Archive for January 3, 2017

WikiLeaks vows to ‘blow you away’ in 2017 ‘showdown’

January 3, 2017

WikiLeaks vows to ‘blow you away’ in 2017 ‘showdown’

Published time: 3 Jan, 2017 13:36

Source: WikiLeaks vows to ‘blow you away’ in 2017 ‘showdown’ — RT News

Julian Assange, Founder and Editor-in-Chief of WikiLeaks. © Axel Schmidt / Reuters

WikiLeaks has promised 2017 will be an even bigger year for leaks than 2016, which saw the whistleblowing site publish thousands of documents exposing US political secrets, covert trade deals and private communications from global leaders.

“If you thought 2016 was a big WikiLeaks year, 2017 will blow you away,” WikiLeaks tweeted on Monday, giving no hints as to what may be in store.

The tweet also included a link to its website’s donation page so people can help the site “prepare for the showdown.”

It proved a very busy 2016 for the whistleblowing site, as it delivered a massive trove of documents over the 12-month period.

This included more than 50,000 emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair JohnPodesta and more than 27,000 emails from the Democratic National Committee, which confirmed the DNC worked against Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, favoring Clinton.

More US State Department cables were released, as well as documents which gave an insight into the US arming of Yemen. Text from the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA) was also revealed.

The emails relating to the US election rocked the Democratic establishment and delivered a blow to the Clinton campaign in the lead-up to the November election.

WikiLeaks also confirmed that founder Julian Assange will take part in a Reddit Ask Me Anything (AMA) on Thursday at 14:00 GMT (9am EST). The tweet announcing the AMA contained the hashtag ‘proofoflife’, presumably referencing concerns raised by some for the WikiLeaks editor’s wellbeing.

READ MORE: WikiLeaks urges people to stop requesting Assange ‘proof of life’

Trump scolds House GOP for gutting ethics office

January 3, 2017

Trump scolds House GOP for gutting ethics office, Washington Examiner, Gabby Morrongiello, January 3, 2016

(Update: House Republicans dropped the plan after Trump complained. — DM)

draintheswampPresident-elect Trump urged GOP lawmakers to “drain the swamp” after GOP members moved to gut the independent Office of Congressional Ethics in a closed-door vote Monday night. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)

President-elect Trump Tuesday criticized House Republicans for moving to gut the independent Office of Congressional Ethics in a closed-door vote Monday night, saying their attention should be focused elsewhere and hinting they had violated the spirit of his campaign slogan, “drain the swamp.”

“With all that Congress has to work on, do they really have to make the weakening of the Independent Ethics Watchdog, as unfair as it may be, their number one act and priority,” the incoming Republican president wrote in a pair of tweets.

“Focus on tax reform, healthcare and so many other things of far greater importance!” he added, while including the hashtag “#DTS” or “drain the swamp.”

With all that Congress has to work on, do they really have to make the weakening of the Independent Ethics Watchdog, as unfair as it

……..may be, their number one act and priority. Focus on tax reform, healthcare and so many other things of far greater importance!

Man of the Year: Chief Trump Strategist Stephen K. Bannon

January 3, 2017

Man of the Year: Chief Trump Strategist Stephen K. Bannon, Front Page MagazineDavid Horowitz and Matthew Vadum, December 30, 2016

skb

Donald Trump is America’s champion and deservedly TIME’s “person of the year.” But in the absence of his chief strategist, Steve Bannon, the promise he now holds out for America – and freedom lovers everywhere – might never have reached the White House, the seat of power where he will have the ability to implement his agendas. Which is why an unsung hero, Steve Bannon, is our “Man of the Year.”

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

TIME magazine named Donald Trump “Person of the Year” for 2016, and we could have done the same. But this would have been to over-simplify a victory that millions of Americans believe has brought this nation back from the brink of destruction, and has done so against what seemed impossible odds. In the just completed election campaign, a vicious partisan press substituted character assassination for reporting and joined malicious Democrats in demonizing Trump and his supporters as racists, sexists, Islamophobes, xenophobes and religious bigots, while dismissing the candidate as “unfit to sit in the White House.”

