Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Foreign Policy’

Whistleblower had ‘professional’ tie to 2020 Democratic candidate


Written by Byron York  | October 08, 2019 03:04 PM

URL of the original posting site: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/whistleblower-had-professional-tie-to-2020-democratic-candidate

In an Aug. 26 letter, the Intelligence Community’s inspector general, Michael Atkinson, wrote that the anonymous whistleblower who set off the Trump-Ukraine impeachment fight showed “some indicia of an arguable political bias … in favor of a rival political candidate.”

A few weeks later, news reports said the whistleblower’s possible bias was that he is a registered Democrat. That was all. Incredulous commentary suggested that Republicans who were pushing the bias talking point were so blinded by their own partisanship that they saw simple registration with the Democratic Party as evidence of wrongdoing.

“Give me a break!” tweeted whistleblower lawyer Mark Zaid. “Bias? Seriously?”

Now, however, there is word of more evidence of possible bias on the whistleblower’s part. Under questioning from Republicans during last Friday’s impeachment inquiry interview with Atkinson, the inspector general revealed that the whistleblower’s possible bias was not that he was simply a registered Democrat. It was that he had a significant tie to one of the Democratic presidential candidates currently vying to challenge President Trump in next year’s election.

“The IG said [the whistleblower] worked or had some type of professional relationship with one of the Democratic candidates,” said one person with knowledge of what was said.
“The IG said the whistleblower had a professional relationship with one of the 2020 candidates,” said another person with knowledge of what was said.
“What [Atkinson] said was that the whistleblower self-disclosed that he was a registered Democrat and that he had a prior working relationship with a current 2020 Democratic presidential candidate,” said a third person with knowledge of what was said.

All three sources said Atkinson did not identify the Democratic candidate with whom the whistleblower had a connection. It is unclear what the working or professional relationship between the two was.

In the Aug. 26 letter, Atkinson said that even though there was evidence of possible bias on the whistleblower’s part, “such evidence did not change my determination that the complaint relating to the urgent concern ‘appears credible,’ particularly given the other information the ICIG obtained during its preliminary review.”

Democrats are certain to take that position when Republicans allege that the whistleblower acted out of bias. Indeed, the transcript of Trump’s July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is a public document, for all to see. One can read it regardless of the whistleblower’s purported bias.

Nevertheless, Republicans will want to know more about the origins of the whistleblower complaint, especially given the unorthodox use of whistleblower law involved. There is more to learn — like who the Democratic candidate is — before Republicans will say they know enough about what happened.

US sending 1,000 more troops to Middle East


Written by Zachary Halaschak | June 17, 2019 08:22 PM

The U.S. is sending an additional 1,000 troops to the Middle East amid increasing tension between the U.S. and Iran. Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan announced the additional forces in a statement Monday evening, saying that the increase came at the urging of U.S. military leaders in the Middle East.

“In response to a request from the US Central Command for additional forces, and with the advice of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and in consultation with the White House, I have authorized approximately 1,000 additional troops for defensive purposes to address air, naval, and ground-based threats in the Middle East,” Shanahan said in a statement.

“The recent Iranian attacks validate the reliable, credible intelligence we have received on hostile behavior by Iranian forces and their proxy groups that threaten United States personnel and interests across the region,” Shanahan said.

“We will continue to monitor the situation diligently and make adjustments to force levels as necessary given intelligence reporting and credible threats,” he added.

A pair of oil tankers were attacked earlier this month in the Gulf of Oman. The U.S. and the U.K. have placed blame for the attack on Iran. The move came just hours before Iran reportedly fired a surface-to-air missile at a U.S. drone. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo blamed the tanker attacks on the “maximum pressure campaign” that the U.S. is waging against the Iranian regime, targeting its financial industry.

“Iran is lashing out because the regime wants our successful maximum pressure campaign lifted,” Pompeo told reporters last week. “The international community condemns Iran’s assault on the freedom of navigation and the targeting of innocent civilians.”

Last month, four other tankers were targeted by Iran in what Pompeo described as an Iranian attempt to inflate international oil prices.

The U.S. also recently deployed the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group and a bomber task force to the Middle East.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Tariff Man

Mexico decides to help Trump stop the mass invasion at the U.S. southern border after threats of tariffs. Media typically misinforms the public.

Mexico Concedes to Trump Tariff Threats
More A.F. Branco cartoons at Flag And Cross.com here.

An adult children’s Book for all ages APOCALI NOW! brilliantly lampoons the left. ODER >  HERE

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

Classified Iran briefing becomes heated as Trump team clashes with Democrats


Reported by Joel Gehrke | May 21, 2019

A classified Senate briefing on Iranian plots against the United States turned into a tense clash between top U.S. officials and lawmakers frustrated with President Trump’s strategy toward Tehran.

“I would say there was a lot of heat in that room,” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, told the Washington Examiner following the Tuesday afternoon briefing.

Key congressional Democrats suggested that President Trump’s administration was preparing for military conflict with the regime based on faulty intelligence or even false pretenses after ambiguous U.S. warnings that Iranian proxies might attack American personnel in Iraq. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan sought to allay that suspicion in separate meetings, first with House lawmakers and then the Senate Tuesday afternoon.

“Today I walked them through what the Department of Defense has been doing since May 3, when we received credible intelligence about threats to our interests in the Middle East and to American forces, and how we acted on that credible intelligence,” Shanahan told reporters after the Senate briefing. “That intelligence has borne out in attacks, and I would say it’s also deterred attacks. We have deterred attacks based on our re-posturing of assets, deterred attacks against American forces.”

The controversy shifted in the briefing to complaints that they didn’t communicate with Congress enough in recent weeks and a broader protest against the administration’s withdrawal from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a top contender for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, was among the most aggressive in raising the specter of being misled into a conflict with Iran.

“Most Americans know way back when we were lied to about the situation in Vietnam and we went into a war which ended up costing us 59,000 lives, based on a lie,” he said. “In 2003, we were lied to in terms of Iraq supposedly having weapons of mass destruction.”

Sanders refused to answer whether he believes such lies are being told now. “I won’t talk about what we heard in the meeting,” he said. “But let me just say that I worry very much that, intentionally or unintentionally, we create a situation in which a war will take place.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer avoided that controversy entirely, focusing only on the frustration that the administration didn’t provide more information to lawmakers over the last three weeks.

“I told the people who were briefing us that I thought the consultation with the American people and the Congress was inadequate,” the New York Democrat told reporters in a brief appearance, without taking additional questions. “Both the American people and the Congress read about a lot of actions in the newspapers and had no idea what was going on. I told them they had to make it better next time.”

Shanahan acknowledged that desire for more information. “We heard feedback that they’d like more conversation,” he said. “They’d also like us to be more communicative with the American public, and we agreed to do more of that.”

Maryland Sen. Ben Cardin, a senior Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, conceded that the meeting was a “very helpful” survey of the intelligence reports and U.S. responses. Another lawmaker confirmed that the meeting was testy, but in this telling the confrontation was bipartisan and focused more on the administration’s policies than suspicions that they are fabricating intelligence.

“A number of them questioned the conclusions of the administration about the reaction of the Iranians and what it might lead to,” a Democratic senator, speaking on condition of anonymity, said after the briefing. “I think there’s a lot of us with real misgivings about how serious this is and how much is a creation of the administration’s own provocative policy.”

Shanahan stressed that the administration, which has deployed an aircraft carrier strike group to the Persian Gulf and threatened devastating consequences for attacks on Americans, is trying to avoid a conflict.

“Our biggest focus at this point is to prevent Iranian miscalculation,” he told reporters. “We do not want the situation to escalate.”

Cruz kept the focus on Democratic hostility to Trump and their fidelity to the nuclear agreement that former President Barack Obama’s team negotiated with Iran.

“Far too many congressional Democrats are invested in appeasement for Iran, which manifests in effectively defending the mullahs against maximum pressure,” he told the Washington Examiner.

Establishment Media Silent: Trump Gets Unexpected Surprise Courtesy Of Singapore Citizens


Reported By Ben Marquis | June 11, 2018 at 1:43pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/establishment-media-silent-trump-gets-unexpected-surprise-courtesy-of-singapore-citizens/

Since President Donald Trump’s first day in office, the liberally biased mainstream media has perpetuated the narrative that Trump is largely despised both at home and abroad, and that in other nations he is almost universally viewed as an embarrassment to the American people.

Thus, it came as no surprise whatsoever when the U.S. media essentially ignored the reception Trump received from cheering supporters upon his arrival Sunday in Singapore ahead of a high-stakes summit with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un. Coverage of the cheering crowds greeting Trump would directly contradict the “Trump is hated” narrative the mainstream media outlets push every day, so they simply ignore it and choose not to cover it.

