is life inside the womb, according to science, claim superiority in the subject?

If you vote for nothing else but this one issue, you still have at least done your job as a Christian to fight for the unborn and the right, that every human shares, to life.

ARE YOU A LAW ABIDING CITIZEN?

If you are a law aiding citizen, you not only value the law but you respect it as well. If you elect the criminal that is Hillary Clinton, you are sending a message. You are sending a message that not only are you okay with her previous crimes but that no matter what she does as president, you condone. If she commits criminal acts as the commander-in-cheif, you will have no ground to stand on in opposing her. You’ll have known who she is and, even worse, you’ll have put the power in her hands to commit these crimes. She has been a criminal her entire life. Lying, cheating, stealing, and murder have been instrumental in getting her where she is today. Just this week, we found out that officials under her in the State Department attempted to bribe FBI agents to unlawfully change documents AFTER they had been subpoenaed and accumulated as evidence in a criminal investigation.

In the legal system, legal precedent is a legal case or incident that establishes a rule. That rule is later taken in other cases to determine the case at hand with similar issues or actions. If we let Hillary Clinton’s past crimes go unpunished, it will set the precedence of the Clinton administration if she is elected.

Hillary Clinton, herself, has been repeating the words, “America is great, because America is good.” Well folks, Hillary Clinton is not good. She doesn’t do good, she doesn’t represent goodness, nor have her actions shown any interest in the common good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.

Vote for goodness. Vote for greatness. Vote for America.

Huma Abedin’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood are no joke

The Clinton campaign is attempting once again to sweep important questions under the rug about top aide Huma Abedin, her family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and to Saudi Arabia, and her role in the ballooning Clinton email scandal.

The New York Post ran a detailed investigative piece over the weekend about Ms. Abedin’s work at the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs from 1995 through 2008, a Sharia law journal whose editor in chief was Abedin’s own mother.
This is not some accidental association. Ms. Abedin was, for many years, listed as an associate editor of the London-based publication and wrote for the journal while working as an intern in the Clinton White House in the mid-1990s.

Her mother, Saleha Abedin, sits on the Presidency Staff Council of the International Islamic Council for Da’wa and Relief, a group that is chaired by the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

Perhaps recognizing how offensive such ties will be to voters concerned over future terrorist attacks on this country by radical Muslims professing allegiance to Sharia law, the Clinton campaign on Monday tried to downplay Ms. Abedin’s involvement in the Journal and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Clinton surrogate group Media Matters claimed predictably there was “no evidence” that Ms. Abedin or her family had ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, and that Trump campaign staffers who spoke of these ties were conspiracy theorists.

To debunk the evidence, Media Matters pointed to a Snopes.com “fact-check” piece that cited as its sole source… Senator John McCain. This is the same John McCain who met Libyan militia leader Abdelkarim Belhaj, a known al Qaeda associate, and saluted him as “my hero” during a 2011 visit to Benghazi.

Senator McCain and others roundly criticized Rep. Michele Bachmann in 2012 when she and four members of the House Permanent Select Committee Intelligence and the House Judiciary Committee cited Ms. Abedin in letters sent to the Inspectors General of the Department of Defense, Department of State, Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, warning about Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the United States government.

In response to those critiques, Rep. Bachmann laid out the evidence in a 16-page memo, which has never been refuted by Senator McCain or the elite media.

The evidence, in my opinion, is overwhelming: Huma Abedin is nothing short of a Muslim Brotherhood princess, born into an illustrious family of Brotherhood leaders.

Her father, Syed Zaynul Abedin, was a professor in Saudi Arabia who founded the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs, an institution established by the Government of Saudi Arabia with the support of the Muslim World League.

The Muslim World League was “perhaps the most significant Muslim Brotherhood organization in the world,” according to former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy. Its then-General Secretary, Umar Nasif, founded the Rabita Trust, “which is formally designated as a foreign terrorist organization under American law due to its support of al Qaeda,” he wrote.