From the outset Trump distinguished himself as a self-confident warrior who refused to be “politically correct.” Trump won the primaries and eventually the election because, unlike Republicans before him, he refused to be intimidated by leftist witch-hunters and their reputation-burning attacks.

But Trump’s very fearlessness, self-confidence and disregard for progressive bigotry – his indisputable strengths – came with a downside that threatened to undo him. Even as he responded to the defamation from whatever quarter it came, his campaign message was pushed into the background until it was in danger of being altogether lost. Questions began to be raised and not only by opponents. Could Trump be presidential? Could he stick to a winning message? Lackluster polling numbers sparked a panic among feckless Republicans who began demanding that Trump be replaced as the nominee. Even in the camp of the faithful, supporters began to wonder if their candidate was too thin-skinned and undisciplined to win, and – equally important – whether such a strong-willed individual could listen to a voice that was not his own. Could he ever trust and then avail himself of a counselor, who would focus his message and keep him on course?

The answer came within four months of the election when Trump, then trailing in the polls, shook up his team and made Stephen K. Bannon the CEO of his campaign. Within weeks the Trump ship began to turn around, then move forward until the final long push through the battleground states where the shape of a presidential winner at last came into view. While Donald J. Trump on his own had already changed the political landscape, if he had not hired Steve Bannon as his chief executive officer, it is doubtful he would be president-elect today.

A former naval officer, investment banker, movie producer, documentary filmmaker, and publisher of the online news giant Breitbart.com, Bannon was a kindred spirit to Trump and also a complementary one. “I come from a blue-collar, Irish Catholic, pro-Kennedy, pro-union family of Democrats,” Bannon said in a Bloomberg Businessweek profile last year. “I wasn’t political until I got into the service and saw how badly Jimmy Carter f—ed things up. I became a huge Reagan admirer. Still am. But what turned me against the whole establishment was coming back from running companies in Asia in 2008 and seeing that [George W.] Bush had f—ed up as badly as Carter. The whole country was a disaster.” Explaining his disdain for the Bushes, Bannon said: “[They are] not as cinematic as the Clintons, with their warlords and Russian gangsters and that whole cast of bad guys, Bush is more prosaic. It’s really just grimy, low-energy crony capitalism.”

In a sense Bannon and Trump were brothers under the skin. They both went to Ivy League schools (Trump to Wharton at U. Penn and Bannon to Harvard) and yet both had an affinity for working Americans, the blue-collar voters who eventually put Trump over the top. Both were businessmen who turned to politics to repair the damage they saw being done to their country. Both were passionate patriots, distressed over America’s progressive decline, determined to restore the values and virtues that had made it a symbol of liberty and national greatness to the world at large. Both were instinctively combative and not shy about using political speech as a blunt instrument to counter the attacks of the politically correct. Both were fed up with the accommodations Republicans had made to the destructive agendas of a Democratic Party that had become captive to its leftwing.

To this shared outlook, Bannon brought crucial additions. First, unlike Trump he had for decades been involved as a conservative partisan in the political and cultural wars that traditional Republicans were losing. He knew the terrain and its pitfalls as Trump, whose careers were in the popular culture and business could not.

Second, Bannon brought Trump his experience as an entrepreneur who in Breitbart.com had built one of the largest media sites in the world. Unlike others, Bannon was never horrified by candidate Trump’s stream-of-consciousness Twitter feed though he saw the need for more discipline in its contents. Unlike Trump’s critics, Bannon understood how important it was for the candidate to break free from the mainstream media filter that was busy crucifying him. With a feed that reached 40 million followers, Trump was able to speak directly to a larger audience than the hostile networks or the cable news shows could provide. Bannon helped Trump narrow his Twitter focus and become more effective as a candidate.