According to a series of photos published by The Daily Caller, the president received a boisterous welcome from not just U.S. citizens who live in Singapore, but also from Singaporean citizens as well.

A couple photos show a pair of young American women wearing red MAGA hats and waving American flags, with one of the girls even wearing a pair of patriotic socks emblazoned with Trump’s name.

Other photos show citizens of Singapore, young and old alike, waving U.S. flags and holding signs expressing support for Trump and appreciation for his efforts at securing peace for the Korean Peninsula and broader Asian region.

Fans of the president had gathered at the airport to greet his arrival, and lined the streets of the route used to transport him via presidential motorcade to the Shangri-La Hotel, as well as the Singaporean prime minister’s residence, the Istana Palace.

According to The U.K. Independent, Trump landed in Singapore at about 8:20 p.m. local time, and proceeded directly to the hotel.

“It’s exciting, but I am also anxious,” a Trump-supporting woman, identified only by her first name as Kim, told the Independent. “Kim (Jong Un) can change his mind at any time. Mr. Trump also likes to get his own way.

“But if it works, it’s for the good of the whole world. It will make history,” she added.

That view was echoed by a 16-year-old U.S. citizen student named Christine McDougal, who lives in Singapore and cheered the president’s arrival with a friend.

“This is a such an important moment,” McDougal told the Independent, in what can only be described as an understatement.

Meanwhile, apart from the cheering crowds and pomp and circumstance of a major geopolitical summit, Christian leaders across Singapore were urging their church members and attendees to pray for God’s will to be reflected upon the high-stakes meeting, according to the Washington Examiner.

Anglican and Catholic church leaders alike asked that God provide wisdom and guidance to both Trump and Kim and prayed that they would find success as they sought to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula and bring closure to a state of war that has been technically in effect since the 1950s.

Whether you fall into the category of those wildly cheering for Trump to emerge victorious from the meeting with a fierce communist rival or are praying that God’s hand will touch both leaders and guide them during the meeting — or both — there is no doubt that all eyes are on Singapore right now.

It would be nice if the U.S. media would cover all aspects of the summit — including the warm reception given to Trump — instead of not so subtly hoping for his failure, if only to rob the president they despise of yet another “win” he can tout with voters ahead of the 2020 election.

Hostile Media Desperate to Derail Trump’s Foreign Trip. Press scanning tweets, dredging anonymous sources to disrupt focus on overseas tour


disclaimerReported by Eddie Zipperer | Updated 22 May 2017 at 6:31 AM

URL of the original posting site: http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/hostile-media-desperate-to-derail-trumps-foreign-trip/

Rest in peace, lead-from-behindism! The new American president doesn’t bow to anyone, he doesn’t apologize for America, and — as it turns out — he doesn’t get deserted at the airport. So long, and good riddance to the Obama administration’s disastrous foreign policy, which eroded the world’s respect for America. That’s the consequence of projecting weakness on the world stage. That’s the consequence of a fearful, feckless foreign policy built on the sinkhole foundation of peace through weakness.

The logic of the previous administration went something like this: If America willfully weakened itself, the rest of the world would love us. For eight years we endured a strategy of scaling down the U.S. military, infecting it with politically correct nonsense, apologizing for America’s past, denying that America is exceptional, waffling on red lines, enabling the birth and proliferation of ISIS, and allowing rogue regimes such as Iran and North Korea to run amok.

As each “controversy” surfaces for its moment in the sun, bear in mind, these are the same outlets who thought reckless, feckless Obama could do no wrong.
Unfortunately, love — even if it were attainable — is of no geopolitical value. Only respect has value. Peace through strength is back, thanks to President Trump.

And respect was on display when King Salman of Saudi Arabia greeted President Trump at the airport in Riyadh, and he received red carpet treatment. It was a far cry from President Obama’s last visit where King Salman sent his distant nephew to pick up Obama at the airport. That disrespect was a result of President Obama’s willingness to trash our relationship with the Gulf State “sheikists” in order to make a ridiculous deal with the Shiite, death-to-America regime in Iran.

Now, President Trump is using his ambitious foreign trip — where he’ll visit the holy lands of three major world religions — to send the message that America is back and stands by its traditional allies.

But the mainstream media — the same that spent eight years enabling Obama’s sharks in the press poolfecklessness — aren’t having any part of the “America’s back” narrative. They’re beside themselves that the news cycle has shifted away from the anonymous source leaks they’ve been cramming down America’s throat and away from their Trump-Russia collusion fury. These are media determined to manufacture a narrative of failure regarding all aspects of Trump’s presidency.

Over the weekend, Byron York at the Washington Examiner reported on a Harvard study that quantified the anti-Trump bias of several mainstream media outlets. Of course, you don’t have to be a lab-coat-wearing, laboratory-dwelling scientist armed with an electron microscope and a mountain of grant money to figure that out. Just spend two minutes with any of those outlets, and you’ll be swimming in bias. When a supposedly objective news anchor such as CNN’s Anderson Cooper responds to contributor Jeffrey Lord by saying that if Trump “took a dump on his desk,” Lord would defend it, it’s safe to assume there’s bias at work.enemedia

Now, after all the work they’ve done for the past few days digging up anti-Trump gossip from anonymous sources, they have to switch gears and talk about a scandal-free foreign trip.

They’re framing it like it’s just halftime — an opportunity for the resistance to get up and use the bathroom while the marching band takes the field.

All they can do is lie in wait, ready to pounce on any perceived faux pas that Mr. Trump may commit. They almost certainly have an eye on Twitter awaiting any leftwing faux outrage that may surface so they can proliferate it. Already, there have been several stories about the fact that Melanina and Ivanka Trump didn’t wear headscarves. What’s the big deal about that? Well, President Trump tweeted two and a half years ago that “Mrs. Obama refused to wear a scarf” in Saudi Arabia, and the Saudis were “insulted.”

Crisis. Catastrophe. Hysteria. You’d think each individual Trump tweet is one of the nation’s founding documents and that the president himself had taken an oath to preserve, protect and defend all 35,000 of them.

Trump has tweeted 35,000 times. Anyone demanding that his presidency and the policies of his administration be consistent with all 35,000 tweets will probably be disappointed often. But that’s not what this story is about. This story is about trying to thwart the success of the American president on an overseas trip. It’s just part of a pathetic attempt to find a negative angle on everything. CNN and NBC, which — according to Harvard — spend 93 percent of their time trashing the president, both had this story featured prominently on their websites.trump derangement syndrom vacine

These news outlets go Three Mile Island every time Mr. Trump utters the words fake news, but consider the asinine assumptions a story like this rests on:

1.) The assumption that Trump’s 35,000 tweets should be binding on his actions as president.
2.) The assumption that Melania and Ivanka’s choice of clothing belongs to President Trump and not to them.
3.) The assumption that this story is actually newsworthy.

But it’s not about newsworthiness — it’s about unearthing a negative weapon to hurl at the president’s trip. After all, when Trump fired Comey, and the Left had their weekly meltdown, the MSM wasn’t at all interested in trolling through all those #FireComey tweets floating around the Twittersphere to expose Democrat hypocrisy.

So in the coming days, as the president goes about the important business of fixing all the damage President Obama did, watch for the MSM to attempt to undermine him with ridiculous controversies that are hatched from Twitter eggs or divulged by anonymous sources who probably sleep in oversized #ImWithHer t-shirts. But as each “controversy” surfaces for its moment in the sun, bear in mind, these are the same outlets who thought reckless, feckless Obama could do no wrong.

Eddie Zipperer is an assistant professor of political science at Georgia Military College and a regular LifeZette contributor.

Levin: This BOMBSHELL report on the Iran deal is infuriating


Posted April 24, 2017 07:23 PM by Chris Pandolfo

 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.conservativereview.com/articles/levin-this-bombshell-report-on-the-iran-deal-is-infuriating

Anton Watman | Shutterstock

Anton Watman | Shutterstock

There was a “blockbuster” story in Politico Monday that Conservative Review Editor-in-Chief Mark Levin wants you to know about.

In “Obama’s hidden Iran deal giveaway,” Josh Meyer reports that when President Obama released Iranian-born prisoners to secure Iranian support for his administration’s infamous nuclear deal, he portrayed the released prisoners as simple “civilians.” “In reality,” Meyer writes, “some of them were accused by Obama’s own Justice Department of posing threats to national security.”

Listen:

The bottom line is that President Obama lied to get support for the Iran Nuclear deal. “And his surrogates lied, and therefore the media lied,” Levin said. “And [Obama] surrendered America’s national security to do it!”

There is Democrat and mainstream media hysteria over possible, unproven, connections between President Trump and Russia, and meanwhile, President Obama released dangerous Iranian fugitives to pass a deal that enabled the nuclear proliferation of the world’s number one state sponsor of terrorism. 

