Archive for October 4, 2016

Moscow delivers S-300 missile system to Syria for defense of Russian naval base

October 4, 2016

Moscow delivers S-300 missile system to Syria for defense of Russian naval base

Published time: 4 Oct, 2016 15:33 Edited time: 4 Oct, 2016 16:02

Source: Moscow delivers S-300 missile system to Syria for defense of Russian naval base — RT News

© Kirill Kallinikov / Sputnik

A battery of Russian S-300 air defense missile launchers has been transported to Syria, Russia’s Defense Ministry said in a statement. Its sole purpose is to defend a Russian naval base and warships, the ministry added.
Read more

The Russian Embassy in Damascus. © Mikhail Alaeddin

The information about the S-300’s deployment was confirmed by ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov.

“Indeed, the Syrian Arab Republic received an S-300 anti-aircraft missile system. This system is designed to ensure the safety of the naval base in [Syrian city of] Tartus and ships located in the coastal area [in Syria]…” he told the media.

Konashenkov said it is unclear why the deployment of the missile system has created such a fuss in the West.

“The S-300 is a purely defensive system and poses no threat,” he said.

He recalled that before the deployment of S-300, Russia had delivered Fort air defense missile systems to Syria.

The statement comes after a report by Fox news that a Russian S-300 was deployed to Syria. The media cited three US officials who claimed that Moscow “continues to ramp up its military operations in Syria.”

In November 2015, Moscow deployed its newest S-400 air defense missile system to Khmeimim in Syria as part of a security boost following the downing of a Russian jet by Turkey near the border with that country. At the time, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the S-400 systems are not targeting Russia’s partners, “with whom we fight terrorists in Syria together.”

The S-400 is the most advanced anti-aircraft defense system in Russia.

Obama Admin Secretly Facilitated Iranian Ballistic Missile Program

October 4, 2016

Obama Admin Secretly Facilitated Iranian Ballistic Missile Program, Washington Free Beacon, , October 4, 2016

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry smiles during a speech on the future of "Transatlantic Relations" during an event hosted by The German Marshall Fund (GMF) and the U.S. Mission to the EU at Concert Noble in Brussels, Tuesday, Oct. 4, 2016. Kerry is in Brussels for a two-day conference, hosted by the EU, with the participation of over 70 countries to discuss the current situation in Afghanistan. (AP Photo/Geert Vanden Wijngaert)

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry smiles during a speech on the future of “Transatlantic Relations” during an event hosted by The German Marshall Fund (GMF) and the U.S. Mission to the EU at Concert Noble in Brussels, Tuesday, Oct. 4, 2016. AP Photo/Geert Vanden Wijngaert

The Obama administration misled journalists and lawmakers for more than nine months about a secret agreement to lift international sanctions on a critical funding node of Iran’s ballistic missile program, as part of a broader “ransom” package earlier this year that involved Iran freeing several U.S. hostages, according to U.S. officials and congressional sources apprised of the situation.

The administration agreed to immediately lift global restrictions on Iran’s Bank Sepah—a bank the Treasury Department described in 2007 as the “linchpin of Iran’s missile procurement”–eight years before they were to be lifted under last summer’s comprehensive nuclear agreement. U.S. officials initially described the move as a “goodwill gesture” to Iran.

The United States also agreed to provide Iran $1.7 billion in cash to release or drop charges against 21 Iranians indicted for illegally assisting Tehran. Full details of this secret agreement were kept hidden from Congress and journalists for more than nine months, multiple sources told theWashington Free Beacon.

State Department officials who spoke to the Free Beacon now say the United States “already made” the decision to drop U.S. sanctions, but declined to address multiple questions aimed at clarifying the discrepancy between past and current explanations for dropping international sanctions.

The Free Beacon first reported on these terms in January, including the dropping of international sanctions on Bank Sepah.

State Department officials told the Free Beacon at the time that the settlement with Iran, including the $1.7 billion cash award, was “not related” to “the release of the U.S. citizens from Iran.”

U.S. officials last week confirmed to the Wall Street Journal that in fact the dropping of sanctions on Bank Sepah “was part of a package of tightly scripted agreements” surrounding the release of the U.S. citizens from Iran.

When asked about the discrepancies between these statements, a State Department official would not elaborate, instead telling the Free Beacon, “The U.S. government had already made the determination that it would remove Bank Sepah from our domestic Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List on Implementation Day, which was outlined clearly in the JCPOA [nuclear deal] itself in July 2015.”

“We made this determination after a careful review of the activity of all individuals and entities—including Bank Sepah—that would be removed from the SDN list,” the official explained. “Although we removed Bank Sepah from the U.S. SDN list, Bank Sepah will continue to be cut off from the U.S. financial system and its funds under U.S. jurisdiction will remain blocked. Furthermore, we have the ability to quickly reimpose additional U.S. sanctions if Bank Sepah or any other entity engages in activities that remain sanctionable.”

The Free Beacon was not the only publication that was provided with misleading information by the Obama administration.

U.S. officials told Al Monitor in late January that the move to cancel international sanctions on Bank Sepah at the United Nations was undertaken by Venezuela without U.S. action.

“We already made the decision to delist this bank as part of U.S. secondary sanctions as part of the nuclear deal,” the official added, claiming the United States only agreed “not to oppose the delisting at the U.N., which Iran very much wanted.”

Senior Iranian officials said in January that the $1.7 billion payment and delisting of Bank Sepah were part of the agreement to free U.S. hostages, a charge the Obama administration denied at the time.

“The annulment of sanctions against Iran’s Bank Sepah and reclaiming of $1.7mln of Iran’s frozen assets after 36 years showed that the U.S. doesn’t understand anything but the language of force,” Mohammad Reza Naqdi, commander of Iran’s Basij Volunteer Force, told Iran’s state-controlled press in early February.