That is not guilt by association but what federal prosecutors would call a “nexus” of like-minded people who shared the same goals.

A Saudi government document inspired by Ms. Abedin’s father explains the concept of “Muslim Minority Affairs,” the title of the Journal Mr. Abedin founded, and its goal to “establish a global Sharia in our modern times.”

Simply put, Huma Abedin worked for thirteen years as part of an enterprise whose explicit goal was to conquer the West in the name of Islam. No wonder the Clinton campaign wants to sweep this issue under the rug.

Mrs. Clinton has sometimes referred to Huma Abedin as her “second daughter.” Whether it was because of their close relationship or for some other reason, Mrs. Clinton has done much to further the Muslim Brotherhood agenda while Secretary of State, and can be counted on doing more as president.

As Secretary of State, she relentlessly pushed the overthrow of Libyan leader Mohammar Qaddafi, a dire enemy of the Brotherhood, even when President Obama and his Secretary of Defense were reluctant to go to war.

Along with Obama, she pushed for the overthrow of Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak and his replacement by Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammad Morsi.

She pushed for direct U.S. involvement in the Syrian civil war, including the arming of Syrian rebels allied with al Qaeda.

As I reveal in my new book, she worked side by side with the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the umbrella group where 57 majority Muslim states pushed their agenda of imposing Sharia law on the non-Muslim world, to use hate crime laws in the United States to criminalize speech critical of Islam, in accordance with United Nations Resolution 16/18.

Their first victim in the United States was a Coptic Christian named Nakoula Bassiley Nakoula, the maker of the YouTube video Hillary and Obama blamed for Benghazi.

New Abedin emails released to Judicial Watch this week show that Huma Abedin served as liaison between Clinton Foundation donors, including foreign governments, and the State Department.

When foreign donors had difficult in getting appointments with Mrs. Clinton through normal State Department channels, Clinton Foundation executive Douglas Band would email Huma Abedin, and poof! the doors would open as if by magic.

Donald Trump has criticized this as “pay for play.” But it also raises questions as to whether Huma Abedin and Mrs. Clinton were in fact serving as unregistered agents for foreign powers who sought to impose their anti-freedom agenda on the United States.

The United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization in 2014. But by then, the damage had been done.

Do Americans want eight years of a President Clinton, who will do even more to empower the Muslim Brotherhood and impose its agenda on America?

DeceptionEDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Hill. The featured image is of Huma Abedin is by Greg Nash.

Mr. Timmerman is a Donald Trump supporter. He was the 2012 Republican Congressional nominee for MD-8 and is the author of Deception: The Making of the YouTube Video Hillary & Obama Blamed for Benghazi, published by Post Hill Press.

Democratic convention more about Fantasyland than America

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.

It wasn’t by chance that the Democrats made no mention of ISIS on the first day of the convention and scarcely mentioned it on the next two days.

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.”

In his first year in office, President Obama directed the Central Intelligence Agency to divert significant assets from the war against real threats from terrorists and enemy nations to the hypothetic dangers of “climate change.”

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.”

Four men died in Benghazi because Mrs. Clinton didn’t have their backs. Instead of rushing to the rescue, she spent hours in meetings trying to keep Panetta from sending reinforcements to their rescue.

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.

VIDEO: It doesn’t Matter if Obama is a Muslim

One of the most common questions is: Is Obama a Muslim? Who knows, but it doesn’t make any difference. He always supports Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Sharia.

What is important is the Islamification of the United States.

Hillary Clinton is not a Muslim but her chief advisor is Huma Abedin. Huma is closely linked with the Muslim Brotherhood. Hillary is an apologist for Sharia and Islam.

George Bush is not a Muslim but he advanced Islam with his declaration that Islam is the religion of peace. Bush would not use the word jihad, and gave us the “war on terror”.

The governor of Tennessee is not a Muslim but he only allows Muslims to train Tennessee law enforcement about “terror”.