And President Trump is somehow undermining American national security? Levin set the record straight:

“Barrack Obama did more damage to our national security, to the United States military, to our border security, to our internal security with our police, than any foreign enemy or opponent could possibly achieve!”

“This is a stunning story! And it gags me to say to Politico, I tip my hat. For once.”


Don’t miss an episode of LevinTV. Sign up now!


ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Chris Pandolfo is a staff writer and type-shouter for Conservative Review. He holds a B.A. in Politics and Economics from Hillsdale College. His interests are Conservative Political Philosophy, the American Founding, and Progressive Rock. Follow him on Twitter for doom-saying and great album recommendations @ChrisCPandolfo.

Setting their veils ablaze, Syrian women celebrate their freedom from ISIS [VIDEO]


Syrian Democratic Forces

Syrian Democratic Forces

Overwhelmed with joy after being freed from the grip of the Islamic State, some Syrian women have taken to burning the veils that they were forced to wear while living under the control of the terror group.

Video of the celebrations emerged Wednesday on a YouTube channel affiliated with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a Syrian rebel group made up mostly of Kurdish fighters. The video shows men, women, and children all singing and dancing to celebrate their liberation from the Islamic State. Two of the women in the video take off their veil and proceed to light it ablaze in celebration. Two other women celebrate their freedom by lighting up a cigarette, while children are seen dancing in the streets.

Syrian women deciding to torch their burqas and veils has become a common occurrence upon being freed from ISIS rule. To many, it is a symbol of oppression.

“Damn this stupid invention that they made us wear,” a Syrian woman said in August after she was liberated by the SDF. “We’re humans, we have our freedom.”

The Islamic State has ordered women in Iraq and Syria to wear full veils or be subject to “serious punishment.”

The SDF is a critical component of the U.S.-backed coalition battling the Islamic State, as Kurdish forces are engaged in a campaign to cut off ISIS supply lines throughout the country. In recent days, they have continued to push further into ISIS-held territory, liberating many towns and villages along the way. According to Kurdish news outlet Rudaw, the SDF “crossed into Deir ez-Zur province [in Syria] for the first time Tuesday.”

SDF troops plan on continuing their push forward until they reach Raqqa, which is known as the Syrian headquarters of the Islamic State.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Jordan Schachtel is the nationals security correspondent for Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @JordanSchachtel

Levin: ‘For once in their pathetic lives’ will liberals condemn Obama after he let traitor Manning off?


Chelsea Manning poster / Timothy Krause | Flickr

Manning is a former American intelligence analyst who received a 35-year sentence for acts of treason against the United States. He leaked classified documents detailing American military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan – among other sensitive information – that put American lives in danger, betraying his fellow soldiers and his country.

He is a traitor. And President Obama commuted his sentence today.

Listen:

“Manning is a traitor who pled guilty to a lesser offense to avoid the full penalty for his crimes,” Levin read from French’s piece. “He has received too much mercy already. President Obama’s commutation of his sentence is a disgrace.”

Levin invited liberals to call his program and attempt to defend what Obama did today.

“I want some damn liberal to step up to the plate and either defend what Obama did or for once in their pathetic lives to condemn him!” Levin exclaimed.

Meanwhile, over 50 Democratic politicians are going to skip President-elect Trump’s inauguration, Levin noted, and not a one of them have spoken up about this. President Obama committed an “affirmative act of betrayal by commuting the sentence of a treasonous little son-of-a-gun,” Levin said.

Why won’t any Leftists call him out on it?

Iran Wants More Pallets of Cash


waving flagAugust 9, 2016By

I wonder if now that the Obama administration has paid the ransom “we owed” the Iranian regime, whether it will set a precedent for others to put their hands out and demand, or at least request funds from the U.S. treasury?

Heck, even before the precedent, the Israeli government asked the U.S. to bump up its annual military stipend from $3 billion to $5 billion. Those dirty, money-grubbing Jews – asking for an additional $2 billion. You might think that, but they are blaming the Obama administration for the fact that they must request it in the first place.

It seems the Middle East is poised to get a lot more dangerous thanks to the huge infusion of cash which was part of the US-Iran nuclear agreement. So thanks to Obama, Israel expects to have to spend a lot more on defense. They do have a point.

Now in, we’ll call the post-ransom period, another has come forward asking for cash. Our old buddy, “former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is asking President Obama to release nearly $2 billion in Iranian assets frozen in a New York bank account.”

The Hill reports that Mahmoud is back and may be considering dealanother run for president next year.

I guess he plans to return to the election circuit as the conquering hero, with $1.75 billion in tow.

However, as you may recall – this is the same $1.75 billion that the supreme Court voted 6-2 to disperse over 1,000 victims of various terrorist atrocities perpetrated on Americans over the years, “including the 1983 bombing of a Marine barracks in Beirut and the 1996 attacks on Saudi Arabia’s Khobar towers…”

“Iran is appealing the case at the international Court of Justice.” Court of Justice. Sounds like a place where superheroes gather. Not quite – more like super-leftists.

pallets-of-cash-to-iranBut Mahmoud isn’t content to leave it in the hands of the courts. He instead has penned an open letter to Obama.

After a full paragraph of praising Allah and Mohammed, he gets down to it, spending the next couple paragraphs buttering up Obama – telling him that basically nothing is his fault. Birds of a feather, I suppose, as Obama has said the same for years.

However, Mahmoud doesn’t mention Bush specifically as does Obama – just past administrations that have been responsible for “about 60 years of oppression and cruelty by different American governments against the Iranian nation…”extra bowl of stupid

He then cites the supreme Court case which he claims illegally seized Iranian assets. He asks for “his Excellency,” Obama to “quickly fix” the problem and “that not only the Iranian nations must be restored, and the seized property released and returned, but also the damages caused be fully compensated for.”

Iran-ATM-600-LIWow – he sure knows the American legal system. If he loses his bid for the presidency, Mahmoud could no doubt become a slip and fall lawyer. And he also knows Obama, the leftist, as he plays to Obama’s legacy. “I passionately advise you not to let the historical affirmation and bitter incident be recorded under your name,” writes Mahmoud.

I don’t know whether Obama has the authority to release the funds the court has already allocated. Of course I also don’t think the court should have the authority, regardless of the good cause.

In my opinion, if Obama does “find” the authority, he would certainly get out the forklift again and load up the unmarked jet with more pallets of Euros. Anything for his pals in Iran.

Bright-Future-NRD-600 Never-Hillary-Egl-sm fight Picture1 true battle In God We Trust freedom combo 2

World War III Anyone?


waving flagJuly 25, 2016 By

That's Nothing Watch ThisA 25 page document recently released by the Atlantic Council (AC), based in the U.S., states that Russia could “attack Poland overnight.” The report claims that Russia could take advantage of NATO “being distracted by another crisis” or by misinterpreting activities NATO is involved in. After the annex of Crimea in 2014, the Baltic States have become legitimately nervous, wondering who Ruusia’s next target may be.

Many of these think tanks are employed from time to time to hash out war-game scenarios, as it were. But this is noStand-Off-590-LA game. The Atlantic Council is deadly serious, even going so far as to suggest possible counterattack targets should Russia decide to move on Poland – targets including the Kaliningrad and Metro Moscow.

They warned that “Even if Moscow currently has no immediate intent to challenge NATO directly, this may unexpectedly change overnight.” The Council also recommends that the Obama administration authorize more shipments of missiles to the Baltic region.

In recent years Poland has had a tough time holding onto its citizens. Young men of fighting age have been pulling up stakes and leaving to find work elsewhere. The report recognizes this to be a potential problem and urges Poland to find a way to halt the exodus. They give no suggestion of how this should be accomplished – only that it needs to be a priority.

Sanctions-Bear-LittleVladimir Putin seems to think the escalation between Russia and the West was and is inevitable and claimed in a speech from earlier this year that, “Russia does not wish for the chaos to spread, does not want war, and has no intention of starting one.putin However, today Russia sees the outbreak of global war is almost inevitable, is prepared for, and is continuing to prepare for it.”

Do you believe him? Neither do I. I’m not sure he wants to start World War III and I don’t think he thinks war is inevitable. Escalation of tensions yes – war – I’m not so sure.  I do however believe that Putin thinks the West is weak and has grown cowardly.

But I also believe he has a bit of a hotheaded streak and could be prone to overreaction. He is also, for good or bad (mostly bad), bold and does not go in for the covert.

The report states that, “Russia rarely disguises its true intentions. On the contrary, it has proclaimed to them very publicly on various occasions, but, in general, the West is chosen not to believe Russia’s declarations and disregards its willingness to carry them out.”

Needless to say Poland is not thrilled by the report. Not that they don’t believe it, but they are tired of the whole thing – after centuries of being ruled by others. First by the Russian Empire – then Germany and the Soviet Union in 1939. After World War II, it was back under the Soviet boot until 1989 and now this again.