Senior congressional sources apprised of the matter told the Free Beacon that these latest revelations provide further proof of the administration’s intentional bid to deceive the public about its dealings with Iran.

“Facts are facts, no matter how much the administration tries to hide them,” said one senior congressional aide involved in investigating the matter. “Journalists and Members of Congress are on the trail and have already uncovered so much, including the cash payment of almost $2 billion to the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism as a ransom for four American hostages. The truth, no matter how disturbing it is, will continue to come out.”

“This should eliminate any remaining doubt that the administration paid a ransom to Iran,” said another source familiar with the issue. “Why else would they keep Congress and the American people in the dark about this unprecedented concession? President Obama’s continued capitulation to the Iranian regime is a hazard to our national security.”

Another source who serves as a senior adviser to Congress and is familiar with the administration’s thinking told the Free Beacon that the Obama administration misled the public to avoid sparking outrage over its decision to drop sanctions on the top funder of Iran’s ballistic missile program.

“The Obama administration couldn’t tell the American public that it had just unleashed Iran’s ballistic missile program as one part of an enormous ransom extracted by Iran,” the source said. “So instead they ran to friendly reporters to misleadingly boast about how successful their diplomacy was, while they were bribing Iran with billions of dollars and military concessions to stay at the table.”

The Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank, described the administration’s move as putting Iran’s ballistic missile program “back in business.”

“It represents a unilateral dismantling of the international ballistic missile embargo against the Islamic Republic,” FDD wrote in a recent policy analysis. “Iran’s preferred missile-financing bank is back in business.”

Iran has test fired multiple ballistic missiles since the nuclear deal was implemented, despite international restrictions on this type of activity.

Voter Fraud Rising

October 4, 2016

Voter Fraud Rising, Front Page MagazineMatthew Vadum, October 4, 2016

voterfraud

Conservatives think fighting voter fraud is important; liberals and progressives don’t care — and many of them go further, arguing that voter fraud is an imaginary problem.

Voting by illegal aliens and other non-citizens – millions of whom are registered to vote – is widespread. . . .

****************************

There is already evidence that voter fraud is being perpetrated in critical battleground states like Virginia and Colorado a month before Election Day.

Voter fraud is commonplace. Completely eliminating it is impossible. The most policymakers can do is create laws and policies that attempt to minimize it.

Voter fraud is unlawful interference with the electoral process in an effort to bring about a desired result. Voter fraud is also called vote fraud, election fraud, and electoral fraud. It refers to fraudulent voting, impersonation, intimidation, perjury, voter registration fraud, forgery, counterfeiting, bribery, destroying already cast ballots, and a multitude of crimes related to the electoral process.

Reasonable people can disagree over how serious a problem voter fraud is in today’s America, but the evidence it actually exists cannot be ignored.

This is where people on the Right and Left differ. Conservatives think fighting voter fraud is important; liberals and progressives don’t care — and many of them go further, arguing that voter fraud is an imaginary problem.

News of the illegal voting in Virginia and Colorado comes as Republican candidate Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed in campaign speeches that the system, including the electoral system, is “rigged.”

Trump has been issuing this warning about the election for months. After a series of anti-voter fraud laws were struck down in several states by federal courts, the candidate raised the possibility that people will vote over and over in the election, voting for which is already underway in many states.

“There’s a lot of dirty pool played at the election, meaning the election is rigged,” Trump said two months ago. “I would not be surprised. The voter ID, they’re fighting as hard as you can fight so that they don’t have to show voter ID. So, what’s the purpose of that?”

People will be able to vote “multiple times,” he said. “How about like 10 times. Why not? If you don’t have voter ID [requirements], you can just keep voting and voting and voting.”

In fact the Left has made it easy to commit voter fraud. Bill Clinton’s Motor-Voter law of 1993 opened the floodgates to fraud.

Nowadays the Left unfairly influences election outcomes by fighting electoral integrity laws in the courts, often enjoying great success. On Sept. 9, a federal appeals court blocked a proof-of-citizenship requirement on a federal mail voter registration form in Alabama, Georgia, and Kansas. This year alone federal courts have blocked voter ID laws to varying extents in North Carolina, North Dakota, Texas, and Wisconsin.

The danger of the national vote being compromised is real, according to Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson who has acknowledged that cyber attackers could engage in massive electronic vote fraud. At least 18 states have asked Johnson’s department for help. The agency says the electoral systems of more than 20 stateshave been targeted by cyber criminals.

Now Americans are learning that there are at least 1,046 non-citizens on the voter rolls in eight counties in Virginia, according to a new report released jointly by the Virginia Voters Alliance and the Public Interest Legal Foundation. No proof of U.S. citizenship is required in Virginia to register to vote.

“Virginia election officials don’t seem to care that thousands of aliens have corrupted their voter rolls,” by unlawfully registering to vote, J. Christian Adams, the former Department of Justice lawyer who now heads the Public Interest Legal Foundation told Breitbart News. “Even worse than doing nothing about it, they are trying to cover it up,” he said.

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D), a longtime Hillary Clinton crony, instructed election officials to ignore inquiries about possible electoral irregularities, Adams says. This summer after the Supreme Court of Virginia threw out McAuliffe’s blanket clemency order, the governor defiantly restored voting rights to 13,000 felons and vowed to take that figure to 200,000.

Just a few illegal votes can affect the outcome of an election. Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring (D) defeated Mark Obenshain (R) in 2013 by just 165 votes out of 2.2 million votes cast.

The thousand-odd non-citizens currently on the rolls, all identified by name in the report, may be the tip of the iceberg. The problem “is most certainly exponentially worse because we have no data regarding aliens on the registration rolls for the other 125 Virginia localities.”