Schools in America are beginning to adopt Sharia compliant textbooks.

Obama will be gone, but what difference does that make? Our politicians are Islamifying the U.S. without him.

VIDEO: Minneapolis Muslims prefer Sharia, want blasphemy laws in U.S.

Note the unanimous opposition to the freedom of speech and support for criminalizing criticism of Islam — and even for murdering those who insult Muhammad. All freely and openly expressed on a sunny day in Minneapolis.

Video thanks to Ami Horowitz.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Freedom, Provocation and Targets

Islamic State has 30,000 foreign jihadis from over 100 countries

U.S. humanitarian aid going to the Islamic State

Does Obama not know this? Or does he just not care? Certainly the latter would be in line with his foreign policy, which has been consistent since the day he took office.

“U.S. Humanitarian Aid Going to ISIS,” by Jamie Dettmer, The Daily Beast, October 19, 2014:

GAZIANTEP, Turkey — While U.S. warplanes strike at the militants of the so-called Islamic State in both Syria and Iraq, truckloads of U.S. and Western aid has been flowing into territory controlled by the jihadists, assisting them to build their terror-inspiring “Caliphate.”

The aid—mainly food and medical equipment—is meant for Syrians displaced from their hometowns, and for hungry civilians. It is funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development, European donors, and the United Nations. Whether it continues is now the subject of anguished debate among officials in Washington and European. The fear is that stopping aid would hurt innocent civilians and would be used for propaganda purposes by the militants, who would likely blame the West for added hardship.

The Bible says if your enemy is hungry, feed him, and if he is thirsty, give him something to drink—doing so will “heap burning coals” of shame on his head. But there is no evidence that the militants of the Islamic State, widely known as ISIS or ISIL, feel any sense of disgrace or indignity (and certainly not gratitude) receiving charity from their foes.

Quite the reverse, the aid convoys have to pay off ISIS emirs (leaders) for the convoys to enter the eastern Syrian extremist strongholds of Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor, providing yet another income stream for ISIS militants, who are funding themselves from oil smuggling, extortion and the sale of whatever they can loot, including rare antiquities from museums and archaeological sites.

“The convoys have to be approved by ISIS and you have to pay them: the bribes are disguised and itemized as transportation costs,” says an aid coordinator who spoke to The Daily Beast on the condition he not be identified in this article. The kickbacks are either paid by foreign or local non-governmental organizations tasked with distributing the aid, or by the Turkish or Syrian transportation companies contracted to deliver it.

And there are fears the aid itself isn’t carefully monitored enough, with some sold off on the black market or used by ISIS to win hearts and minds by feeding its fighters and its subjects. At a minimum the aid means ISIS doesn’t have to divert cash from its war budget to help feed the local population or the displaced persons, allowing it to focus its resources exclusively on fighters and war making, say critics of the aid….

EDITORS NOTE: The below CNN report on  the Islamic State (IS) shows excerpts from an IS propaganda video. If you look closely at the IS video you will see printed on the tents “U.S”. Video courtesy of CNN.

U.S.’ Nuclear Weapons Policy Puts Country At Great Risk

While China and Russia are upgrading their nuclear weapons inventory and are going forward with advance nuclear weapons research, and while Iran is developing nuclear weapons, the Executive Branch has been degrading America’s once superior and advanced nuclear weapons technology capability. The once most powerful U.S. nuclear weapons research facility in the world is rapidly falling behind Russia and China. Please read the below article by VADM Robert R. Monroe, USN (Ret).

Sandia Lab0ratory scientists have ceased doing exploratory and research work to avoid technology surprise by other nuclear powers, and work on new smaller and more effective design nuclear weapons has ceased all together. The U.S.‘s unilateral cessation of safe underground testing has prevented scientist from testing our aging nuclear weapons, and allowing the United States with the ability to replace them with modern smaller, more effective, and safer weapons—it leaves the Republic at the mercy of the Chinese and the Russians who have no such limitations and are progressing rapidly.

“Peace through Strength”, a policy that the endorsed Combat Veterans For Congress support, could be achieved by having a modern and more effective nuclear weapons inventory. That policy has been shouted down by leftist and Socialist supporters of the Obama administration in the U.S. Congress.

The endorsed Combat Veterans For Congress who are running for election in 2014 will fight to reverse the current U.S. Nuclear Weapons policy that is putting the nation at great risk–please give them your support.

INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY
September 12, 2014

U.S.’ Nuclear Weapons Policy Puts Country At Great Risk

By ROBERT R. MONROE

At the dawn of the nuclear era, when America created its nuclear weapons laboratories (Los Alamos, Livermore and Sandia), one of their primary missions was to avoid technological surprise.

The labs were charged to conduct advanced nuclear weapons research, development and testing of all types so that no adversary could ever take us unawares by producing some new and dangerous types of nuclear weapons.

The labs performed this mission superbly throughout World War II and the five decades of the Cold War. For over half a century our nuclear weapons and related advanced technological capabilities were supreme in the world.

But since 1992, the U.S. government — executive branch and Congress — has actively prevented the labs from doing work of this type. For 23 years Democrats and Republicans, using laws, regulations and denials of funding, progressively restricted the labs from taking any of these needed actions.

Lab scientists have not been able to even think about new weapons, exploratory work has ceased to exist and the high-priority mission of avoiding technological surprise has been closed down.

These grave mistakes resulted from the simplistic belief that they would help prevent nuclear proliferation. Wiser voices, making the obvious point that true national security — and effective prevention of nuclear proliferation — lay in nuclear weapons strength, were shouted down.
This two-decade rampage has resulted in a staggering list of national disabilities:

  • Most damaging is President Bush’s unilateral 1992 moratorium on underground nuclear testing. It bars the labs from essential testing of our overage nuclear stockpile, prevents development of relevant replacement weapons, denies our scientists use of the scientific method (the basis of all advancement) and leaves us at the mercy of Russia, China and other adversaries.
  • From 1993-2003 Congress explicitly made it illegal to carry out any research or development on low-yield nuclear weapons, which are vital to deter today’s grave new nuclear threats. This established the wrong mindset in a generation of lab scientists which still exists.
  • In 1989 the executive branch shut down the nation’s only facility to produce plutonium pits — the hearts of nuclear weapons — making us the only nuclear weapons state in the world unable to produce nuclear arms. Since then, executive branch fumbling and congressional denials have combined to prevent replacement of this absolutely essential production facility. If a decision were made today, it would still be 10 to 15 years before pit production could start.
  • In 1996 President Clinton signed the extremely damaging Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, which denies nuclear weapons testing for all time. The Senate emphatically rejected ratification in 1999, but several adverse effects of the signing remain and President Obama is determined to get it ratified. The CTBT has an overpoweringly adverse effect on the labs.
  • In 2003 the executive branch belatedly proposed three important new nuclear weapons programs. The Advanced Concepts Initiative would have enabled the labs to commence research and development on advanced nukes. The Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator program would have met the mushrooming threat of hard, deeply buried targets. The Enhanced Test Readiness program would have enabled the president, in a national emergency, to conduct an underground test within one to two years, rather than the current three to five. Congress delayed, then killed, all three programs.
  • In 2005 the Reliable Replacement Warhead program was proposed. Because it had no new military capabilities, it gained fragile bipartisan support. However, Congress soon backwatered on it, and Obama killed it in 2009 as not befitting his “world without nuclear weapons” vision.
  • The 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, which established the overall nuclear policy of the current administration, provided the blueprint for U.S. nuclear weakness, a stark reversal from the role of U.S. nuclear weapons strength that had been established and maintained by 12 Presidents (six Democrats, six Republicans) throughout the prior seven decades.
  • The urgently needed modernization program for the labs and America’s nuclear weapons infrastructure, formally agreed to by Obama in return for Senate approval of New START treaty ratification in 2010, has been progressively dismantled by both branches ever since.