Putin over ObamaWhether it’s a coincidence or due in part to the AC report, four NATO countries, the United States, Canada, Germany and Britain will send 1000 troops each to the region. Naturally Russia took this as a provocation and warned if NATO dispatched the 4000 troops, “Moscow would respond by posting three new divisions of its own close to the frontier.”

Although many still believe Putin is bluffing about his intentions, the defense minister of Lithuania is certainly not. When questioned on the feasibility of a Russian attack he said: “We cannot exclude it. They might exercise on the borders and then switch to invasion in hours.”

This situation is as serious as it gets. Much more so than ISIS or other terrorist networks. And who do we have as commander-in-chief? The feckless Obama. As long as he remains at the helm, Putin believes he can act without regard. And Putin is not prone to bluffing. He may take a while to set up his chess pieces, but don’t be surprised if you wake up one morning and find he’s made his first move (or second if you count Crimea).

fight Picture1 true battle In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Hezbollah Says It Gets All Its Money From Iran (Thank You Obama, Clinton, And Kerry)


waving flagby | Jun 26, 2016

Hezbollah Says It Gets All Its Money From Iran (Thank You Obama, Clinton, And Kerry)

In a speech broadcast by the Shiite party’s Al-Manar station, Nasrallah brushed off assertions that Hezbollah would be hurt by US sanctions on Lebanese financial institutions that work with the group.

“We do not have any business projects or investments via banks,” Nasrallah said, insisting the group “will not be affected.”

“We are open about the fact that Hezbollah’s budget, its income, its expenses, everything it eats and drinks, its weapons and rockets, are from the Islamic Republic of Iran,” he added.

In December, the US Congress voted to impose sanctions on banks that deal with Hezbollah, considered a “terrorist group” by the US. And last month, Lebanon’s central bank instructed the country’s banks and financial institutions to comply with the new measure against the Lebanese Shiite group. 

But none of that really matters:

“We totally reject this [U.S.] law until the Day of Judgment. … Even if the law is applied, we as a party and an organizational and jihadi movement, will not be hurt or affected,”

Nasrallah said: “As long as Iran has money, we have money… Just as we receive the rockets that we use to threaten Israel, we are receiving our money. No law will prevent us from receiving it…” 

As Al Arabia pointed out, the Nasrallah speech is a major embarrassment to the Obama muslim-obamaAdministration, since it appears that by approving the thawing of Iranian funds in return for a dubious nuclear agreement the US is now “playing a critical role in assisting and facilitating the ways through which Hezbollah receives this significant aid from the Iranian government.”

Two of the major beneficiaries of the [Iranian] sanctions relief have been Hezbollah and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Iran has also been able to increase its military budget by $1.5 billion from $15.6 billion to $17.1 billion.

Although it’s something most observers already knew, this is the first time ever that Nasrallah publicly confirmed his group is receiving full monetary and arms support from the Iranian government.  And thanks to the negotiating weakness of the Obama/Clinton administration, Iran has much more money to turn into terrorist attacks throughout the world, but especially Israel. But then again Jewish lives are never a concern of the Democratic Party and Barack Obama.

Obama%20Netanyahu%20Iran%20Nuke%20Deal%20Cartoon Picture1 true battle Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

ANOTHER Politically INCORRECT Cartoon for Today


waving flagMichael Ramirez – Friday, May 13, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://townhall.com/political-cartoons/michaelramirez

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Picture1 true battle Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Former Intelligence Chairman Warns ‘Stealth Jihad’ Is Moving Through The West


waving flagReported by Ginni Thomas, Contributor 01/17/2016

Former House Intelligence Chairman Pete Hoekstra is genuinely worried about the fundamental changes President Barack Obama has made to American foreign policy, according to this 28-minute exclusive video interview for The Daily Caller News Foundation.

A Michigan congressman for 18 years, the native-born Dutchman is a man of integrity and candor who has seen American statecraft up close. His years in politics gives Hoekstra the perspective that “the ruling elite in Washington is becoming disconnected from citizens.”

Hoekstra said when former President George W. Bush and Obama claim “Islam is a religion of peace,” many citizens are taken aback. Americans think, “’Whoa. They’re beheading Christians. They’re suicide bombers. They’re taking gays and lesbians and throwing them off the tops of buildings and they’re selling women into sex slavery. That doesn’t kind of look like a religion of peace to me,’” Hoekstra said in the interview.

Tying this cognitive dissonance to the rise of presidential candidate Donald Trump who sounds authentic, passionate and patriotic, Hoekstra said, “people are just frustrated and angry and this may be the election where they go out and say, I want something totally different.”American women respond

The former congressman watches the bellwether of embedded Islamafication in Europe and is worried what this could mean for safety in America. Hoekstra warned that accusations of Islamophobia are weapons used to intimidate Americans so that we close our eyes and ears to the “stealth jihad” strategy moving through the West. Islamists “use our laws, our customs to change who we are and to change us into something we don’t want to become.”

Hoekstra confirmed political correctness, such as that exposed by Department of Homeland Security whistleblower Phil Haney in a December video interview, is endangering Americans. All federal agencies, and now even the New York Police Departmentare fundamentally shifting their policies with dangerous consequences, he said.cause of death

He discussed the refugees who attacked German women on New Year’s Eve in Cologne and elsewhere, and said America can’t vet any refugee or asylee from failed states. America especially can’t vet asylum seekers since the Islamic State is seeding the refugees with Islamic jihadists.

Hoekstra gives a C grade to Republican oversight in Congress, knowing from experience what successful oversight can accomplish. 

The new movieThirteen Hours: the Secret Soldiers of Benghazi is reigniting conversations about the mishandled 2012 Benghazi attack that killed four Americans, including an ambassador.Benghazi Remebrence

Further from the truthHoekstra said, “Libya is a huge disaster.” He added it was a planned strategy by the Obama administration to work with the Muslim Brotherhood, rather than former Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi — who maintained stability in northern Africa and who helped control radical jihadists. After Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton insisted in taking out Gadhafi, Hoekstra said Libya became a failed state. It exports ideology, fighters, and weapons. He continued that it spawned what became ISIS, and serves now to help frame up attacks on Europe.

Adding insult to injury, our attackers in Benghazi in 2012, he said, were most likely those who were “trained and equipped by NATO.”

As to why Obama and Clinton did not send help to those under attack on the anniversary of 9/11, Hoekstra said the administration appears to have made a tragic judgment call in that “sending help was going to be more risky than allowing those people to survive on their own.”

“Almost everyone of this administration’s readjustments in foreign policy, whether it’s North Korea, Iran or engaging with radical jihadists like the Muslim Brotherhood, has been a total and utter failure. They’ve seen it as weakness; they’ve used it to leverage and move their programs forward,” he said.

Fired from a  Washington, D.C. law firm last year for writing and speaking publicly of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a way that displeased some of the partisan lawyers, Hoekstra is determined to pursue litigation in defense of his right to freedom of speech in the District of Columbia.

Today, Pete Hoekstra is a fellow with the Investigative Project on Terrorism and author of a book on Libya titled “Architects of Disaster.”  Follow him on Twitter @petehoekstra. Follow the Investigative Project on Terrorism on Facebook.

Watch the interview for much more.

daily

Mrs. Thomas does not necessarily support or endorse the products, services or positions promoted in any advertisement contained herein, and does not have control over or receive compensation from any advertiser.

Something Fishy About Iran’s Catch and Release of Navy Boats


waving flagPosted 9 hours ago by

muslim-obamaTalk about a snow job. Even for the Obama Administration, thanking the Iranian government for capturing two Navy boats and 10 sailors is low.

The whole incident, in which the Iranian government publicly castrated President Obama hours before his self-aggrandizing State of the Union speech, is now being spun by the White House as some sort of positive for U.S.-Iranian relations.

Secretary of State and all-around tough guy John “I Fought in Vietnam” Kerry called the matter a “testament to the critical role diplomacy plays in keeping our country safe.”Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

Baloney.

If anything, it was the promise of billions of dollars from the impending lifting of international sanctions against Iran that got those sailors released, not anything John Kerry did. Even the obtuse leaders of Iran weren’t going to jeopardize that payday.

The funniest lie of all, though, came from Vice President Joe Biden, who responded to Iranian officials’ statement that the sailors were released after apologizing by saying, “There was no looking for any apology.” Then what pops up? A video of the senior Naval officer apologizing to the Iranians at their request. Biden even went so far as to claim the entire embarrassing incident was “standard nautical practice,” that Iran was rescuing two boats in distress and acted as “ordinary nations would do.”Lies Lies and More Lies

Sure, releasing photos of rescued foreign sailors with their hands behind their heads, forcing the lone female to wear a hijab, then detaining the crews overnight — all standard. 