“Even in this small sample, when the voting history of this small sample of alien registrants is examined, nearly 200 verified ballots were cast before they were removed from the rolls,” the report states. “Each one of them is likely a felony.”

And in Harrisonburg, Va., local officials and the FBI are investigating after 18 to 20 potentially fraudulent voter registrations were filed in the names of dead people. Democrat Andrew Spieles reportedly admitted filing the documents.

Recent reports also indicate the dead have been voting in Colorado. There are at least 78 dead people currently registered to vote in the Centennial State.

Obviously, fraudulent and inaccurate voter registrations open the door to fraudulent voting.

A 2012 Pew Center on the States study revealed around 24 million — one out of every eight — U.S. voter registrations are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate. About 2.75 million people are registered to vote in more than one state and more than 1.8 million dead people are still on voter rolls.

Left-wing activists who don’t care about voter fraud register millions of voters every election, sometimes with potentially disastrous results. For example, in 2008, ACORN collected more than 1 million voter registrations and 400,000 of those applications “were rejected by election officials for a variety of reasons, including duplicate registrations, incomplete forms, and fraudulent submissions,” the New York Times reported at the time.

The infamous left-wing activist group ACORN and at least 54 individuals connected to it have been convicted of voter fraud and related offenses, as I reported in my 2011 book, Subversion Inc.

Voting by illegal aliens and other non-citizens – millions of whom are registered to vote – is widespread, according to a report released two years ago by Jesse Richman and David Earnest, two political science professors at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Va.

“We find that some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and Congressional elections,” the professors say, adding that non-citizens favor Democratic candidates over Republican candidates.

“Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress,” the authors write. They estimate that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008, followed by 2.2 percent of non-citizens in 2010.

Indeed, Al Franken (D) triumphed over incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman (R) in Minnesota in 2009 by a mere 312 votes after a protracted, suspicious recount presided over by leftist Secretary of State Mark Ritchie (D). Illegally cast ballots may have put Franken over the top.

As Trump suggested, double-voting and triple-voting are distressingly common.

In California’s presidential primary this year, “in just three counties, Contra Costa, Alameda and Santa Clara, 194 people voted twice, suggesting the abuse statewide might run into the thousands,” the East Bay Times reported.

Earlier this year, Robert Monroe was sent to jail in Wisconsin after being charged with 13 counts of fraud, including multiple voting and voting twice in the 2012 presidential contest.

Pasco Parker, a Tennessee man was discovered to have who voted in the 2012 presidential election three times in three different states — Florida, North Carolina, and Tennessee. “It’s too easy to vote twice; it comes down to your honor,” Jay DeLancy of the North Carolina-based Voting Integrity Project, which caught Parker in the act, told Fox News. DeLancy’s group found another 148 cases of suspected double-voting and turned its files over to authorities.

In 2013, Cincinnati community organizer Melowese Richardson was jailed for illegally voting five times in different elections. In 2011, Mississippi NAACP executive Lessadolla Sowers was imprisoned for 10 counts of fraudulently casting absentee ballots.

Voter fraud is easy to commit as video journalist James O’Keefe III, the ACORN slayer, has proven over and over again. The Project Veritas founder had little trouble uncovering fraud and questionable election practices in Colorado, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Texas, and Virginia.

This summer O’Keefe set out to show that voter impersonation takes place at the polls. He gave the names of four well-known Michiganders including rapper Eminem to election officials and was offered a ballot in all but one case. In 2012 an O’Keefe colleague gave the name of then-U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in Holder’s own voting precinct in Washington, D.C. and was offered his ballot.

Some on the Left are in denial about voter fraud and many of the rest know the truth but lie anyway. Earlier this year U.S. District Judge Lynn S. Adelman of the Eastern District of Wisconsin, a Bill Clinton appointee, claimed that “virtually no voter impersonation occurs” in Wisconsin and that “no evidence suggests that voter-impersonation fraud will become a problem at any time in the foreseeable future.”

The Left’s voter fraud denial industry, underwritten by radical billionaires like George Soros and the leftist groups he funds such as Center for American Progress, Demos, Media Matters for America, and the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, routinely misrepresent the facts about voter fraud and spread propaganda.

If you believe voter fraud exists, you are smeared by these leftists as a racist and a kook.

Which means there are millions of Americans who are about to get smeared by the Left.

Brutal ISIS Executions, Military Weakness, and A New Refugee Crisis

October 4, 2016

Brutal ISIS Executions, Military Weakness, and A New Refugee Crisis, Counter Jihad, October 4, 2016

islsttflag

 Increasingly Russia and their Iranian allies are looking likely to dominate the northern Middle East from Afghanistan to the Levant.  This President has been badly outmaneuvered.  The next President will have to decide how much he or she is willing to risk in order to try to deal with the feeding of “jihadism… by war and state failure.”

******************

The Islamic State (ISIS) has delivered a new propaganda video showing another gruesome mass execution of fellow Muslims.  The group proclaims that the video should serve as a warning to any Muslims thinking of coming to join any of the rebel armies fighting against them in the conflict.  Amid Nazi salutes, ISIS soldiers clad in stolen American-made 3 color DCU uniforms promised to fight the “apostates” whom they painted as being on the same side as the Americans.

Yet the Americans have done but little to support any allies in the region.  As the Economist notes, US President Barack Obama has kept American forces largely out of the conflict except in an advisory role.  This is because, they explain, he views an American intervention as likely to cause more harm than good.  His policy has been throughout “cool,” “rational,” and “wrong.”

As America has pulled back, others have stepped in—geopolitics abhors a vacuum. Islamic State (IS) has taken over swathes of Syria and Iraq. A new generation of jihadists has been inspired to fight in Syria or attack the West. Turkey, rocked by Kurdish and jihadist violence (and a failed coup), has joined the fight in Syria. Jordan and Lebanon, bursting with refugees, fear they will be sucked in. The exodus of Syrians strengthens Europe’s xenophobic populists and endangers the European Union. A belligerent Russia feels emboldened….