These eight actions — and many others — by our national leadership have emasculated the labs’ ability to protect us from technological surprise in nuclear weapons.

Meanwhile, for two decades Russia has been following exactly the opposite course. Its nuclear weapons labs have focused on low-yield weapons research, design, testing and production. It’s pursued advanced concepts, fifth-generation weapons and greater use of fusion and less of fission (possibly achieving pure fusion).

Such weapons might well emit only neutrons and gamma rays, and their tactics of use would be ones we’ve never seen. Furthermore, Russia’s new strategy calls for early use of nuclear weapons in all conflicts, large and small.

America’s current nuclear weapons course is one of grave risk. Our policy documents emphasize that “nuclear stability” must be our goal, yet the technological surprise we are encouraging by our actions is the antithesis of stability. We must return to a policy of nuclear strength.

ABOUT ROBERT R. MONROE

Robert R. Monroe is a retired Navy Vice Admiral and former director of the Defense Nuclear Agency.

Blacks Missing from U.S.-Africa Business Forum

President Obama hosted the first ever U.S.-Africa Business forum last week here in Washington, DC. Leading up to the conference, the U.S. Commerce Department announced:

“On August 5, 2014, Bloomberg Philanthropies and the U.S. Department of Commerce will co-host the first-ever U.S.-Africa Business Forum, a day focused on trade and investment opportunities on the continent. The U.S.-Africa Business Forum will be part of President Obama’s U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit, the first summit of its kind, and the largest event that any U.S. president has ever convened with African heads of state or government.”

I must admit that the various panels consisted of executives who all had a track record of great achievement. Panelists included Americans, Indians, Africans, and women. But, I couldn’t help but notice that there was not one Black American on any of the panels.

Not only has the first Black president continued to ignore his most loyal voting block, the Black community, but by his actions he has made it perfectly clear to African leaders that Black business leaders are totally irrelevant within the U.S.

There was not shortage of Blacks who could have fit the bill: Ken Chenault, CEO of American Express; Dick Parson, former CEO of Time Warner; Dave Steward, CEO of World Wide Technology ($ 6 billion in annual revenue); Junior Bridgeman, owner of 195 Wendys (doing more than $ 500 million in annual revenue); Bob Johnson, CEO of RLJ Holdings, who has already invested money in hotels in Liberia.

There was one panel that had five African presidents: Macky Sall (Senegal), Paul Kagame (Rwanda), Jacob Zuma (South Africa), Jakaya Kikwete ( Tanzania), and Moncef Marzouki (Tunisia). The panel was moderated by Charlie Rose. I guess the White House has never heard of Black interviewers such as Charlayne Hunter-Gault, Michelle Norris, or Gwen Ifill.

The first question Rose asked was about the ebola virus. The presidents seemed to have been quite offended by the question and pushed back that America only views Africa in terms of the negative.

The blame is totally Africa’s fault for the negative portrayal they receive in U.S. media. African presidents come to the U.S. and rarely, if ever, engage with the American media and definitely not with the Black media.

Kagame admitted as much when he told Rose, “We [must be] able to own up to our weaknesses, our mistakes and own up to our solutions and contribute to our solutions. We can’t even tell our story. We even depend on others to tell our stories which leads to distortions.”

When the president of Cameroon landed in the U.S. on his presidential jet at Andrews Air Force Base (where Obama’s presidential jet is stored), there was a huge story written about his arrival in the Washington Post. No, no it was not on the front page. No, not in the business section, But on the gossip page. There was not one mention of the president’s name. The full page story was all about the president’s wife hair. Yes, you heard right, her hair; and the author of the story was a Black female.

This is how irrelevant Africa is viewed by the U.S. media. This is what happens when African presidents and their U.S. based ambassadors have no meaningful engagement with the media.

Africa can’t continue to demand to be a player on the world’s stage in the 21st century and yet govern and lead with a 20th century mentality. In many ways, having a media strategy is just as important as having a military strategy.

Controlling how you are perceived in the global market place has a direct impact on the investment community throughout the world. One needs to look no further than Equatorial Guinea to prove my point. It is one of the most corrupt countries on the planet; and outside of the oil industry, it’s almost impossible for them to get investment in their country.

I didn’t see or hear one media interview with any of the presidents during their stay in the U.S. The daily media coverage was focused on all the traffic problems being created by the street closures because of the various presidential motorcades.

Obama spent more time discussing the unemployment rate in Africa than he has the unemployment rate within the Black community here in the U.S. He talked about targeted incentives for investment and job creation on the continent of Africa; but can’t find the time to create opportunities for Blacks here at home.

Obama even created the Washington Fellowship for Young African Leaders. According to the White House, “through this initiative, young African leaders are gaining the skills and connections they need to accelerate their own career trajectories and contribute more robustly to strengthening democratic institutions, spurring economic growth, and enhancing peace and security in Africa.”

How about a similar program for Blacks in the U.S.?

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is courtesy of Yahoo News.

U.S. rushes 75 Hellfire missiles to Shi’ite regime in Iraq

Has the Maliki regime noticed yet that Obama is arming the Sunni jihadists in Syria and arming their foes in Iraq? This incoherence should be the lead story on every nightly news program and the lead story in every major news outlet. Instead, of course, they continue to cover for this disastrous Administration.

“US Rushes Hellfires to Iraq, Trying to Rebuild Arsenal,” by Hamish MacDonald, ABC News, June 29, 2014:

The U.S. has rushed 75 Hellfire missiles to the Iraqi government, but that small arsenal will last the regime only about three days as they battle to take back the city of Tikrit.

The government of President Nouri al-Maliki ran out of the missiles shortly after the al-Qaeda offshoot ISIS chased his troops out of northern Iraq by taking Mosul, Tikrit and the border posts with Syria.

This weekend, the government made its first concerted effort to take back territory and is battling ISIS and its Sunni Muslim allies in Tikrit, the one-time hometown of former dictator Saddam Hussein.

The Iraqi army is receiving information used in its offensive from U.S. advisers who have been using intelligence gathered by U.S. drones that have been flying over Iraq.

Other highlights in the murky fog of war that has enveloped Iraq are expectations that it will likely be at least six months before Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, can be recaptured by government forces.

Before moving on Mosul, the government will need to recruit forces from the region and rebuild the 2nd Division of the Iraqi army, which totally collapsed and fled in the face of the ISIS attack.

Three U.S. teams of miltary advisers are now operating in Iraq, some of them north of Baghdad. Three more teams are expected to arrive. President Obama has authorized as many as 300 miltary advisers to return to Iraq.

The advisers, along with the intel from the drones, will help direct the Iraqi offensive and give Obama targets to hit if he decides to become more aggressive in Iraq.

There is some skepticism that two Russian Sukhoi fighter jets that are being prepared by technicians can be made ready in three days as promised.

The introduction of help from Russian now means that three of the U.S.’s rivals — Russia, Iran and Syria — are helping Iraq’s Shia-dominated government.

Iraq needs some help in the air, however. Sixty of its helicopters have been damaged since January and six have been shot down.

Despite the huge swath of territory through northern Syria and northern Iraq that ISIS — the Islamic State of Syria and Iraq — has conquered, the radical Sunni militants are believed to have vulnerabilities….

RELATED ARTICLES:

ISIS/ISIL declares Islamic State, shortens name to “The Islamic State” (IS)
ISIL crucifies eight of its foes
Iraqi military fails to retake Tikrit from Islamic State jihadis
“With this declaration of khilāfah, it is incumbent upon all Muslims to pledge allegiance to the khalīfah Ibrāhīm and support him”
Ramadan in Nigeria: Boko Haram attacks five churches, murders 100