White House spokes-monkey Josh Earnest insisted that the sailors were “afforded the proper courtesy that you would expect.” Especially the part where they dressed up our female sailor like a Burka Barbie.

The coup de grace, however, was Kerry actually thanking the Iranians for their “cooperation.”

Thanks for the swirly, guys. Maybe next time you could give our country a wedgie, too.

The whole incident smells rotten and seems to defy the U.S. Armed Forces Code of Conduct, particularly the part about never surrendering of your own free will.

I’m no expert on military procedure, but from what I’ve been given to understand, if those boats truly broke down in enemy waters, those crews should have immediately issued a distress call to any nearby Navy vessel, then manned the guns on their boats in a defensive posture until rescued or until they could get under weigh again.

The government of Iran is an enemy power. So why would a Navy crew surrender unless there was an order from higher up to do so? There’s also the matter of the video apology by the Navy officer, which I’m told is also prohibited under the Code of Conduct. Again, why did this happen?

Then there’s the whole question of what those boats were doing there and why they both “broke down.”**

No, there are a lot of questions that need to be answered, and the Obama Administration, as it has done so often in the past, has gone into coverup mode.

My two centsSince this happened, I was immediately reminded of the following information. There is NOTHING coincidental about this incident. Please read and consider the following and then ask yourself, “Does Iran, or their Russian partner, possess this technology?

Electromagnetic pulse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse
This article is about the phenomenon in general. For nuclear EMP weapons, see Nuclear electromagnetic pulse.

An electromagnetic pulse (EMP), also sometimes called a transient electromagnetic disturbance, is a short burst of electromagnetic energy. Such a pulse’s origination may be a natural occurrence or man-made and can occur as a radiated, electric or magnetic field or a conducted electric current, depending on the source. The term “electromagnetic pulse” is commonly abbreviated EMP (which is pronounced by saying the letters separately, “E-M-P”).

EMP interference is generally disruptive or damaging to electronic equipment, and at higher energy levels a powerful EMP event such as a lightning strike can damage physical objects such as buildings and aircraft structures. The management of EMP effects is an important branch of electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) engineering.

The damaging effects of high-energy EMP have been used to create EMP weapons. These are typically divided into nuclear and non-nuclear devices. Such weapons, both real and fictional, have become known to the public by means of popular culture.

General characteristics[edit]

An electromagnetic pulse is a short burst of electromagnetic energy. Its short duration means that it will be spread over a range of frequencies. Pulses are typically characterised by:

  • The type of energy (radiated, electric, magnetic or conducted).
  • The range or spectrum of frequencies present.
  • Pulse waveform: shape, duration and amplitude.

The last two of these, the frequency spectrum and the pulse waveform, are interrelated via the Fourier transform and may be seen as two different ways of describing the same pulse.

Types of energy[edit]

Main article: Electromagnetism

As with any electromagnetic signal, EMP energy may be transferred in any of four forms:

In general, only radiation acts over long distances, with the others acting only over short distances. There are a few exceptions, such as a solar magnetic flare.

Frequency ranges[edit]

A pulse of electromagnetic energy typically comprises many frequencies from DC (zero Hz) to some upper limit depending on the source. The range defined as EMP, sometimes referred to as “DC to daylight”, excludes the highest frequencies comprising the optical (infrared, visible, ultraviolet) and ionizing (X and gamma rays) ranges.

Some types of EMP events can leave an optical trail, such as lightning and sparks, but these are side effects of the current flow through the air and are not part of the EMP itself.

Pulse waveforms[edit]

The waveform of a pulse describes how its instantaneous amplitude (field strength or current) changes over time. Real pulses tend to be quite complicated, so simplified models are often used. Such a model is typically shown either as a diagram or as a mathematical equation.

" "
Rectangular pulse
" "
Double exponential pulse
" "
Damped sinewave pulse

Most pulses have a very sharp leading edge, building up quickly to their maximum level. The classic model is a double-exponential curve which climbs steeply, quickly reaches a peak and then decays more slowly. However, pulses from a controlled switching circuit often take the form of a rectangular or “square” pulse.

In a pulse train, such as from a digital clock circuit, the waveform is repeated at regular intervals.

EMP events usually induce a corresponding signal in the victim equipment, due to coupling between the source and victim. Coupling usually occurs most strongly over a relatively narrow frequency band, leading to a characteristic damped sine wave signal in the victim. Visually it is shown as a high frequency sine wave growing and decaying within the longer-lived envelope of the double-exponential curve. A damped sinewave typically has much lower energy and a narrower frequency spread than the original pulse, due to the transfer characteristic of the coupling mode. In practice, EMP test equipment often injects these damped sinewaves directly rather than attempting to recreate the high-energy threat pulses.

Effects[edit]

Minor EMP events, and especially pulse trains, cause low levels of electrical noise or interference which can affect the operation of susceptible devices. For example, a common problem in the mid-twentieth century was interference emitted by the ignition systems of gasoline engines, which caused radio sets to crackle and TV sets to show stripes on the screen. Laws had to be introduced to make vehicle manufacturers fit interference suppressors.

At a high voltage level an EMP can induce a spark, for example from an electrostatic discharge when fuelling a gasoline-engined vehicle. Such sparks have been known to cause fuel-air explosions and precautions must be taken to prevent them.[1]

A large and energetic EMP can induce high currents and voltages in the victim, damaging electrical equipment or disrupting its function.

A very large EMP event such as a lightning strike is also capable of damaging objects such as trees, buildings and aircraft directly, either through heating effects or the disruptive effects of the very large magnetic field generated by the current. An indirect effect can be electrical fires caused by heating. Most engineered structures and systems require some form of protection against lightning to be designed in.

The damaging effects of EMP have led to the introduction of EMP weapons, from tactical missiles with a small radius of effect to nuclear bombs tailored for maximum EMP effect over a wide area.

Types of EMP[edit]

An EMP arises where the source emits a short-duration pulse of energy. The energy is usually broadband by nature, although it often excites a relatively narrow-band damped sine wave response in the victim. Some types are generated as repetitive and regular pulse trains.

Different types of EMP arise from natural, man-made and weapons effects.

Types of natural EMP event include:

  • Lightning electromagnetic pulse (LEMP). The discharge is typically an initial huge current flow, at least mega-amps, followed by a train of pulses of decreasing energy.
  • Electrostatic discharge (ESD), as a result of two charged objects coming into close proximity or even contact.
  • Meteoric EMP. The discharge of electromagnetic energy resulting from either the impact of a meteoroid with a spacecraft or the explosive breakup of a meteoroid passing through the Earth’s atmosphere.[2][3]
  • Coronal Mass Ejection (CME). A massive burst of gas and magnetic field arising from the solar corona and being released into the solar wind sometimes referred to as a Solar EMP.[4]

Types of (civil) man-made EMP event include:

  • Switching action of electrical circuitry, whether isolated or repetitive (as a pulse train).
  • Electric motors can create a train of pulses as the internal electrical contacts make and break connections as the armature rotates.
  • Gasoline engine ignition systems can create a train of pulses as the spark plugs are energized or fired.
  • Continual switching actions of digital electronic circuitry.
  • Power line surges. These can be up to several kilovolts, enough to damage electronic equipment that is insufficiently protected.

Types of military EMP include:

  • Nuclear electromagnetic pulse (NEMP), as a result of a nuclear explosion. A variant of this is the high altitude nuclear EMP (HEMP), which produces a pulse of a much larger amplitude and different characteristics due to particle interactions with the Earth’s atmosphere and subsequently the Earth’s magnetic fields driving an oscillation in electric current after the original pulse from the particle and ray interactions on the atmosphere.
  • Non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse (NNEMP) weapons.

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

You Say Islamist – I Say Wahhabist


waving flagJanuary 5, 2016 By

According to Saudi’s Arabia’s Grand Mufti, Sheikh Abdul Aziz al-Asheikh, both ISIS and al-Qaeda are enemy number one. I guess he couldn’t choose just one. Maybe it’s one of those 1 and 1A kinds of things.

Off topic as it is – who chooses the names for these characters anyway? Do they get to choose? If so, why must they always be so long? Could you imagine having to endorse a check or sign one of the tiny electronic keypads at the grocery store – or signing autographs for the Grand Mufti groupies? Sheesh!

Anyway, the Mufti – oh excuse me – the Grand Mufti stated emphatically that, “The ideas of extremism, radicalism and terrorism … have nothing to do with Islam and (their proponents) are the enemy number one of Islam.”

Yet about the time he was condemning the two terror groups for their barbarism, he was signing off on one of the largest mass executions in the country’s history. They executed 47 “criminals.” Among these criminals was a Shiite cleric, Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr (again with the names). This did not please Shiite Iran, as response to the executions, they attacked and burned the Saudi embassy in Tehran.