None of this is in America’s interest. Being cool and calculating is not much use if everybody else thinks you are being weak. Even if America cannot fix Syria, it could have helped limit the damage, alleviate suffering and reduce the appeal of jihadism…. Mr Obama says that Mr Assad eventually must go, but has never willed the means to achieve that end. (Some rebel groups receive CIA weapons, but that is about it.)… [J]ihadism is fed by war and state failure: without a broader power-sharing agreement in Syria and Iraq any victory against IS will be short-lived; other jihadists will take its place.

Russia has been building pressure on the Obama administration in other ways.  Since the suspending of talks between the US and Russia, the Putin administration has announced major nuclear war games that will move tens of millions of people to civil defense shelters on very short notice.  They have suspended nuclear arms deals with the United States involving plutonium cleanup, suggesting that they fear the US will cheat.  The Russians have also deployed one of their advanced missile systems outside of their homeland for the first time.  The deployment was made without comment, but as one American official noted wryly, ““Nusra doesn’t have an air force do they?”  Al Nusra Front is an al Qaeda linked organization that has been sometimes allied with, but more often at war with, the Islamic State.

All of this means that America’s window to take a more aggressive approach may be closing, if it has not already closed.  Increasingly Russia and their Iranian allies are looking likely to dominate the northern Middle East from Afghanistan to the Levant.  This President has been badly outmaneuvered.  The next President will have to decide how much he or she is willing to risk in order to try to deal with the feeding of “jihadism… by war and state failure.”

The threat is very real, as estimates are that the assault on Mosul might produce another million refugees headed for Europe and America, orperhaps half again that many.  The failure to take a more aggressive approach may end up bringing a flood tide of human suffering and terror.

Trump should propose real debates

October 4, 2016

Trump should propose real debates, Dan Miller’s Blog, October 4, 2016

(The views expressed in this article are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)

The first presidential “debate” was a farce. The next presidential “debates” will likely be as well. Rather than submit to biased mainstream media moderators (but I repeat myself), Trump should propose real debates, in addition to or as substitutes for those currently scheduled. The article is also a bit of a rant about Ms. Clinton.

demdebatemoderator

In a real debate, one resolution is proposed. The candidate in favor of the proposition speaks first and gets a specified amount of time to say why it’s a good idea. Then the candidate against the proposition gets a specified amount of time for rebuttal and the other candidate a specified amount of time to respond. A timekeeper would alert the candidates when time is almost up and then up. There would be no moderator to help one debater and to trash the other; the debaters would be on their own. Both would know the issue in advance and could prepare to address it however they please and with or without prepared notes. Were our presidential debates so conducted, viewers might well learn about the candidates’ positions on the issues by how the candidates address them, rather than via the moderator.

Here are a few possible debate propositions, for illustrative purposes only:

Latin American Immigration

In a recent article, in Spanish, Hillary wrote

that no other region in the world is “more important” for the prosperity and security of the United States than Latin America.

“There is power in our proximity, which means we are not only close geographically but also in our values, interests and in our common cultural heritage,” Clinton said, adding that the “interdependence” of the economies of the two regions, as well as the ties between communities and families, is a tremendous advantage.

“We shouldn’t build a wall between us because of that truth, but rather accept it,” she said, a clear reference to her rival, Republican candidate Donald Trump, who has promised more than once to build a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico if elected to the White House.

Ms. Clinton has disagreed with Trump’s assertion that “No one has the right to immigrate to this country.”

092216-hillary-retweet

A real debate grounded on the following resolution would deal with the matter raised by Ms. Clinton. Hillary could take the affirmative and Trump the negative:

Resolved: no other region in the world is more important for the prosperity and security of the United States than Latin America.

There is power in our proximity, which means we are not only close geographically but also in our values, interests and in our common cultural heritage. The interdependence of the economies of the two regions, as well as the ties between communities and families, is a tremendous advantage.

We shouldn’t build a wall between us because of that truth, but rather accept it. The wall along our southern border would keep our the good immigrants we need and there is a right to immigrate to America.

Trump would probably point out that his wall would prevent not even one legal immigrant from coming to the United States. He might also suggest that were our immigration laws and procedures more rational (like those of Mexico?) and reflected American interests as well as those of the immigrants, it would be much easier for the immigrants we want to come, legally: those who haven’t committed significant law violations, can soon become self-supporting instead of relying on welfare, do not have serious contagious diseases and appear likely to accept American values rather than, for example, joining gangs and/or importing drugs. Trump could easily provide legal support for the proposition that there is, in fact, no legal right to immigrate to America.

Islam, the religion of peace, tolerance and women’s rights

There has been substantial discussion in the few media outlets providing an “honest discussion” of Islam about the extent to which Hillary and her colleague Huma Abedin have similar views on Sharia law. Under a Clinton presidency, Huma would likely have a high place at the White House, if not as Secretary of State.

Even if Huma were to state that she disagrees with her father, mother and other close relatives about Islam and Sharia law, would she tell the truth or engage in Al-taqiyya (lying to non-Muslims to advance Islamist doctrine)?

Huma

worked on an Islamist journal for 12 years, beginning the year she became a White House intern. She hasn’t commented on that job.

. . . .

In 2012, Rep. Michele Bachmann and four other members of Congress requested information about the influence of Muslim Brotherhood-tied groups and individuals in the U.S. government, including Abedin, who worked for 12 years as an assistant editor of an Islamist journal that spewed extremism.

Abedin’s tenure at the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs began in 1996, the year she began working as an intern at the White house.