He also helped to persuade him to use teleprompters at his public events. This limited the degree to which the news media could distort his remarks and turn them against him. The teleprompters helped Trump to stay on message although the impulsive personality and direct address that so endeared him to his followers was still evident in the ad libs and asides which spiced his remarks. The results were immediately positive, as Trump began to climb in the polls.

Most importantly, Bannon and Trump shared a courage unique in Republican quarters. Call it character. The ability to stand firm under fire. The absence of this quality is the primary reason the Obama left has been able to steamroll Republicans in the past. Eight long years of incessant, in-your-face race-baiting by President Obama, attorneys general Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, and the left-wing networks served to cow Republicans and cause them to abandon their own agendas. Even when Republicans controlled the House and Senate, President Obama still managed to get his major legislative priorities through. The millions of voters who flocked to the Trump camp understood and appreciated these facts. They had been waiting eight years – and more likely 28 years – for a candidate like Trump backed by a strategist like Bannon to stand up for them.

For Bannon and Trump getting things done – getting America back on track – took precedence over hurt progressive feelings. They did not back down under even the heaviest left-wing fire. Trump was maligned from the outset as Hitler, a misogynist and a racist. Once Bannon joined the Trump campaign, he too was smeared in the same dark colors. He was called a white nationalist, a racist and an anti-Semite. Yet he didn’t allow these calumnies to become a political distraction. He didn’t fire back. He worried about the candidate, not his personal reputation.

In these battles against the libels of the hate-driven left, epitomized by Hillary’s “basket of deplorables,” Trump has emerged as a paladin of integrity and common sense – therefore the nemesis of the politically correct. For they count on Republicans backing off for fear of their slanders. Faced with similar smears against his top political aide there is absolutely no other Republican president-elect who would have failed to throw Steve Bannon under the bus. Just to appease the left. Trump’s faith in Bannon and readiness to stand by him against those scurrilous attacks is an emblem of why Trump is the next president, and why Americans can take confidence in his ability to lead them in the predictable wars ahead.

But it is also the basis of Trump’s bond with Bannon whose own courage, bluntness, media-savvy, love of working Americans and ardent patriotism reflects his own. Donald Trump is America’s champion and deservedly TIME’s “person of the year.” But in the absence of his chief strategist, Steve Bannon, the promise he now holds out for America – and freedom lovers everywhere – might never have reached the White House, the seat of power where he will have the ability to implement his agendas. Which is why an unsung hero, Steve Bannon, is our “Man of the Year.”

We Stand With Israel. Kerry and Obama don’t know where they stand

January 3, 2017

Diamond & Silk of Trump supporter’s fame…

 

 

Patience is a virtue

January 3, 2017

Patience is a virtue, Israel Hayom, Dr. Haim Shine, January 3, 2017

For years, the leftist Israeli media has waged a timed and organized campaign against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his family, a campaign the likes of which has not been seen in the history of the country. A Bibiphobic psychosis born of the Left’s deep frustration, dismay and helplessness at its inability to carry out regime change through the ballot box. Desperation that intensified after the last elections, in which millions were invested, mostly from foreign sources who collaborated with well-known figures in the Israeli media to take down the Right.

Every day, Israeli citizens were force-fed stories and about the Netanyahu family; a series of rumors and accusations circulating endlessly. A journalist creates a headline in the morning, the television networks echo it at night and esteemed pundits, including lawyers, pile on with their creative theories. “Truth of the day” at its most wretched.

Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit’s statement Monday made it clear that most of the cases made famous by the Bibiphobes were groundless, including claims of illegal financing in the 2009 elections, tilting the Likud primary election results, receiving benefits abroad and the double-billing of travel expenses, dubbed “Bibi Tours.”

I am sure many Israelis remember the media frenzy over “Bibi Tours” all too well, but as it turns out, those things never happened. There is no doubt that those who celebrated the allegations won’t do any soul-searching regarding their contribution to the erosion of public faith in much of the media.

While many in politics and in the media treated Netanyahu’s statements — that nothing would come of these alleged affairs because there would be nothing to find — with blatant cynicism, as it turns out, he was right.

In their battle against Netanyahu, the media — in their efforts to pressure the attorney general to advance the interests of those propagating the allegations — have trampled on Mendelblit’s credibility.

There are allegations Mendelblit instructed the police to investigate. That is the role of the police. But here too, one cannot expect the media to allow the police to do their work without interfering and creating smoke screens. In the coming days, we will hear and read countless speculations. A degree of restraint, patience and caution is important to afford the media the respect it deserves, as it is essential to democracy. And perhaps, in relation to these allegations, it will turn out that nothing will come of them because there was nothing to investigate. Time will tell.

Fatah Honors Islamist Terrorists For 52nd Anniversary

January 3, 2017

Fatah Honors Islamist Terrorists For 52nd Anniversary, Clarion Project

palestineunvote-640-320_5

The ruling party in the Palestinian Authority celebrated its 52nd anniversary with Facebook posts glorifying bloodthirsty terrorists.

Fatah, the ruling party of the Palestinian Authority, celebrated its 52nd anniversary on Saturday. They used the occasion to heap praise on some of the most vicious Islamist terrorists in Israeli history, despite being ostensibly a secular organization.

Fatah praised Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood branch and jihadist terrorist organization Hamas, featuring his picture among those on a banner of terrorists who murdered Israeli civilians. Praise was also heaped on the founder of Islamic Jihad, Fathi Shaqaqi, along with several other secular terrorists.

“Fatah embraces its people and praises the Martyrs,” the organization posted on Facebook, as translated by Palestinian Media Watch.

fatah-52-anniversary-500x172

“To be a real Palestinian, you must be a self-sacrificing fighter (Fida’i), know much and reveal little, search for the security in the heart of the danger, get used to having no time to cry over endings but rather to always have new beginnings.

Long life to you and long live the anniversary of the Launch [of Fatah] (Intilaqa), and may it be a good year.

A people whose leaders are Martyrs will undoubtedly triumph with Allah’s help…”

The inclusion of Sheikh Yassin, who was killed in by an Israeli missile in 2004, comes as Fatah is attempting to reconcile with its longstanding foe Hamas, which currently controls the Gaza strip.

Russia has reportedly volunteered to broker a reconciliation between the divided factions.

“The Russians will host a meeting of Fatah, Hamas and other Palestinian officials in Moscow in the middle of January to discuss reconciliation,” PLO Executive Committee member Wasel Abu Yousef told The Jerusalem Post on Monday.

Facing North Korea and Iran, Trump Must Strengthen Nuclear Deterrence

January 3, 2017

Facing North Korea and Iran, Trump Must Strengthen Nuclear Deterrence, National Review, Tom Rogan, January 3, 2017

Ultimately, the nuclear issue is just one challenge the incoming Trump administration faces in foreign policy. The U.S. needs a new strategy of realist resolution. After years of Obama’s fraying credibility with allies and foes alike, the United States must resume leading. Kim Jong-un and Iranian supreme leader Khamenei are arrogant. If given an inch, they will walk the nuclear mile. And history tells us that great power and totalitarian zealots rarely blend positively.

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

How President Trump should strengthen America’s ICBM-deterrence posture. Like Big Brother in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un holds absolute power. And Kim, the same as his father and grandfather, wants to forcibly unify the Korean peninsula under a xenophobic ideology of self-sufficiency.

Since the end of the Korean War, the Kims’ wacky “Juche” ideology has sparked Western laughter as much as fear. We have rightly assumed the Kims are deterred by their understanding that a conventional-arms conflict with America would destroy them. While the U.S. has had to occasionally reinforce this conventional deterrence, it has been sustained for 60 years.

Over the weekend, Kim Jong-un announced that the North’s development of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) is advancing rapidly. Unless America appeases him, Kim warned, he will build a “preemptive striking capacity with a main emphasis on nuclear force.” Recently successful rocket tests suggest we should take Kim at his word.

Still, it’s not just North Korea the West should be concerned about here.

Today, alongside other malevolent activities, the Islamic Revolutionary Republic’s ballistic-missile research is advancing unabated. In his wisdom, President Obama decided to exclude a ban on such research from his legacy Iran deal. He lacked the threat-of-force credibility to compel the Iranians to cease their missile development. Unfortunately, when Iran perfects ballistic-missile technology, it will break the nuclear deal. By then, sanctions relief will have made Iran tens of billions of dollars richer.

Collectively, these developments threaten not just the stability of international peace, but the civilian population of the United States. They demand a robust response in U.S. nuclear-deterrent posture. President Trump should deliver it.

First, Trump should reform the Iran nuclear deal to include prohibitions on Iranian ballistic-missile development. This is the realist compromise between scrapping the nuclear deal entirely and attempting to make it work better.

Second, Trump should enforce a new, proactive strategy to deal with North Korea’s increasingly advanced ICBM program. Whereas, in the past, the U.S. has simply monitored North Korean missile tests, stronger action is now required. North Korean ICBMs demand it. After all, the base-minimum range of an ICBM is 3,400 miles. But seeing as 1960s-era Soviet and U.S. ICBMs easily exceeded 6,200-mile ranges, we must assume North Korean ICBMs will exceed the minimum range. And with just 125 miles more than the minimum, North Korea could strike Darwin, Australia. An extra 270 miles would put Anchorage, Alaska, in range. Hawaii, a little over 4,300 miles from North Korea, would also be vulnerable.

Countering this threat, Trump should supplement the U.S military’s multi-phase missile-defense programs. He should publicly announce that if the North tests an ICBM, he will establish three North Korea focused missile-test defense sectors. Trump should be clear that any North Korean ICBM that enters or passes these sectors will be shot down. U.S. military planners would, of course, fine-tune such proposals, but here’s one example of what the defense zones might look like.

Trump could establish a northern sector — focused on protecting Alaska — off the Japanese coast in the Sea of Okhotsk. Second, a western sector — focused on protecting Hawaii and the U.S. west coast — could be set up approximately 1,000 miles west of Midway Island, at the southern tip of the Emperor seamounts. Third, a southern sector — to protect Australia — could be established south of Palau Island between Papua and Papua New Guinea. These sectors should be maintained by U.S. Navy destroyers and cruisers (and hopefully allied assets), equipped with the Aegis missile-defense system.

Next, Trump should clarify his willingness, where facing imminent nuclear attack, to use nuclear weapons in a “first strike” role. That demand is urgent because President Obama has equivocated on this fundamental precept of U.S. nuclear-deterrent posture. Namely, the understanding that U.S. nuclear weapons serve both deterrence (preventing an attack) and capability (destroying an enemy). A retained first-strike capability is necessary to prevent the loss of millions — or tens of millions . . . or hundreds of millions — of American lives in a nuclear showdown. Yes, ideally, the U.S. would be able to use conventional non-nuclear capabilities to achieve that objective. But idealism is a dangerous master. For one, U.S. military pilots might not be able to penetrate enemy air defenses in time to prevent a ballistic-missile attack. Similarly, conventional bunker-busting bombs might not destroy enemy nuclear platforms.

Fourth, Trump should aggressively confront illicit ICBM research-and-development networks. Specifically, Trump should push Pakistan, Russia, and the former Soviet states to take action against smugglers in their nations. In the case of Pakistan and the former Soviet states, such action should be tied to U.S. aid payments. A philosophical evolution of U.S. tactics is equally important here. Put simply, instead of treating nuclear smuggling as a law-enforcement matter, the U.S. must be prepared to coerce or kill those who support the illicit nuclear industry. Fear is always the best guarantor against a nuclear holocaust.

Ultimately, the nuclear issue is just one challenge the incoming Trump administration faces in foreign policy. The U.S. needs a new strategy of realist resolution. After years of Obama’s fraying credibility with allies and foes alike, the United States must resume leading. Kim Jong-un and Iranian supreme leader Khamenei are arrogant. If given an inch, they will walk the nuclear mile. And history tells us that great power and totalitarian zealots rarely blend positively.