No one knows exactly what  their “crimes” were – only that the verdict against the “47 criminals was based on Allah’s Book and the Prophet’s Sunnah.”

The Grand Mufti, or G-Muf to his homies, claims they were tried properly according to Shariah law and found guilty of killing and making explosives. Well, that’s good enough for me, cause we can’t have anyone killing or making explosives. And I’m sure the cleric Nimrod al-Nimrod, being Shiite, where as the Saudi’s are Sunni, was just a happy coincidence.

Grand Mufti

G-Muf

But the 72 old Grand Mufti, complete with gray beard and gnarled eye, is evidently not without a sense of humor as he stated that not only is ISIS enemy numero uno, but that they “are in actuality Israeli soldiers.” Huh – who knew.

“This threat against Israel is simply a lie. Actually, Daesh (ISIS) is part of the Israeli soldiers,” said G-Muf. “The mufti also dismissed the seriousness of the threat declared by self-proclaimed Islamic State caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. If the Islamic State was serious, al-Asheikh said, they would be ‘killing Jews and liberating Palestine.’” He labeled the Islamic State heretics and they were doing damage to Islam and Muslims.

Well G-Muf –ain’t that the pot calling the kettle black. Sure the Saudi royal family and their holy men, like G-Muf, all publically proclaim their disgust of Islamist terror, but there’s a little thing called Wahhabism, the radical Islamic ideology that dates back a lot further than that of the Islamic State. So it’s time for another history lesson that I’ll guarantee the Grand Mufti knows all about and I also bet he’s a big booster.

The radical Wahhabi movement was founded by – here we go again – Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab in the 1700’s. Now, we’ve heard that terrorists like ISIS wish to return to the time of the earliest Muslims in the 7th century. Well, that’s exactly what al-Wahhab wished to do.

Al-Wahhab created the “Kitab al-Tawid” or “Book of God’s Uniqueness,” which became the “guiding text for his followers, who consequently speak of themselves as Muwahhidun (total monotheists) or as Salafis (followers of the ways of the first Muslims).”

After being run out of his home town, al- Wahhab found refuge in the city of Diriyah, north of what is now Riyadh, a city then ruled by Muhammad ibn Saud. The two had a commonality of cause and al-Wahhab agreed to help Saud fight his battles and send messengers of the faith out to spread the word and convert Muslims to Wahhabism. Of course those who refused, just as today, didn’t fare well. The messengers declared that, “King Saud, who was presented as Allah’s chosen monarch to whom all Muslims had to pledge baya, or absolute allegiance, so as not to face annihilation as foes of god.” Sound familiar?

Between 1744 and 1818 Wahhabist preachers, and the troops that backed them up, swept across the region securing the first kingdom of the House of Saud, or Saudi Arabia. The Wahhabist beliefs ran so deep that even the mighty Ottoman empire couldn’t wipe them out completely.

In 1824 the Saudi kingdom reemerged. At the throne was Emirate of Nejd, who ruled the kingdom from it’s new capital, Riyadh, between 1824 and 1891. The third Saudi kingdom started in 1932, who’s ruler, Abdulaziz ibn Saud (’32 – ’53) used Wahhabism to unite the many tribes under the Saudi umbrella.

“King Faisal ibn Abdulaziz al-Saud (ruled 1964–75) decided the propaganda of Wahhabism, which proclaims the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as the sole rightful defender of Islam, would become the long-term strategy for the monarchy’s survival.”

During the Cold War, Fahd bin Abdulaziz Al Saud (ruled 1982 until his death in 2005) saw the opportunity to spread Wahhabism using weaponized jihad. During Fahd’s reign, “Saudi Arabia spent $4 billion per year on mosques, madrassas, preachers, students, and textbooks to spread the Wahhabi creed over the next decades.” But they weren’t/aren’t educating aspiring holy man. They were/are training terrorists – jihadis using Wahhabist theology and oh by the way, American supplied weapons.

And it’s no different today. The Saudis claim to be our friends and allies against terror, but the House of Saud has been quietly funding Wahhabist terror for many decades. They have created the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaeda and ISIS and their influence is global through their funding of thousands of Mosques and Muslim Centers, where radical Wahhabist preachers recruit new jihadists. Most of the more than 1200 Mosques in the U.S. were funded by the Saudis.

The Saudis are bad people and certainly not our friends. Their radical Wahhabist ideology, while kept under wraps, is entirely incompatible with America and a free, secular society.

So when we hear old G-Muf state that extremism and terrorism are not Islam, you know for fact, he is lying his a** off.

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


Branco Cartoon – Assume the Position

Posted by    Thursday, October 15, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/10/branco-cartoon-assume-the-position/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LegalInsurrection+%28Le%C2%B7gal+In%C2%B7sur%C2%B7rec%C2%B7tion%29

U.S. Foreign Policy

Indenification of Obama ObamaIranian-Flag-WORD-ART Liberals Hate Merchants The Lower you go Demorates B2A_FvyCMAE14px tyrants muslim-obama cause of death freedom Obama Muslim collection Dupe and Chains In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


Fruit Loop Foreign Policy

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://conservativebyte.com/2015/03/fruit-loop-foreign-policy/

Embarrassed-600

Sorry Yet 02 more evidence Dupe and Chains Picture6

Obama’s Doctrine of Destruction of America as we know it & the March to a New World Order


http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/06/obamas-doctrine-destruction-america-know-march-new-world-order/#kQsAsbSlcrO1F5hl.99

Written by

Trigger the VoteWe could not have a better person in office than President Obama, if you want someone to do everything

Click on image to see movie trailer and more

Click on image to see movie trailer and more

he can to destroy the country that is. This President has gone out of his way to make sure not only just a few of his Socialist policies ruin us, but that his whole time in office is dedicated to the destruction of the United States as we know it.

From supplying terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and countless other Islamic Jihadists in N. Africa, the Mid-East, Indonesia, and Europe with billions of dollars in weapons, billions in financial aid, and actual military help, to purposely busing and flying in hundreds of thousand illegal aliens per day via Homeland Security.

Cloward Pevin with explanationThis President expects his agenda of anti-Americanism to continue with breaking our economy and with the EPA’s anti CO2 regulations, which are based on guess work from UN climate organizations and not concrete scientific evidence.

We also have the countless scandals which amount to crimes perpetrated by this President. From Benghazi to the IRS situation, where Conservatives are targeted by the IRS for their voices of opposition to the Administration, we now have a Socialist Dictator in office who has declared war on any American who stands with the Constitution as the rule of law.

We now have the dirtiest most corrupt President ever to hold office, making Richard M. Nixon look like the most honest President we ever had, when comparing the two. At least Nixon loved America; Obama hates the very core of American values of which make us great.

A President, who loves his country, would not aid enemies who have only our destruction in mind. Yet, Obama has made his whole foreign policy about helping terrorist organizations gain control of countries.

Last year, in Obama’s quest to aid Al Qaeda and other terrorist factions fighting in Syria by wanting to bomb the Assad regime, we now see these same Islamic factions taking over Iraq via all the aid in arms, money, and military training we did supply them. It stands to reason that Obama does not want to help the Iraq government since his vision was to see Islamists take power across the Mid-East in the first place.

ConfusedObama and John Kerry have done everything possible to damage beyond recognition the friendship the US has had with key allies such as Israel and Russia. Today, we stand in opposition to Israel because of Obama’s agenda to transform the Mid-East into a region completely run by terrorist organizations, labeling Israel as an oppressive state and doing everything possible short of cutting ties with them altogether.

We now live in a Cold War atmosphere with Russia over events in Ukraine, which were stoked by our own CIA in the first place.

The Benghazi cover up is clear to anyone who has been following US foreign policy. This Administration has to keep these events swept under the rug since it was the very terrorist organizations the Obama Administration is supporting who are responsible for killing Americans on that day.

Because of the massive opposition to the Obama Administration’s desire to grant Amnesty to millions of Illegal Aliens, the President has given orders for all Border Patrol agents to stand down and has Homeland Security busing and flying hundreds of thousands of Illegals into the US daily from Central America with the help of the drug cartels.

The recent Federal land grab in New Mexico is also part of the Obama strategy in creating a flood of illegal immigrants.

So, now, instead of having hundreds cross our southern border each day, we now have thousands getting a free ride here daily.

Obama's IRS GestapoAside from all of this, we are supposed to believe the IRS lost some two years of Lois Learner’s E-Mails. In light of the massive domestic spying by the NSA, CIA, and other clandestine organizations on American citizens, we know this isn’t a problem since these organizations do have these E-Mails.