While it is certainly possible to disavow the ideology of one’s parents, Abedin has remained silent on their extremism as well as her work with on journal. It remains to be seen whether or not she will repudiate these new findings.

. . . .

Syed Abedin, Huma Abedin’s father who died in 1993, was a Muslim scholar connected to the Saudi Arabian government. According to exclusive video footage from 1971 recently obtained by the Washington Free Beacon, Syed Abedin advocated the following:

As Muslim countries evolve, he said, “The state has to take over. The state is stepping in in many countries … where the state is now overseeing that human relationships are carried on on the basis of Islam. The state also under Islam has a right to interfere in some of these rights given to the individual by the sharia.”

In addition, he is quoted as saying, “The main dynamics of life in the Islamic world are still supplied by Islam. Any institution, as I said before, any concept, any idea, in order to be accepted and become a viable thing in the Islamic world has to come through … Islam.”

Abedin’s mother, Saleha, has an especially strong Islamist ties. She is a member of the female counterpart of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the Muslim World League. She leads a group called the International Islamic Committee for Women and Child, a subsidiary of a Muslim Brotherhood-led group that is banned in Israel for its links to Hamas.

In 1999 and three years after Huma began working for the journal, the journal and Saleha Abedin’s group published a book in Arabic titled “Women in Islam: A Discourse in Rights and Obligations.”

The book states that man-made law is inherently oppressive towards women, while sharia law is liberating. According to the text, Muslim women have an obligation to contribute to jihad, apostates are to be put to death, adulterers should be stoned or lashed, freedom of speech should be conformed to the boundaries set by sharia and wives must have sex with their husbands on command, “even if she is not in the mood.“

In addition, the organization led by Huma Abedin’s mother “advocates for the repeal of Mubarak-era prohibitions on female genital mutilation, child marriage and marital rape, on the grounds that such prohibitions run counter to Islamic law, which allows for their practice,” according to an analysis by the Center for Security policy.

The book advocates against laws to assure equality of women, saying, “Man-made laws have in fact enslaved women, submitting them to the cupidity and caprice of human beings. Islam is the only solution and the only escape.”

In terms of women working in high positions, the book states, “Her job would involve long hours of free mixing and social interaction with the opposite sex, which is forbidden in Islam. Moreover, women’s biological constitution is different from that of men. Women are fragile, emotional and sometimes unable to handle difficult and strenuous situations. Men are less emotional and show more perseverance.”

As noted in an article titled PIGGY-Headed,

Honor killings of their own maimed and maltreated women.  Forced conversions and kidnappings and abductions of whole school-loads of girls and women.  Selling these captives on the open market as slaves for the slugs who then abuse the women and girls unto death.  Not to mention torture as a rule, not exception, for captured women.  Nor, of course, the overall banning of women from driving, traveling alone, working outside the home, or suing for their own lives, domestic arrangements, or unheard-of gay right to not have a male husband/overlord.

For all these, the “Ms. Piggy”- quoting smartest woman in the world has done and said…nothing.

What do Muslims worldwide believe?

How about,

Resolved: America is not merely a Judeo-Christian nation and Islam is no less peaceful and tolerant than Christiany and Judaism. To become more diverse, we need more Muslim refugees and should strive to accommodate them by making our laws less offensive.

Hillary could take the affirmative and Trump the negative.

Conclusions

Trump should offer Ms. Clinton an opportunity to provide additional resolutions for debate which he might support.

Were Trump to propose supplemental or replacement debates along these lines, Hillary would very likely reject his offer because she needs support from the moderators and would understand the dangers a real debate would present. If Ms. Clinton declines Trump’s offer, he should feel free to decide whether to participate in the partisan “debate” farce as currently established.

Russian embassy in Damascus shelled from terrorist-controlled area of Syria

October 4, 2016

Russian embassy in Damascus shelled from terrorist-controlled area of Syria

Published time: 4 Oct, 2016 10:26 Edited time: 4 Oct, 2016 12:33

Source: Russian embassy in Damascus shelled from terrorist-controlled area of Syria — RT News

The Russian embassy in Damascus came under fire on Tuesday from a neighborhood controlled by militant groups, including Al-Nusra Front, the Russian Foreign Ministry reports.
Read more

Al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front fighters © Stringer

One of the mortar shells fired at the embassy complex hit the residential area, while two others landed near the embassy building, the ministry said in a statement. Nobody was injured by the explosions.

“According to reports, the shelling came from the Jobar neighborhood of Damascus, which is under control of the terrorist groups Jabhat Fateh al-Sham and Failak ar-Rahman,” the ministry said.

Jabhat Fateh al-Sham is the new name taken by Al-Nusra Front, the Al-Qaeda offshoot universally considered a terrorist organization. Failak ar-Rahman is a lesser-known Islamist group.

Moscow said the shelling is “result of the actions of those who, like the US and some of its allies, provoke the continued bloodshed in Syria and flirt with militants and extremists of all flavors.”

The ministry said Russia would take “all necessary measures” to return peace and security to Syria.

READ MORE: 30 killed, scores injured in suicide bombing at Kurdish wedding in Syria

The Russian embassy in Damascus has come under militant fire on several occasions. The Syrian capital remains under threat despite the efforts of the army to fend off armed groups.

Pentagon Paid for Fake ‘Al Qaeda’ Videos

October 4, 2016

Pentagon Paid for Fake ‘Al Qaeda’ Videos

Source: Pentagon Paid for Fake ‘Al Qaeda’ Videos – The Daily Beast

A controversial foreign PR firm known for representing unsavory characters was paid millions by the Pentagon to create fake terrorist videos.

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism

10.01.16 7:00 PM ET

By Crofton Black & Abigail Fielding-Smith of The Bureau of Investigative Journalism

The Pentagon gave a controversial U.K. PR firm over half a billion dollars to run a top secret propaganda program in Iraq, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism can reveal.

Bell Pottinger’s output included short TV segments made in the style of Arabic news networks and fake insurgent videos which could be used to track the people who watched them, according to a former employee.

The agency’s staff worked alongside high-ranking U.S. military officers in their Baghdad Camp Victory headquarters as the insurgency raged outside.

Bell Pottinger’s former chairman Lord Tim Bell confirmed to the Sunday Times, which has worked with the Bureau on this story, that his firm had worked on a “covert” military operation “covered by various secrecy documents.”

Bell Pottinger reported to the Pentagon, the CIA, and the National Security Council on its work in Iraq, he said.

Bell, one of Britain’s most successful public relations executives, is credited with honing Margaret Thatcher’s steely image and helping the Conservative party win three elections. The agency he co-founded has had a roster of clients including repressive regimes and Asma al-Assad, the wife of the Syrian president.

In the first media interview any Bell Pottinger employee has given about the work for the U.S. military in Iraq, video editor Martin Wells told the Bureau his time in Camp Victory was “shocking, eye-opening, life-changing.”

The firm’s output was signed off by former General David Petraeus—then commander of the coalition forces in Iraq—and on occasion by the White House, he said.

General David Petraeus

Alamy

Bell Pottinger produced reams of material for the Pentagon, some of it going far beyond standard communications work.

The Bureau traced the firm’s Iraq work through U.S. army contracting censuses, reports by the Defense Department’s inspector general, and federal procurement transaction records, as well as Bell Pottinger’s corporate filings and specialist publications on military propaganda. We interviewed half a dozen former officials and contractors involved in information operations in Iraq.

There were three types of media operations commonly used in Iraq at the time, said a military contractor familiar with Bell Pottinger’s work there.

“White is attributed, it says who produced it on the label,” the contractor said. “Grey is unattributed, and black is falsely attributed. These types of black ops, used for tracking who is watching a certain thing, were a pretty standard part of the industry toolkit.”

Bell Pottinger’s work in Iraq was a huge media operation which cost over a hundred million dollars a year on average. A document unearthed by the Bureau shows the company was employing almost 300 British and Iraqi staff at one point.

The London-based PR agency was brought into Iraq soon after the U.S. invasion. In March 2004 it was tasked by the country’s temporary administration with the “promotion of democratic elections”—a “high-profile activity” which it trumpeted in its annual report.

Get The Beast In Your Inbox!
Daily DigestStart and finish your day with the top stories from The Daily Beast.
Cheat SheetA speedy, smart summary of all the news you need to know (and nothing you don’t).
By clicking “Subscribe,” you agree to have read the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

The firm soon switched to less high-profile activities, however. The Bureau has identified transactions worth $540 million between the Pentagon and Bell Pottinger for information operations and psychological operations on a series of contracts issued from May 2007 to December 2011. A similar contract at around the same annual rate—$120 million—was in force in 2006, we have been told.

The bulk of the money was for costs such as production and distribution, Lord Bell told the Sunday Times, but the firm would have made around £15m a year in fees.

Martin Wells, the ex-employee, told the Bureau he had no idea what he was getting into when he was interviewed for the Bell Pottinger job in May 2006.

He had been working as a freelance video editor and got a call from his agency suggesting he go to London for an interview for a potential new gig. “You’ll be doing new stuff that’ll be coming out of the Middle East,” he was told.

“I thought ‘That sounds interesting,’” Wells recalled. “So I go along and go into this building, get escorted up to the sixth floor in a lift, come out and there’s guards up there. I thought what on earth is going on here? And it turns out it was a Navy post, basically. So from what I could work out it was a media intelligence gathering unit.”

After a brief chat Wells asked when he would find out about the job, and was surprised by the response.

“You’ve already got it,” he was told. “We’ve already done our background checks into you.”

He would be flying out on Monday, Wells was told. It was Friday afternoon. He asked where he would be going and got a surprising answer: Baghdad.

U.S. Army soldiers, from the 1st. Cavalry Division, survey destruction to a civilian house, which was flattened by an explosion on Friday evening in the al-Mansur district in the Iraqi capital Baghdad, December 25, 2004.

Reuters

“So I literally had 48 hours to gather everything I needed to live in a desert,” Wells said.

Days later, Wells’s plane executed a corkscrew landing to avoid insurgent fire at Baghdad airport. He assumed he would be taken to somewhere in the Green Zone, from which coalition officials were administering Iraq. Instead he found himself in Camp Victory, a military base.

It turned out that the British PR firm which had hired him was working at the heart of a U.S. military intelligence operation.

A tide of violence was engulfing the Iraqi capital as Wells began his contract. The same month he arrived there were five suicide bomb attacks in the city, including one a suicide car bomb attack near Camp Victory which killed 14 people and wounded six others.

Describing his first impressions, Wells said he was struck by a working environment very unlike what he was used to. “It was a very secure building,” he recalled, with “signs outside saying ‘Do not come in, it’s a classified area, if you’re not cleared, you can’t come in.’”

Inside were two or three rooms with lots of desks in, said Wells, with one section for Bell Pottinger staff and the other for the U.S. military.

“I made the mistake of walking into one of the [U.S. military] areas, and having a very stern American military guy basically drag me out saying you are not allowed in here under any circumstances, this is highly classified, get out—whilst his hand was on his gun, which was a nice introduction,” said Wells.

It soon became apparent he would be doing much more than just editing news footage.

The work consisted of three types of products. The first was television commercials portraying al Qaeda in a negative light. The second was news items which were made to look as if they had been “created by Arabic TV,” Wells said. Bell Pottinger would send teams out to film low-definition video of al Qaeda bombings and then edit it like a piece of news footage. It would be voiced in Arabic and distributed to TV stations across the region, according to Wells.

The American origins of the news items were sometimes kept hidden. Revelations in 2005 that PR contractor the Lincoln Group had helped the Pentagon place articles in Iraqi newspapers, sometimes presented as unbiased news, led to a Department of Defense investigation.

The third and most sensitive program described by Wells was the production of fake al Qaeda propaganda films. He told the Bureau how the videos were made. He was given precise instructions: “We need to make this style of video and we’ve got to use al Qaeda’s footage,” he was told. “We need it to be 10 minutes long, and it needs to be in this file format, and we need to encode it in this manner.”

U.S. marines would take the CDs on patrol and drop them in the chaos when they raided targets. Wells said: “If they’re raiding a house and they’re going to make a mess of it looking for stuff anyway, they’d just drop an odd CD there.”

The CDs were set up to use Real Player, a popular media streaming application which connects to the internet to run. Wells explained how the team embedded a code into the CDs which linked to a Google Analytics account, giving a list of IP addresses where the CDs had been played.

The tracking account had a very restricted circulation list, according to Wells: The data went to him, a senior member of the Bell Pottinger management team, and one of the U.S. military commanders.

Wells explained their intelligence value. “If one is looked at in the middle of Baghdad… you know there’s a hit there,” he said. “If one, 48 hours or a week later shows up in another part of the world, then that’s the more interesting one, and that’s what they’re looking for more, because that gives you a trail.”

The CDs turned up in some interesting places, Wells recalled, including Iran, Syria, and even America.

“I would do a print-out for the day and, if anything interesting popped up, hand it over to the bosses and then it would be dealt with from there,” he said.

The Pentagon confirmed that Bell Pottinger did work for them as a contractor in Iraq under the Information Operations Task Force (IOTF), producing some material that was openly sourced to coalition forces, and some which was not. They insisted that all material put out by IOTF was “truthful.”

IOTF was not the only mission Bell Pottinger worked on however. Wells said some Bell Pottinger work was carried out under the Joint Psychological Operations Task Force (JPOTF), which a U.S. defense official confirmed.

The official said he could not comment in detail on JPOTF activities, adding “We do not discuss intelligence gathering methods for operations past and present.”

Lord Bell, who stood down as chairman of Bell Pottinger earlier this year, told the Sunday Times that the deployment of tracking devices described by Wells was “perfectly possible,” but he was personally unaware of it.

Bell Pottinger’s output was signed off by the commander of coalition forces in Iraq. Wells recalled: “We’d get the two colonels in to look at the things we’d done that day, they’d be fine with it, it would then go to General Petraeus.”

Some of the projects went even higher up the chain of command. “If [Petraeus] couldn’t sign off on it, it would go on up the line to the White House, and it was signed off up there, and the answer would come back down the line.”

Petraeus went on to become director of the CIA in 2011 before resigning in the wake of an affair with a journalist.

The awarding of such a large contract to a British company created resentment among the American communications firms jostling for Iraq work, according to a former employee of one of Bell Pottinger’s rivals.

“Nobody could work out how a British company could get hundreds of millions of dollars of U.S. funding when there were equally capable U.S. companies who could have done it,” said Andrew Garfield, an ex-employee of the Lincoln Group who is now a senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. “The American companies were pissed.”

Ian Tunnicliffe, a former British soldier, was the head of a three person panel from the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA)—the transitional government in Iraq following the 2003 invasion—which awarded Bell Pottinger their 2004 contract to promote democratic elections.

According to Tunnicliffe, the contract, which totaled $5.8 million, was awarded after the CPA realized its own in-house efforts to make people aware of the transitional legal framework ahead of elections were not working.

“We held a relatively hasty but still competitive bid for communications companies to come in,” recalls Tunnicliffe.

Tunnicliffe said that Bell Pottinger’s consortium was one of three bidders for the contract, and simply put in a more convincing proposal than their rivals.

Iraq was a lucrative opportunity for many communications firms. The Bureau has discovered that between 2006 and 2008 more than 40 companies were being paid for services such as TV and radio placement, video production, billboards, advertising, and opinion polls. These included U.S. companies like Lincoln Group, Leonie Industries, and SOS International as well as Iraq-based firms such as Cradle of New Civilization Media, Babylon Media, and Iraqi Dream.

But the largest sums the Bureau was able to trace went to Bell Pottinger.

According to Glen Segell, who worked in an information operations task force in Iraq in 2006, contractors were used partly because the military didn’t have the in-house expertise, and partly because they were operating in a legal “grey area.”

In his 2011 article “Covert Intelligence Provision in Iraq,” Segell notes that U.S. law prevented the government from using propaganda on the domestic population of the U.S. In a globalized media environment, the Iraq operations could theoretically have been seen back home, therefore “it was prudent legally for the military not to undertake all the… activities,” Segell wrote.

Segell maintains that information operations programs did make a difference on the ground in Iraq. Some experts question this however.

A 2015 study by the Rand Corporation, a military think tank, concluded that “generating assessments of efforts to inform, influence, and persuade has proven to be challenging across the government and DoD.”

Bell Pottinger’s operations on behalf of the U.S. government stopped in 2011 as American troops withdrew from Iraq. 

Bell Pottinger changed ownership after a management buyout in 2012 and its current structure has no connections with the unit Wells worked for, which closed in 2011. It is understood the key principals who were involved in this unit deny any involvement with tracking software as described by Wells.

Wells left Iraq after less than two years, having had enough of the stress of working in a war zone and having to watch graphic videos of atrocities day after day.

Looking back at his time creating propaganda for the U.S. military, Wells is ambivalent. The aim of Bell Pottinger’s work in Iraq was to highlight al Qaeda’s senseless violence, he said—publicity which at the time he thought must be doing some good. “But then, somewhere in my conscience I wondered whether this was the right thing to do,” he added.

Lord Bell told the Sunday Times he was “proud” of Bell Pottinger’s work in Iraq. “We did a lot to help resolve the situation,” he said. “Not enough. We did not stop the mess which emerged, but it was part of the American propaganda machinery.”

Whether the material achieved its goals, no one would ever really know, said Wells. “I mean if you look at the situation now, it wouldn’t appear to have worked. But at the time, who knows, if it saved one life it [was] a good thing to do.”

Thatcher’s PR guru ran Iraq propaganda for Pentagon

October 4, 2016

Thatcher’s PR guru ran Iraq propaganda for Pentagon

October 3 2016, 12:01am, 

Source: Thatcher’s PR guru ran Iraq propaganda for Pentagon | News | The Times & The Sunday Times

Bell Pottinger worked for the US between 2007 and 2011 producing propaganda and faked al-Qaeda videosJerome Delay/AP

Lord Bell, Margaret Thatcher’s PR guru, was hired by the United States to run a $540 million covert propaganda campaign after the invasion of Iraq.

Washington was reported to have paid his company Bell Pottinger’s conflict resolution division to produce fake al-Qaeda videos, which were dropped by US forces.

The films could be tracked by “web-based analytics” when they were played on computers, allowing the Americans to track potential terrorists, according to The Sunday Times.

Martin Wells, a video editor from Bath, was recruited by Bell Pottinger to work on a “psychological operations” campaign for the Pentagon in Iraq.

Bill Clinton bashes Obamacare as ‘crazy system’ on campaign trail

October 4, 2016

Bill Clinton bashes Obamacare as ‘crazy system’ on campaign trail, Washington TimesDouglas Ernst, October 3, 2016

clintonobamacare“You’ve got this crazy system where all of a sudden 25 million more people have health care and then the people are out there busting it, sometimes 60 hours a week, wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage …

Former President Bill Clinton stumped for his wife’s campaign on Monday in Michigan by deeming the Affordable Care Act a “crazy system.”

President Obama’s signature piece of legislation was framed as nonsensical public policy that punishes middle-class Americans by doubling their health-insurance premiums, according to video footage of the event.

“You’ve got this crazy system where all of a sudden 25 million more people have health care and then the people are out there busting it, sometimes 60 hours a week, wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage cut in half,” Mr. Clinton told voters. “It’s the craziest thing in the world.”

The footage was immediately posted on the internet by the Republican Party, which has made similar critics of the industry overhaul since its inception. Not a single Republican in the House or Senate voted in favor of the Affordable Care Act when it was passed in 2010.

“The people that are getting killed in this deal are small businesspeople and individuals who make just a little too much to get any of these subsidies,” the former president added.

Mr. Clinton’s comment are reminiscent of remarks he made before a Spokane, Washington, audience in March.

The former commander in chief said Americans should vote for his wife as a way to “put the awful legacy of the last eight years behind us and the seven years before that when we were practicing trickle-down economics and no regulation in Washington, which is what caused the crash.”

Angel Urena, a spokesman for Mr. Clinton, issued a statement to USA Today shortly afterward saying the comments were meant as a critique against Republicans.

“When Republicans controlled the White House, their trickle-down approach drove our economy to the brink of a collapse. After President Obama was elected, Republicans made it their number one goal to block him at every turn,” Mr. Urena told the newspaper March 22.

Germany tells Iran it will push US to ‘dismantle sanctions’

October 4, 2016

Germany tells Iran it will push US to ‘dismantle sanctions’

Published time: 3 Oct, 2016 21:10

Source: Germany tells Iran it will push US to ‘dismantle sanctions’ — RT News

© Raheb Homavandi / Reuters

German Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel has promised to press Washington loosen its economic restrictions on Iran, as it promised to do as part of last year’s nuclear deal.

During a public speech during a landmark two-day economic cooperation visit to Tehran, Gabriel said Germany intends to “remind the United States of the commitment to get to an effective dismantling of sanctions.”

The SPD politician, who also serves as Germany’s Vice Chancellor, said that Washington “should act on its responsibilities concerning Iran so the outcome of the nuclear deal becomes visible in Iran.”

For its part, Germany said it planned to sign 10 key deals, and boost economic turnover with Iran by €2.5 billion, as a result of the visit, during which 120 senior business leaders joined Gabriel.

Iran's Economy Minister Ali Tayebnia (L) and German vice chancellor, Economy and Energy Minister Sigmar Gabriel pose for a picture after signing agreements during a German-Iranian Joint Economic Commission (GWK) meeting in Tehran on October 3, 2016 © Atta Kenare

Iran’s banks, oil producers and government had been under severe economic restrictions from the US following the Islamic Revolution, which had been subsequently tightened several times, as a reaction to the country’s nuclear program, and ostensible support for organizations Washington classifies as terrorists, such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

Read more

© Stephen Hird

Many of those, and others imposed by the EU and the UN, were officially lifted in January this year, after Iran was adjudged to have been following the terms of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JPA) – an agreement between Iran and China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States, Germany and the EU – that promised more favorable economic conditions in exchange for greater restrictions and tighter supervision of the country’s nuclear program.

But according to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, the implementation of the sanctions reprieve has been “flawed.” Most problematically, many European banks are still reluctant to do business inside Iran, as they fear this may endanger their dealings with US financial institutions that are still banned from having dealings with the Islamic Republic.

But the US said that it is fulfilling its state obligations, and it is now down to individual companies if they want to invest in Iran. Last week, US Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said that Iran’s oil exports were “essentially back to pre-sanctions levels” – Washington and Brussels imposed an embargo on Iranian petrochemicals in 2012 – and said that the Islamic Republic was now the beneficiary of “a considerable additional cash flow.”