About Tony Elliott

I am an established writer with articles in over 20 publications of differing topics Political Commentary Columnist for the Cimarron News Press in Cimarron, New Mexico from 2001 to 2003 generating the controversy I was hired for. I also was a regular writer for several small coastal newspapers in Southern Oregon during the early 1990’s. BOOKS:
Article collective closing

Al-Qaeda: ‘Spreading Like Wildfire’


http://blog.heritage.org/2014/04/14/al-qaeda/

A handout picture released by the official Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) on March 17, 2012, shows fire fighters at the scene following a two bomb attacks on security buildings in the heart of the Syrian capital Damascus which killed several people, state television said. AFP PHOTO/HO

Last week, a House Foreign Affairs subcommittee held a hearing provocatively titled “Is Al-Qaeda Winning?” The answers that the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Trade received were profoundly unsettling.

Former Senator Joseph Lieberman (I–Conn.) testified that Syria had become a key focal point of al-Qaeda’s efforts. He noted that there are more foreign militants fighting in Syria today than in Iraq and Afghanistan combined over the past 10 years:  “Put very bluntly, Syria has become the most dangerous terrorist sanctuary in the world today—and the United States has not coherent or credible policy for dealing with it.”

>>> Read More: The Arab Spring Descends into Islamist Winter: Implications for U.S. Policy

Frederick Kagan, director of the critical threats project at the American Enterprise Institute, warned that the Obama Administration has underestimated the threat posed by al-Qaeda’s ideology, which has inspired a global insurgency. He assessed that al-Qaeda’s “brand is spreading like wildfire, the groups affiliating themselves with it control more fighters, land and wealth than they ever have, and they are opening up new fronts.”

Dear Mr President

Heritage Foundation analysts long have warned about the more permissive environment that al-Qaeda and other Islamist extremist groups have exploited in many countries destabilized by the “Arab Spring” uprisings.  Syria, in particular, has been a magnet for foreign militants and a rich recruiting ground for al-Qaeda.

>>> Read More: A Counterterrorism Strategy for the “Next Wave”

Al-Qaeda has made a comeback in Iraq, and gained followers in Egypt, Libya, Mali, East Africa, and Yemen

The chief takeaway from the hearing was that the Obama Administration needs to focus more on the revolutionary threat posed by al-Qaeda and its affiliates in the Middle East and Africa. Furthermore, the administration should alter its narrow definition of the al-Qaeda threat, which it currently holds as the immediate terrorist threat posed by the al-Qaeda core group based in Pakistan.

Related:
Al-Qaeda Seeks American Recruits in Syria
Al-Qaeda Resurges in Iraq
These Words from Obama Are Frightening—and Revealing

Posted in Front Page, International [slideshow_deploy]

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


“No Laughing Matter”

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/03/laughing-matter/#VxjQWXqsieqEKBLU.99

 

No-Laughing-Matter

Complete Message

Today’s Political Cartoon


CONSERVATIVE-BYTE-BANNER

“LANDSIDE”

Posted on February 26, 2014

http://conservativebyte.com/2014/02/landslide/

Slide-590-LA

 

Death and Taxes

Only Democrats

“Lurch” Tells the World the Priorities President Obama and the State Department; Killing Christians is Okay, Banning Same Sex Marriage is NOT


Kerry Condemns Nigeria for Ban on Same Sex Marriage Not for Slaughter of Christians

For the past several years, Muslims have been attacking Christians in countries like Nigeria and the United States government has said nothing to condemn the slaughter.

Like many nations in the area and in the Middle East, Nigeria is predominately Muslim.  However, there is a significant Christian population that lives in the northern regions of the African nation.  However, Nigeria’s Muslims are determined to eradicate their country of any and all Christians.

I’ve written in the past of Christians being slaughtered in Nigeria.  In one attack, a Muslim suicide bomber attacked a Christian church during services, killing 15 and wounding 40 others.  Since many Christians attend church on Christmas Day, this has become a favorite time for Muslim attacks.  On one recent Christmas Day, Muslims bombed several Christian churches in northern Nigeria, killing at least 25 and wounding dozens more.  After these Christmas Day attacks, the Obama administration issued an impersonal short condemnation and nothing more was said or done.

In mid-November last year, Ann Buwalda, Executive Director of Jubilee Campaign said that around 1,200 Christians had been killed in northern Nigeria.  She didn’t say how many more had been wounded in the attacks, but surely it was several thousand.  Speaking to the Christian Post, she said:

“We documented 1,200 Nigerian Christians in the North of Nigeria who were killed, some by Boko Haram, some by Fulani herdsmen. These two types of attacks are persistent within several of the Northern Nigerian states.”

“With our statistic of more Christians have been killed in Northern Nigeria than the rest of the world combined.”

“Statistically, we are looking at approximately 60 percent of the world’s Christians that were killed for their faith last year was in Northern Nigeria.”

With Nigeria being the center of Christian genocide in the world, all US Secretary of State John Kerry can condemn Nigeria for is their recent ban on same sex marriages.  After Nigeria passed its law, Kerry released an official statement through the State Department saying:

“The United States is deeply concerned by Nigeria’s enactment of the Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Act.  Beyond even prohibiting same sex marriage, this law dangerously restricts freedom of assembly, association, and expression for all Nigerians.”

What about the freedom of Nigeria’s Christians to assemble, associate and express their faith?  When they do assemble, they always do so in fear of being attacked by members of the religion of peace, or so we are told.

Kerry’s statement condemning Nigeria’s new law suggested that such a law was in conflict with international law.  But isn’t the intentional genocide of any group of people a violation of international law?  Shouldn’t the world community, as well as the US, be up in arms over the murder and wounding of thousands of Christians?

Both Barack Obama and John Kerry claim to be Christians, but they are so busy protecting the sinful and abominable lifestyle of homosexuals that they can’t be bothered to protect Christians who seems to have a much stronger faith than their own.

How many Americans would go to church on Sunday morning if they knew there was a chance that they could be the subject of a bomb attack?  I bet many of our nation’s churches would be nearly empty.  But the Christians in Nigeria hold their faith dearly and are willing to risk their lives just to worship Jesus who died for them.

Secretary of State John Kerry’s actions and lack thereof are sickening to me as are those of President Barack Obama.  Their liberal anti-Christian agendas are more important to them than the lives of Christians.  Obviously gays mean more to them than Christians who hold to God’s Word.  What does that say about their own Christian faith?

Ron Paul: Syria Intervention Would be “Reckless and Immoral” – The Last Resistance


by

It’s striking how much the media control people’s political opinions without people realizing it. Just a few years ago, only an “isolationist” would be opposed to U.S. military intervention in a foreign country for the sole purpose of “humanitarianism.”

Way back in 2007, this is one of the very few interviews Sean Hannity did with Ron Paul. This particular exchange took place after one of the presidential debates:

Hannity: Are you saying then that the world has no moral obligation, like in the first Gulf War, when an innocent country’s being pillaged, and people are being raped and murdered and slaughtered, or in the case of Saddam, he’s gassing his own people, are you suggesting we have no moral obligation there? Do you stand by and let that immorality happen?

Paul: We have, on numerous occasions.

Hannity: You support that?

Paul: We have, on numerous occasions. If we feel strongly about it, why don’t we declare war —

Hannity: If a woman’s being raped do you stand by and do nothing there either?

Alan Colmes: We’re almost out of time, but the fact is the Reagan administration stood by while the Kurds were being gassed, it happened in 1988, we didn’t do anything —

Hannity: We didn’t do anything about it, for how many years?

Paul: And what did we do with Pol Pot, what did we do with Moscow, what did we do at the time? We stood by while they did it to their people.

Hannity: We got it, Ron, you would stand by and do that, I would not.

Paul: No, you —

Hannity: I think that’s immoral.

Hannity’s of course singing a much different tune nowadays, since being opposed to unconstitutional military interventions is kind of “cool” now. But Ron Paul was opposed to such interventions long before it was cool, and he’s remained steadfast for decades in his opposition.

A couple days ago, on his Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity website, he wrote that intervening in Syria would be a reckless and immoral use of the military:

“President Obama announced this weekend that he has decided to use military force against Syria and would seek authorization from Congress when it returned from its August break. Every Member ought to vote against this reckless and immoral use of the US military. But even if every single Member and Senator votes for another war, it will not make this terrible idea any better because some sort of nod is given to the Constitution along the way. Besides, the president made it clear that Congressional authorization is superfluous, asserting falsely that he has the authority to act on his own with or without Congress. That Congress allows itself to be treated as window dressing by the imperial president is just astonishing. The President on Saturday claimed that the alleged chemical attack in Syria on August 21 presented ‘a serious danger to our national security.’ I disagree with the idea that every conflict, every dictator, and every insurgency everywhere in the world is somehow critical to our national security. That is the thinking of an empire, not a republic. It is the kind of thinking that this president shares with his predecessor, and it is bankrupting us and destroying our liberties here at home.”

He hasn’t changed one bit. But people’s foreign policy views change depending on what their media channel of choice is feeding them. And the media narratives are written depending on which party holds the White House.

If Bush had decided to attack Syria because the leader was gassing his own people, then conservatives, fed by Fox News, would be all for it; and the liberals, fed by all the other networks, would be denouncing it.

I’m glad that conservatives are coming out in opposition to a war with Syria. What concerns me is that people don’t have any discernment, and that they’ll believe whatever their favorite media network tells them.

What if a Republican becomes president next, and he’s no better than Obama when it comes to foreign policy or the preservation of the 2nd and 4th Amendments (and all the rest) here at home? Will conservatives see through the propaganda that will most certainly be used by the media to sell tyranny to us? They’ll use the same excuses of “security and safety.” And I fear that most people who identify themselves as conservatives will swallow it, hook, line and sinker.

The sooner people get away from this phony “republican vs. democrat” dichotomy, the better off we’ll all be. We should be electing people who want to do the right thing, not the “Republican” thing. Think Rand Paul, Ted Cruz or Justin Amash. Sure, they’re Republicans. But to them, party affiliation is secondary to the Constitution.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

My 2 Cents – Jerry Broussard

  • Who decided that the United States of America is the world’s police?
  • If we are going to come to the rescue of a people, what didn’t we go to the aid of the Christians in the Sudan?
  • The evidence is confirmed many times that those responsible for the gas attack was the accidental mishandling of the chemical weapons give to the Syrian rebels by Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia, who also was instrumental in confirming the false evidence of Saddam Hussein‘s weapons of mass destruction? Why can’t we see that Saudi Arabia is culpable in the entire mess in the Mid East?
  • The Obama Administration is buying into the same lies the were fed to the Bush Administration. Why aren’t we acknowledging that fact? What does Saudi Arabia have on our government that they always end up with “clean-hands”?
  • Fact: Russia, China and others have stated that they will defend Syria and will retaliate if America uses any military force against the Assad regime. That will cause a larger war American Military is NOT prepared to fight because the Obama Administration has decimated our military.
  • Fact: The only winner is such a conflict would be Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea and China.
  • Fact: We cannot afford another war.
  • Fact: 2014 Mid Term Elections are growing in importance every day.
  • Fact: America is in desperate need of a Spiritual revival that will change the spirits, hearts and minds of the people of the United States to use what means are moral and necessary to rid our country of the evil that has such a death-grip on our Federal, State and Local governments.

US Ready To Enter Negotiations With Taliban?


by

Joyce Brothers said: “Trust your hunches. They’re usually based on facts filed away just below the conscious level.”

Unquestionably, there is merit in trust. Having trust in other people is a basic and necessary part of life. Without trust, we would remain isolated; never able to form relationships with other people. However, just as important as holding trust in someone else, is holding trust in yourself; in your own instincts. In politics, sometimes, trusting your own instincts is all you have.

 There are certainly those in the world with whom you should not deal, or negotiate. There is a basic understanding—at least I have a basic understanding—that one should not trust someone who has not proven worthy of trust. Simple, right? Apparently not. According to breitbart.com, the United States, in conjunction with Afghanistan, is prepared to enter negotiations with the Taliban. Yes, you read that correctly…negotiating with the TALIBAN.

Taliban Spokesman Mohammad Naim has announced that the Taliban will not accept the use of Afghan soil as a base for military operations, and supports negotiations. The Obama administration stated that US representatives will start bilateral negotiations with the Taliban…Marine General Joseph Dunford, the top US commander in Afghanistan, also celebrated the beginning of talks: ‘My perspective has always been that this war is going to have to end with political reconciliation and so I frankly would be supportive of any positive movement in terms of reconciliation…that would bring reconciliation between the afghan people and the Taliban.’

So, a terrorist organization is suddenly—with seemingly abundant enthusiasm–willing to enter “peace talks?” Something doesn’t smell right. Actually, that’s generous. This is totally bogus. This is the same organization that called the Karzai administration “stooges” of the West.

I can’t ask much beyond these basic questions: Why would anyone enter negotiations with the Taliban? More than that, why would the Taliban suddenly decide that now is the time to negotiate?

No answer?

An ideologically-driven group of people, a people who want nothing more than to exterminate those who don’t agree with them, cannot be negotiated with. Is it just me, or is this not absolutely, hands down crazy?

However, the part that baffles me the most is the willingness on the part of Afghanistan and the US to deal with these maniacs. Do they actually believe that the Taliban can be trusted; or is this a small move in a much larger game? Is it a fake out?

I am trusting my instincts, and leaning toward the belief that this is a chess move in a much larger game. But I wonder; in the end, which side is actually benefitting? Is this move worth the risk of legitimizing psychopaths? I say no.

Obama calls Romney ‘new’ to foreign policy, recalling ’08 criticism


Published September 10, 2012: www.FoxNews.com

A little more than four years ago, Hillary Clinton suggested then-Democratic primary opponent Barack Obama was so naïve on the world stage he’d need a “foreign policy instruction manual” should he win office.

Fast forward to the 2012 Democratic National Convention. Obama, now the president, accepted his party’s nomination for a second term by touting his experience as a steady leader in the face of overseas crises and mocked his Republican challenger as “new to foreign policy.”

How times have changed.

But the president’s new tactic — to incorporate into his campaign message the sense that he is the tested leader, and that Mitt Romney is a newbie — could be a risky one. For starters, it recalls the very criticism against Obama, like the above line from Clinton, when he first ran.

“Obama had probably less foreign policy experience (when he first ran for president) than Romney has,” said Steffen Schmidt, political science professor at Iowa State University.

Schmidt also noted that Romney is hardly alone among non-incumbent candidates in not having a tremendous foreign policy background. “The truth of the matter is, presidents learn on the job,” he said.

Obama, in an official sense, may have had a bit more foreign policy experience when he first ran than Romney does today.

Obama, as a first-term senator, was a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. And he took several foreign trips. He traveled in 2005 with Republican Indiana Sen. Richard Lugar to Russia and Eastern Europe to visit nuclear and biological weapons facilities. The following year, Obama traveled to the Middle East. Obama, the senator, made another foreign trip to several African countries in late 2006 as well.

Obama, though, downplayed the value of that experience during his 2008 primary run. “Experience in Washington is not knowledge of the world,” he said in April 2008, according to an account from the time in The New York Times. “This I know. When Sen. Clinton brags, ‘I’ve met leaders from 80 countries,’ I know what those trips are like. I’ve been on them. You go from the airport to the embassy. There’s a group of children who do a native dance. You meet with the C.I.A. station chief and the embassy and they give you a briefing. … And then, you go.”

Obama instead had stressed his time living abroad, as well as a visit to Pakistan back in the 1980s.

Romney, though, also lived abroad — in France as a Mormon missionary — in the 1960s. And both Romney and Obama, as presidential candidates, conducted high-profile overseas tours to bolster their campaigns.

Obama’s, which included an address to a massive crowd in Berlin, was likely better received. Romney stumbled on his summertime tour abroad, most notably when he suggested Britain might not be ready for the 2012 Olympic Games.

Obama seized on that gaffe during his nomination address last Thursday in Charlotte, N.C.

“My opponent and his running mate are new to foreign policy,” Obama said. “But from all that we’ve seen and heard, they want to take us back to an era of blustering and blundering that cost America so dearly. After all, you don’t call Russia our No. 1 enemy — not Al Qaeda — Russia, unless you’re still stuck in a Cold War mind warp.

“You might not be ready for diplomacy with Beijing if you can’t visit the Olympics without insulting our closest ally,” Obama said.

Obama went on to say: “You know, I recognize that times have changed since I first spoke to this convention. The times have changed, and so have I. I’m no longer just a candidate. I’m the president.”

Schmidt said Obama may be trying to inject more foreign policy into the mix, not just to deflect from other issues but to defend his administration against a GOP talking point that the president is “leading from behind” on the world stage.

Indeed, the Romney campaign released a memo over the weekend that highlighted the president’s “manifold failures on foreign policy and national security.” While Obama touts the successful takedown of Usama bin Laden and the official end of the Iraq war under his watch, Republican claims he has done little to slow what they see as Iran’s march toward a nuclear weapon.

Sen. John McCain, the Republican Party’s 2008 nominee, critiqued both Obama and Romney on the foreign policy front in an interview with the Associated Press over the weekend. In the interview, McCain said national security was largely missing from the GOP convention.

“It’s the job of presidents and candidates to lead and articulate their vision for America’s role in the world. The world is a more dangerous place than it’s been since the end of the Cold War, and so I think the president should lead and I think candidates for the presidency should lead and talk about it, and I’m disappointed that there hasn’t been more,” McCain said. He was most critical of the current administration, on issues like Iran and Syria.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: