Archive for July 2017

« WarSclerotic home page
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Mueller and Trump Prepare for War with America the Loser

July 22, 2017

Mueller and Trump Prepare for War with America the Loser, PJ Media, Roger L Simon, July 21, 2017

Watergate ended with a whimper, not a bang. After months of sturm und drang, Richard Nixon finally mounted that helicopter, gave that famous farewell peace sign and flew away. Most Americans were relieved to see him go. Our long national nightmare was over.

If something similar happens to Donald Trump, it will be entirely different. A significant portion of the American public — myself admittedly among them — will be convinced he has been railroaded in a partisan hatchet job. The voters who elected the president are going to feel, at the very least, undermined, more likely betrayed,  by their own government and public officials. Many are going to feel this has nothing to do whatsoever with justice and will act accordingly.

The exact results of this mammoth national split are not easy to predict but they could range from massive civil disobedience to outright civil war.

The behavior of special prosecutor Robert Mueller has exacerbated the situation. Even CNN admits he has staffed his investigation almost exclusively with Democratic Party supporters and donors. It’s hard to say whether this is brazen or stupid or both, but it certainly doesn’t lend credibility to his eventual decisions. At the very least it’s extremely unsophisticated for a former director of the FBI — but perhaps that’s really the way it is. Nothing (and no one) can stand in the way of prosecution.

And then there are the leaks that emerge from his supposedly confidential investigation at seemingly a mile a minute pace. The (always) anonymous creeps who do this are sleazy individuals who — under the mega-narcissistic pretense that they are informing the public of something of importance — undercut everything everyone has ever known about the rule of law. They are, effectively, enemies of the state and even more, of the American people — and pompous ones into the bargain.  It would be poetic justice to send them all to Gitmo.

The most recent of these leaks — published as is so frequently the case by that junk scandal sheet formerly known as The Washington Post — tells us that AG Sessions was supposedly talking about the Trump campaign with Russian Ambassador Kislyak. What Sessions said exactly, which could have been something completely innocuous and no more than a sentence or two, if indeed he did say anything at all, was of course not mentioned. If it was something serious, most likely it would have been specified, but then who knows. We don’t know if this leak is first, second or fifth hand. We don’t know anything about the source. We don’t know anything about the content. We just have the smear. Not surprisingly too, this leak — a character assassination really — was again anonymous (what else?). When Joe McCarthy made his famous character assassinations, at least he had the guts to do it under his own name. (Yes, I know McCarthy turned out to be right in some instances.)

Mr. Mueller runs a tight ship, no? (Maybe he doesn’t even want to. Comey certainly didn’t care. He leaked himself.)

The situation is grim all around. Trump, lawyering up, is obviously preparing for war against Mueller who, in his turn, is apparently digging into information regarding the president’s ten-year-old Russian business dealings. Again, this is a fraught decision because everyone in the informed public is aware of the myriad Clinton-Russia connections (including Uranium One) detailed in Clinton Cash that were, as far as we know, never investigated by the FBI, not to mention the well-documented Russian business connections of John Podesta and his brother.

If Trump and his family are singled out for this when the Democrats have skated, this will be regarded by a vast proportion of the public as selective prosecution further exacerbating the ominous possible results I referred to above.

To take any of this seriously as a search for truth is absurd. It’s more like a blood sport, the modern equivalent of a gladiatorial. Trump baiting. And Trump, as the bear, lashes out.

He has reason to. As everyone knows, cooks cook, plumbers fix the plumbing, and prosecutors prosecute. It’s what they do, part of their personality structure. Especially if the prey is big, and they don’t bring in at least one or two significant players, they feel as if they haven’t done their job. So they work and work until they do — nab someone for something. Trump knows this. The media know this. We all know it.

And bad as it may be for Trump, it’s going to be even worse for We the People.

En garde!

Categories: Anonymous sources, Great Trump - Russia conspiracy, Leaks, Media and Trump, Richard Nixon, Robert Mueller, Trump supporters, Watergate
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

The Washington Post Swings and Misses at Jeff Sessions

July 22, 2017

The Washington Post Swings and Misses at Jeff Sessions, Power Line, Paul Mirengoff, July 21, 2017

The Post’s sources clearly are out to get Sessions. It’s anyone’s guess whether they are accurately characterizing what the ambassador told his government and the reliability of what he told it.

In any event, the Post and its sources have failed to identify any contradiction between Sessions’s statements about his interaction with the ambassador and what the ambassador supposedly told the Russians about the interaction.

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

The Washington Post claims that Attorney General Sessions’ statements about what he discussed with the Russian ambassador are at odds with reports by the ambassador to his government about what he and Sessions discussed. The Post relies on, you guessed it, “current and former U.S. officials.”

But the Post fails to describe a contradiction between what Sessions has said and what the Russian ambassador supposedly reported. Here are the only statements by Sessions cited by the Post and its sources as problematic:

I never had meetings with Russian operatives or Russian intermediaries about the Trump campaign.

I don’t recall any discussion of the campaign in any significant way.

I never met with or had any conversation with any Russians or foreign officials concerning any type of interference with any campaign or election in the United States.

Here is the Post’s description of what the Russian ambassador told the government:

A former official said that the intelligence indicates that Sessions and Kislyak had “substantive” discussions on matters including Trump’s positions on Russia-related issues and prospects for U.S.-Russia relations in a Trump administration.

Maybe. But even someone with average skill in reading and logic would understand that this description is not inconsistent with Sessions’ denial that he did not discuss the campaign with the ambassador.

It stands to reason that Sessions might discuss Russia-related issues with the Russian ambassador. And Russia-related issues are also campaign-related issues in the sense that Russia was an issue in the campaign.

But what Sessions denied was that he discussed the campaign and any interference by Russia with it. The denial was important because, at the time Sessions made it, the issue Washington fixated on was whether Team Trump sought or knew about Russian help for the candidate, or coordinated with Russia regarding the campaign.

The Post’s piece, by Adam Entous, Ellen Nakashima, and Greg Miller, is dishonest. It finds a contradiction where none exists by glossing over the distinction between discussing a “campaign-related issue” — which is any substantive issue raised by any candidate during the campaign season — and discussing the campaign.

Discussing hacking or “opposition research” research with the Russian ambassador would constitute discussing the campaign. Telling the ambassador how the campaign is going or what its strategy is would constituted discussing the campaign. Telling the ambassador — as President Obama told the Russian president — that the candidate would be more flexible with Russia after the campaign would probably be a borderline case.

Simply discussing Russia policy — past, present, or future — is not discussing the campaign.

There is also the question of whether the Russian ambassador was telling his government the truth. The Post admits that “the Russian ambassador could have mischaracterized or exaggerated the nature of his interactions” with Sessions. It notes: “Russian and other foreign diplomats in Washington and elsewhere have been known, at times, to report false or misleading information to bolster their standing with their superiors or to confuse U.S. intelligence agencies.”

The Post adds, however, that the Russian ambassador “has a reputation for accurately relaying details about his interactions with officials in Washington.” Maybe. But I’m not inclined to take the word of the “deep state” on this. I suspect there are “current and former officials” who would grant the Russian ambassador sainthood if it meant embarrassing the Trump administration.

The Post’s sources clearly are out to get Sessions. It’s anyone’s guess whether they are accurately characterizing what the ambassador told his government and the reliability of what he told it.

In any event, the Post and its sources have failed to identify any contradiction between Sessions’s statements about his interaction with the ambassador and what the ambassador supposedly told the Russians about the interaction.

Categories: Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Deep state, Faked news, Great Trump - Russia conspiracy, Media and Trump, Washington Post
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

This is a war for sovereign control of Temple Mt

July 22, 2017

This is a war for sovereign control of Temple Mt, DEBKAfile, July 22, 2017

Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas decided to profit from the high tension around Temple Mount since the July 14 murder of the Israeli policemen. Accusing Israel of declaring a religious war (sic), he announced earlier Friday that he was suspending all Palestinian security cooperation with Israel. This demonstrated extreme hutzpah, considering that it is this cooperation which keeps him in power. He deals directly with American and American parties which support his security forces and serve as go-between for Palestinian ties with their Israeli counterparts.

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

The brutal stabbing attack at Halamish, which left a grandfather of 70, his son and daughter dead while still in their 40s and a grandmother of 78 badly injured – when the family was gathered for the Sabbath Eve meal on Friday, July 21 – was no random act of terror. It followed directly and consistently on the murder of two Israeli police guards on Temple Mount exactly one week earlier. The planners of the first outrage, perpetrated by three Israeli Arabs, knew exactly that such action would ignite flames which would claim many Israeli and Palestinian lives.

Halamish is a small Orthodox Jewish community of 250 families, not far from Ramallah, which is walled, gated and guarded. Nevertheless, a 19-year old Palestinian from the nearby village of Kubar, was able to scale the wall, burst in on the family and repeatedly slash four of its members. The wife of the murdered son grabbed the five children who were visiting their grandparents, hid with them in another room and phoned the police, while a neighbor, a 19-year old soldier on leave, shot the terrorist through a window and so finally stopped the carnage.

The paramedics, though experienced in terrorist atrocities had to overcome their horror at the bloodbath in which they went to work to save laves. For the grandfather and his son, it was too late. His daughter died under their hands, and the grandmother was removed to hospital in serious condition.

Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas decided to profit from the high tension around Temple Mount since the July 14 murder of the Israeli policemen. Accusing Israel of declaring a religious war (sic), he announced earlier Friday that he was suspending all Palestinian security cooperation with Israel. This demonstrated extreme hutzpah, considering that it is this cooperation which keeps him in power. He deals directly with American and American parties which support his security forces and serve as go-between for Palestinian ties with their Israeli counterparts.

If the Palestinians choose to continue along the path of violence, their American and European backers will face the dilemma over whether to continue to sponsor terror. Making a public issue of this will effectively put paid to all efforts at diplomacy for ending the dispute – whether local or regional.

And that is exactly what the three Muslim gunmen were after when they shot dead three Israeli police guards at the Lion’s Gate entrance to Temple Mount.

The Palestinians are consistent in their tactics: First shed Israeli blood, then tell the world they are victims and as martyrs are justified in seeking revenge – especially against “the sons of apes and pigs who defile Al Aqsa.” This was how the Halamish killer Omar al-Abed, 19, a Hamas sympathizer, described the Jews in the “will” he posted on Facebook three hours before the murders. Except that instead of dying with a martyr’s halo, he survived.

The whole week, it was dinned into Palestinian and Israeli Muslims by their leaders, including elected members of the Israeli parliament, that the Al Aqsa compound, an artificial mountaintop platform built as the site of the Jewish Temple more than 2,000 years ago, is exclusive Muslim property and no Jew has the right to set foot in the “Noble Sanctuary.”  This claim also applies to Jerusalem, known in Arabic as Al Quds.

The most notorious metal detectors in Middle East history became emblems that objectified their rage that Iover Israeli sovereignty in Temple Mount and the holy city. This has exposed the dispute as being a national rather than a religious dispute.

For Israel, sovereignty over its capital and the site of the Jewish temples, which was won at great cost in a war of defense after millennia of exile, is not in question. The government’s reiterated pledge to preserve the status quo on Temple Mount and the cities holy places is solidly backed up. But it cuts no ice with the Palestinians since the pledge is offered by an entity they consider a usurper.

Nothing less will satisfy them than Israel relinquishing Temple Mount to the full control of the Waqf Muslim Authority.

But this presents another problem. For decades, Israeli governments has provisionally quelled endless outbreaks of violence, by rescinding pieces of control to Muslim authority – the Waqf or Jordan, allowing the Hashemite King to claims custodianship of Al Aqsa. But it was never enough to keep Palestinian violence down for long. The Waqf was even permitted to build an extension to Al Aqsa, which they rewarded by trashing the relics of the Jewish Temples discovered by the builders.

But Israel has now reached the end of its tether. It is obvious that even if the metal detectors installed at Temple Mount gates are removed or replaced, the violence unleashed at Temple Mount on July 14 was just an opener, followed a week later by the Halamish murders.

A surge Palestinian clashes with police across Jerusalem earlier Friday left three Palestinian rioters dead. Israel’s Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gady Eisenkott Saturday ordered a massive call-up of IDF and police reinforcements to try and put a lid on the violence and protect the Jewish communities of Judea and Samaria.

Categories: Abbas, Palestinan terror at Temple Mount, Palestinian heroes, Palestinian terrorists, Palestinians and Islam, Palestinians and Jews, Temple Mount terrorist attack
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Palestinian President freezes all relations with Israel

July 22, 2017

In a dramatic move, Palestinian Pres. announces PA ‘freezing of contacts at all levels in light of the steps in Jerusalem by placing magnetometers’; Hamas calls move ‘a meaningless announcement.’

Elior Levy|Last update:  22.07.17 , 11:28

Source: Ynetnews News – Palestinian President freezes all relations with Israel

 

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Friday declared a freeze on all relations with Israel in response to the Temple Mount crisis. “Relations with Israel will be frozen at all levels until Israel commits itself to canceling all its steps against the Palestinian people as a whole and against the city of Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque in particular, and to committing itself to preserving the historical and legal situation in Al-Aqsa,” he said in his statement

Abbas continued to say he opposes the new security measures at the entry gates to the Temple Mount, set up by Israel following the deadly terrorist attack that took the lives of two Israeli police officers last week. The added security measures caused a wave of backlash in the Muslim community, with a deadly terrorist attack on Friday in which a teenage Palestinian murdered three family members in the West Bank settlement of Halamish, clashes with Israel Police in which three Palestinian protestors were killed, as well as wide scale protest prayers and riots around Jerusalem.

Muslim protestors pray, riot throughout Jerusalem   (Video: Eli Mandelbaum, Gil Yohanan, Ofer Meir, Reuters)

“We reject to magnetometers, as they are political moves presented in the guise of security measures, whose sole goal is to take over the Al-Aqsa Mosque and escape the peace process, turn the conflict from a political one to a religious one and break up the mosque based on time and place.

Abbas (Photo: EPA)

“We support the residents of Jerusalem and allocate $25 million to do so. We call upon Palestinian businessmen everywhere, the Arab and Palestinian foundations that support Jerusalem, to contribute to Jerusalem,” said Abbas. He also appealed to his political foe the Hamas “to overcome the gaps and unite for the sake of our people and supporters around the world. We call upon everyone to stop the media debates and defend our holy places and our national plan, and I call upon Hamas to dismantle its administrative committee in the Gaza Strip and to participate in general elections.

Rioters outside the Temple Mount (Photo: AFP)

Rioters outside the Temple Mount (Photo: AFP)

“I am in contact with the King of Jordan, the King of Saudi Arabia, the President of Egypt, the King of Morocco, the Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the Secretary General of the Arab League,” Abbas added.

Photo: Ohad Zwigenberg

Photo: Ohad Zwigenberg

Hamas, for its part, responded to Abbas’s announcement by saying that “Abu Mazen’s (a common nickname of Abbas’s—ed) announcement regarding the severing of relations with Israel are meaningless without the lifting of the restrictions on Gaza, stopping security coordination (with Israel) and an end to reigning in the resistance to the occupation.”

A senior Palestinian official spoke to Ynet about the severance of relations with Israel: “The situation in the (Gaza) Strip is on the brink of explosion, and Abbas statement is directed internally, to Palestinian society, in order to release steam. Over the last few days, there’s been some wild incitement against the Palestinian Authority (which is led by Abbas), which is out of the ordinary and very irregular. Abu Mazen had to reassure the Palestinian public, since people in the streets were already talking freely against him and against the Palestinian Authority. Israel must calm the situation by removing the magnetometers from the Al-Aqsa gates.”

 

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: Be the first to comment

‘Illegitimate coalition’ must pay for destroying Syria

July 22, 2017
Published time: 22 Jul, 2017 00:53 Edited time: 22 Jul, 2017 04:59

Source: ‘Illegitimate coalition’ must pay for destroying Syria – Damascus to UN — RT News

FILE PHOTO: Smoke rises over Syrian town of Kobani after an airstrike. A U.S.-led military coalition has been bombing Islamic State © Kai Pfaffenbach / Reuters

Syria wants the US and its allies to pay for the destruction of Syrian infrastructure and to bear legal responsibility for “illegitimately” bombing civilian targets, Damascus has told the UN, demanding that the American-led coalition strikes stop.
TrendsSyria war, US missiles strike Syria

The Syrian “Government insists that these attacks must come to an end, and that the members of this illegitimate coalition must bear the political and legal responsibility for the destruction of infrastructure in the Syrian Arab Republic, including responsibility for compensation,” the Permanent Mission of the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nations said in letters addressed to the UN Secretary-General and the President of the Security Council.

Read more

FILE PHOTO: Raqqa, Syria © Nour Fourat

‘Dogs eating bodies’: Witnesses recall the horrors of US-led liberation of Raqqa

Stating that the ongoing US-led anti-terrorist airstrikes “continue to claim the lives of hundreds of innocent Syrian civilians,” Damascus claimed that the bombings had led to a “near-total destruction” of homes and vital infrastructure, including the “utter destruction” of oil and gas facilities.

The attacks, along with US and EU-imposed economic restrictions on Syria “are impeding the maintenance of those economic facilities and jeopardizing the prospects for development and reconstruction” in the country, the letters, written last week, said.

To support their claims, Syria’correspondence referred to two recent cases where the coalition’s jets destroyed oil and gas facilities. Damascus also said the May 27 bombardment of Hasu Albu Awf village in the Hasakah governorate, “completely” destroyed many homes and killed at least eight civilians, “most of them children.”

On Friday, the US-led coalition announced the demolition of a number of oil and gas facilities in various parts of Syria which allegedly belonged to the Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) terrorist group.

Targeting the terrorists’ illegal oil trade and jihadist infrastructure has been a cornerstone of both American and Russian strategies in Syria. But while Moscow coordinates its strikes with the Syrian government, the Washington-led operation has been harshly criticized for its indiscriminate bombing practices and doing so without communicating with Syrian government forces.

Damascus’ letters to the UN once again underlined that the American air campaign is being conducted in violation of international law, as it lacks any form of consent or authorization from the Syrian government.

Raqqa, known as the stronghold of IS, has been the main focus of the US operation in Syria, where Washington is guiding and supporting the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

While the US-led Operation Inherent Resolve this month confirmed a total of 603 civilian deaths in the US-led air campaign in Syria and Iraq, Airwars, a UK-based group that monitors airstrikes and civilian casualties, claimed this week that it tracked “more than 700 likely civilian deaths” in Raqqa alone – even before the battle for the city began in June.

However, there is little chance that the document would lead to any repercussions for Washington, international relations professor Jamal Wakeem told RT.

“I don’t believe that the United Nations will take any action against the United States, because we know it has been the tradition of the UN not to act against any aggression done by the US against any country,” Wakeem said.

Even if the UN moves forward with Syria’s claims, “the US, as a permanent member of the UN [Security] Council, would veto any resolution that could be proposed against it,” Wakeem added.

Nevertheless, Syria’s move “could affect the US, not on a political, but on a moral level,” the professor said.

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: Be the first to comment

Right Angle – Are There Any Honest Reporters Left?

July 22, 2017

Right Angle – Are There Any Honest Reporters Left? Bill Whittle Channel via YouTube, July 21, 2017

 

According to the blurb beneath the video,

Buzzfeed claims Trump’s was on the media is viewed by his Republican Confederate, as a fake war, and they refuse to join the fight. In fact, some think they are caught in the middle and are being harmed as collateral damage.

Are President Trump’s broad attacks against the media helpful?

Bill Whittle, Scott Ott, and Stephen Green ask: Is there any honest reporters left?

Categories: Media and Democrats, Media and Obama, Media and Trump
Tags: , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

The Jewashing of George Soros

July 21, 2017

The Jewashing of George Soros, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, July 21, 2017

George Soros hates Jews.

He collaborated with the Nazis during the Holocaust and insisted that helping confiscate property from Jews brought him no guilt. “There was no sense that I shouldn’t be there, because that was well, actually, in a funny way, it’s just like in markets that if I weren’t there of course, I wasn’t doing it, but somebody else would.” He described the season of these horrors as “the most exciting time of my life.”

Soros grew up in a “Jewish, anti-Semitic home”. He called his mother a “typical Jewish anti-Semite” who hated his first wife because she was “too Jewish”. After undergoing psychoanalysis, he was able to understand that his shame was rooted in his Jewishness. He had a special contempt for Jewish philanthropies after a failed attempt to defraud a Jewish charity in London.

He was booed when he undermined the presentation of an award to a Holocaust survivor by comparing Israeli Jews to Nazis. Elie Wiesel had declared in disgust, “I heard what happened. If I’d been there—and you can quote me—I would have walked out.”

That same year, Soros blamed the Israeli government for a “resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe”. He might have been more honest if he took responsibility considering his funding of groups that traffic in anti-Semitic smears. And his own anti-Semitic allegations that “attitudes toward the Jewish community are influenced by the pro-Israel lobby’s success in suppressing divergent views.”

Soros has defended Hamas and Hezbollah who have called for the extermination of the Jews. He championed the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt despite or because of its support for Hitler. Yusuf al-Qaradawi had claimed that Hitler had been sent by Allah to punish the Jews. “Allah willing,” the Brotherhood’s spiritual leadersaid, “the next time will be at the hands of the believers (Muslims).”

There’s no denying that George Soros is a warped and twisted man. Especially when it comes to the Jews. But he’s also the money man behind a great deal of leftist activism. Especially anti-Israel activism.

And so he must be defended.

An editorial at New York Times by a figure linked to the +972 anti-Israel hate site decries “Israel’s War Against George Soros”. That’s right up there with Poland’s war on Nazi Germany.

What does this war consist of? Has Israel sent drones to the Soros estate? Did Mossad agents drag George out of his featherbed to face the justice of those injured through his actions?

No.

The “war” consisted of one statement. The Israeli Foreign Ministry condemned Soros for “continuously undermining Israel’s democratically elected governments,” and backing hate groups “that defame the Jewish state and seek to deny it the right to defend itself.” Not only is it true, but it’s underwhelming.

Even by the low fake news standards of today’s extremist media, you expect something more from a headline screaming “Israel’s War Against George Soros” than a single restrained criticism.

Do the thousands of hit pieces from the New York Times count as a “War on Israel? That includes the aforementioned Mairav Zonszein screed on Soros which in true Sorosesque fashion pivots from defending an anti-Semite to launching bizarre and hopelessly factless smears at the Jewish State.

Mairav claims that Israel is now aligned with “illiberal, autocratic states like Russia, Turkey and Egypt.” That would be news to Turkey which just accused Israel of a “crime against humanity” and backs Hamas. Or to Russia, which backs Iran and whose S-300 missiles guard Iran’s nuclear program against an Israeli strike. But using the stopped clock principle, getting one of three right isn’t bad for the New York Times.

Soros and the Times were aligned with the illiberal autocratic Muslim Brotherhood’s takeover of Egypt under a leader who had urged Muslims to “nurse our children and grandchildren on hatred” of the Jews.

But there’s nothing anti-Semitic to see there.

According to the New York Times, criticizing an anti-Semite whose Jewishness can only be found with a DNA analysis is anti-Semitic, but attacking millions of Jews defending themselves against genocide isn’t.

The government that represents millions of Jews is anti-Semitic for calling out a left-wing anti-Semite. And the millions of Jews, and even the recently deceased Elie Wiesel, probably are too.

According to Mairav Zonszein, Israel’s criticism of Soros aligns it with anti-Semites. “It takes some gall on the part of Mr. Netanyahu to choose this moment to kick Mr. Soros while he’s down — not only because Mr. Soros is, once again, a victim of anti-Semitism,” Mairav fumes.

By “down”, Mairav means he’s the world’s 22nd richest man and dictates policy to entire governments.

Mr. Soros has not refrained from kicking Israeli families when they were being shot and stabbed by Islamic terrorists. He hasn’t stopped funding hate against Jews or blaming Jews for anti-Semitism.

George Soros funds BDS, an organization run by a terrorist and one that defends the murder of Jews. But there’s mean ole Mr. Netanyahu kicking the 22nd richest man in the world when he’s down.

This shameless Jewashing is despicable and typical. The left shrugs at the murderous anti-Semitism in the Muslim world. And at times it even defends it. It loves Jewashing its hatred of Jews by putting activists with a Jewish last name up front in its anti-Semitic activities. And it will defend anti-Semites like George Soros as victims of anti-Semitism at the hands of the government of millions of Jews.

When it’s convenient, George Soros takes a break from fond recollections of the most exciting time in his life, helping rob Jews, to play a victim of the Holocaust. And if it’s useful, he’ll even take a break from defending Hamas and Hezbollah, from funding the types of terrorists who call the murder of Jews “resistance” and from supporting Islamist groups that praise Hitler, to play the victim of anti-Semitism.

George Soros hates Jews. So do his apologists and supporters. They just can’t say so in public. Yet.

There are a thousand euphemisms. They’re not anti-Semites, they’re anti-Zionists. Yes, they just happen to be reviving the Nazi boycott against the Jews. And their favorite Muslim Brotherhood hate groups drew organizational inspiration from the Third Reich. But they’re only concerned for social justice. The social justice they’re concerned with just happens to require the persecution of the Jews. They just happen to disrupt Holocaust memorial events and Jewish holidays to bring attention to the cause of the oppressed Muslim terrorists whose heroic figures had egged on Hitler to wipe out the Jews.

And if you doubt their commitment to opposing anti-Semitism, watch them defend George Soros. Then when the Jewashing is done, they can go back to demanding that we fund the terrorists murdering Jews.

George Soros is not a Holocaust survivor. He has spent much of his life collaborating with totalitarian movements whose goal is the extermination of the Jewish people.

He is not a victim of anti-Semitism. He is a perpetrator of anti-Semitism.

The only thing more despicable than the left’s obsessive hatred of Jews is its Jewashing of anti-Semites. Hating Jews is anti-Semitic no matter what your last name might be. Collaborating with the murderers of Jews is attempted genocide no matter what your DNA may say. When you defend Hamas, fund BDS and defend anti-Semitism, no amount of lies and spin will Jewash your hatred and guilt away.

Categories: Anti-Zionism, Antisemitism, George Soros, Holocaust, New York Times
Tags: , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

What Did Trump Certify?

July 21, 2017

What Did Trump Certify? Power Line,  Paul Mirengoff, July 21, 2017

“What that really foreshadows is once the policy review is done, we’re going to see a massive increase in pressure — not just sanctions pressure but using all instruments of American power.”

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

Did President Trump certify to Congress on Monday that Iran is complying with the nuclear deal? This is what virtually of all of the reporting on his action says he did.

We wrote that, early in the day, National Security Council director H. R. McMaster indicated the administration would certify Iranian compliance. The next day we reported, per Eli Lake, that Trump had balked at providing certification and came close to not doing so, but in the end certified Iranian compliance.

But the invaluable Omri Ceren of the Israel Project informs us that, contrary to “almost all major reporting,” Trump stopped short of certifying that Iran is complying with the deal. Indeed, he removed language about Iranian compliance and added language emphasizing Iranian violations. This AP story confirms Ceren’s report.

What, then, did the president certify? He certified only that Iran has met the four narrow conditions of the 2015 Corker-Cardin bill, says Ceren. The four conditions are these:

(1) Iran is implementing the deal,
(2) Iran is not in material breach,
(3) Iran is not advancing its nuclear weapons program, and
(4) sanctions relief is appropriate and vital for U.S. national security.

In limiting his certification to the four conditions, and listing several Iranian violations, the administration made it clear that, although Iran is not in “material breach,” neither is it in full compliance. This is the compromise brought about by Trump’s last-minute intervention.

What difference do the changes make? They don’t change the fact that Iran will continue to get sanctions relief, for now. Only by refusing to certify one or more of the four conditions might this have changed.

However, the changes are not without significance. For one thing, they undermine the Iranian regime’s oft-repeated talking point that the Trump administration admits Iran is complying with the terms of the deal.

For another, they may signal a shift in policy towards the deal once the Trump administration completes its broad review of the Iran deal, which is expected to happen soon. As the estimable Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, who reportedly is advising the administration on Iran puts it: “What that really foreshadows is once the policy review is done, we’re going to see a massive increase in pressure — not just sanctions pressure but using all instruments of American power.”

Let’s hope so.

Categories: Iran scam, JCPOA, Trump and Iran, Trump and Iran scam
Tags: , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Sweden: A Failed State?

July 21, 2017

Sweden: A Failed State? Gatestone Institute, Judith Bergman, July 21, 2017

The Swedish state, in true Orwellian style, fights those Swedish citizens who point out the obvious problems that migrants are causing.

When police officer Peter Springare said in February that migrants were committing a disproportionate amount of crime in the suburbs, he was investigated for inciting “racial hatred”.

Currently, a 70-year-old Swedish pensioner is being prosecuted for “hate speech”, for writing on Facebook that migrants “set fire to cars, and urinate and defecate on the streets”.

The security situation in Sweden is now so critical that the national police chief, Dan Eliasson, has asked the public for help; the police are unable to solve the problems on their own. In June, the Swedish police released a new report, “Utsatta områden 2017“, (“Vulnerable Areas 2017”, commonly known as “no-go zones” or lawless areas). It shows that the 55 no-go zones of a year ago are now 61.

In September 2016, Prime Minister Stefan Löfven and Minister of Interior Anders Ygeman refused to see the warnings: in 2015, only 14% of all crimes in Sweden were solved, and in 2016, 80% of police officers were allegedly considering quitting the force. Both ministers refused to call it a crisis. According to Anders Ygeman:

“… we are in a very difficult position, but crisis is something completely different. …we are in a very strained position and this is because we have done the biggest reorganization since the 1960s, while we have these very difficult external factors with the highest refugee reception since the Second World War. We have border controls for the first time in 20 years, and an increased terrorist threat”.

A year later the Swedish national police chief is calling the situation “acute”.

In 2015, only 14% of all crimes in Sweden were solved. In 2016, 80% of police officers were allegedly considering quitting the force. Nonetheless, Prime Minister Stefan Löfven (pictured above) refused to call it a crisis. (Photo by Michael Campanella/Getty Images)

Sweden increasingly resembles a failed state: In the 61 “no-go zones”, there are 200 criminal networks with an estimated 5,000 criminals who are members. Twenty-three of those no-go zones are especially critical: children as young as 10 years old are involved in serious crimes there, including weapons and drugs, and are literally being trained to become hardened criminals.

The trouble, however, extends beyond organized crime. In June, Swedish police in the city of Trollhättan, during a riot in the Kronogården suburb, were attacked by approximately a hundred masked migrant youths, mainly Somalis. The rioting continued for two nights.

Violent riots, however, are just part of Sweden’s security problems. In 2010, according to the government, there were “only” 200 radical Islamists in Sweden. In June, the head of the Swedish Security Service (Säpo), Anders Thornberg, told the Swedish media that the country is experiencing a “historical” challenge in having to deal with thousands of “radical Islamists in Sweden”. The jihadists and jihadist supporters are mainly concentrated in Stockholm, Gothenburg, Malmö and Örebro, according to Säpo. “This is the ‘new normal’ … It is an historic challenge that extremist circles are growing,” Thornberg said.

The Swedish establishment has only itself to blame for it.

Thornberg said that Säpo now receives around 6,000 intelligence tips a month concerning terrorism and extremism, compared to an average of 2,000 a month in 2012.

Some of the reasons for the increase, according to terror expert Magnus Ranstorp of the Swedish Defense University, is due to segregation in Sweden’s no-go zones:

“… it has been easy for extremists to recruit undisturbed in those areas. …the prevention measures have been pretty tame… if you compare Denmark and Sweden, Denmark is at university level and Sweden at kindergarten level”.

Asked what the increase in people supporting extremist ideologies indicated about Sweden’s work to combat radicalism, Interior Minister Anders Ygeman told the Swedish news outlet TT:

“I think it says little. This is a development we have seen in a number of countries in Europe. On the other hand, it shows that it was right to take those measures we have. A permanent centre against violent extremism, that we have increased the budget to work against violent extremism, that we have increased the security police’s budget for three years.”

There may be even more jihadists than Säpo thinks. In 2015, at the height of the migrant crisis, when Sweden received over 160,000 migrants, 14,000 of them who were told that they were going to be deported disappeared inside Sweden without a trace. As late as April 2017, Sweden was still looking for 10,000 of them. Sweden, however, has only 200 border police staff at its disposal to look for them. One “disappeared migrant” was Rakhmat Akilov, from Uzbekistan. He drove a truck into a department store in Stockholm, killing four people and wounding many others. He later said he did it for the Islamic State (ISIS).

Meanwhile, Sweden continues to receive returning ISIS fighters from Syria, a courtesy that hardly improves the security situation. Sweden, so far, has received 150 returning ISIS fighters. There are still 112 who remain abroad — considered the most hardcore of all — and Sweden expects many of those to return as well. Astonishingly, the Swedish government has given several of the ISIS returnees protected identities to prevent local Swedes from finding out who they are. Two Swedish ISIS fighters who returned to Europe, Osama Krayem and Mohamed Belkaid, went on to help commit the terror attacks at Brussels airport and the Maelbeek metro station in the center of Brussels, on March 22, 2016. Thirty-one people were killed; 300 were wounded.

Swedish news outlets have reported that the Swedish towns that receive the returnees do not even know they are returning ISIS fighters. One coordinator of the work against violent Islamist extremism in Stockholm, Christina Kiernan, says that “…at the moment there is no control over those returning from ISIS-controlled areas in the Middle East”.

Kiernan explains that there are rules that prevent the passing of information about returning jihadists from Säpo to the local municipalities, so that the people who are in charge in the municipal authorities, including the police, have no information about who and how many returned ISIS fighters there are in their area. It is therefore impossible to monitor them — and this at a time when Säpo estimates the number of violent Islamist extremists in Sweden in the thousands.

Even after all this, the Swedish state, in true Orwellian style, fights those Swedish citizens who point out the obvious problems that migrants are causing. When police officer Peter Springare said in February that migrants were committing a disproportionate amount of crime in the suburbs, he was investigated for inciting “racial hatred”.

Currently, a 70-year-old Swedish pensioner is being prosecuted for “hate speech”, for writing on Facebook that migrants “set fire to cars, and urinate and defecate on the streets”.

With thousands of jihadists all over Sweden, what could be more important than prosecuting a Swedish pensioner for writing on Facebook?

Categories: Islamic invasion, Islamic terrorists, Islamisation of Sweden, Law enforcement, Sweden
Tags: , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Mueller Expands His Probe Again

July 21, 2017

Mueller Expands His Probe Again, Front Page Magazine, Matthew Vadum, July 21, 2017

(Don’t worry, something sexy may emerge from the FBI’s investigation into the connections between the  “Trump Dossier” and President Trump’s Vast Russian conspiracy. Please see, FBI relies on discredited dossier in Russia investigation. — DM)

Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III is yet again expanding the scope of his off-the-rails investigation into the Left’s wacky Russian electoral collusion conspiracy theory by examining financial transactions even vaguely related to Russia involving President Trump’s businesses and those of his associates, Bloomberg News reports.

Honest observers recognize that with the election of Donald Trump, the longtime Russophiles of the morally flexible Left flipped on their traditional friends in Moscow faster than you can say Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact or Operation Barbarossa. Ignoring its own history of rampant seditious collaboration with Russia, the Left has now managed to convince many that any past or present connection a Republican has or had to Russia, however trivial, is somehow now retroactively evidence of treason against the United States.

There is still no evidence that Trump covered up a crime, or even that there was an underlying crime to be concealed but that hasn’t stopped the Left’s witch-hunt from growing and the goalposts from being shifted.

Remember that it was just a month ago as the bizarre collusion allegations got stuck in the mud that Mueller expanded his investigation to include allegations that Trump tried to obstruct justice by firing FBI Director James B. Comey on May 9. The claim is that Trump did this to end Comey’s investigation into National Security Advisor Mike Flynn’s ties to Russia. Of course, as Harvard Law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz has pointed out repeatedly, the president has authority under the Constitution to fire the FBI director for any reason or no reason at all. Comey himself has freely acknowledged he served at the pleasure of the president.

That said, “FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development in New York with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008,” Bloomberg reported an anonymous source saying.

The report continues, elaborating that:

Mueller’s team is looking at the Trump SoHo hotel condominium development, which was a licensing deal with Bayrock Capital LLC. In 2010, the former finance director of Bayrock filed a lawsuit claiming the firm structured transactions in fraudulent ways to evade taxes. Bayrock was a key source of capital for Trump projects, including Trump SoHo.

The 2013 Miss Universe pageant is of interest because a prominent Moscow developer, Aras Agalarov, paid $20 million to bring the beauty spectacle there. About a third of that sum went to Trump in the form of a licensing fee, according to Forbes magazine. At the event, Trump met Herman Gref, chief executive of Russia’s biggest bank, Sberbank PJSC. Agalarov’s son, Emin, helped broker a meeting last year between Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer [i.e. Natalia Veselnitskaya] who was said to have damaging information about Hillary Clinton and her campaign.

Another significant financial transaction involved a Palm Beach, Florida, estate Trump purchased in 2004 for $41 million, after its previous owner lost it in bankruptcy. In March of 2008, after the real-estate bubble had begun losing air, Russian fertilizer magnate Dmitry Rybolovlev bought the property for $95 million.

As part of their investigation, Mueller’s team has issued subpoenas to banks and filed requests for bank records to foreign lenders under mutual legal-assistance treaties, according to two of the people familiar with the matter.

In addition, a federal money-laundering probe of Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort has reportedly been subsumed into the larger investigation headed by Mueller. Mueller’s office is also reportedly looking at Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’s tenure as vice chairman of the Bank of Cyprus and at presidential advisor and son-in-law Jared Kushner’s efforts to obtain financing for his family’s real estate investments.

Newt Gingrich said yesterday that Mueller “has so many conflicts of interest it’s almost an absurdity,” but all of this seems above-board to Bloomberg.

“The Justice Department’s May 17 order to Mueller,” the media outlet reports, “instructs him to investigate ‘any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign’ as well as ‘any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation,’ suggesting a relatively broad mandate.”

Trump lawyer John Dowd disagrees. He said examining the president’s business dealings should be out-of-bounds for Mueller.

“Those transactions are in my view well beyond the mandate of the Special counsel; are unrelated to the election of 2016 or any alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia and most importantly, are well beyond any Statute of Limitation imposed by the United States Code,” he told Bloomberg in an email.

Meanwhile, the Left is digging in its heels.

In a defamatory, overheated column, the buffoonish purveyor of partisan drivel Jonathan Chait claims:

New reports in the Washington Post and New York Times are clear signals that Trump is contemplating steps – firing Mueller or issuing mass pardons – that would seem to go beyond the pale. Except Trump’s entire career is beyond the pale, and in his time on the political stage, the unthinkable has become thinkable with regularity.

Chait pontificates that:

Trump’s actions are best understood in the context of the overwhelming likelihood he, his family members, and at least some of his associates are guilty of serious crimes. The investigation might not produce proof of criminal collusion with Russia’s illegal hacking of Democratic emails. (Though reasonable grounds for suspicion already exists in abundance.)

Except there is no “overwhelming likelihood” that Trump, his family members, or associates are “guilty of serious crimes,” at least not based on publicly available evidence. Chait is engaging in pure speculation precisely because there is no proof of wrongdoing.

Chait shrieks that Trump’s New York Times interview this week and other news reports citing unidentified sources are proof that the president is a threat to the republic. “The ominous threats emanating from the White House are an administration mobilizing for war against the rule of law,” he wrote.

But what did Trump actually tell the Old Gray Lady?

“I have done nothing wrong,” he said. “A special counsel should never have been appointed in this case.”

One interviewer asked the president, “Last thing, if Mueller was looking at your finances and your family finances, unrelated to Russia, is that a red line?” Another then chimed in with, “Would that be a breach of what his actual charge is?”

Trump responded, probably correctly, with “I would say yeah. I would say yes.”

“Would you fire Mueller if he went outside of certain parameters of what his charge is?” an interviewer asked.

“I can’t answer that question because I don’t think it’s going to happen,” Trump replied.

It is horrifying to Chait that Trump is daring to defend himself in an interview.

Then there is that anonymously-sourced Washington Post article that claims Trump is considering firing Mueller and issuing mass-pardons – kind of like when Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) unilaterally re-enfranchised felons by the hundreds of thousands to help Hillary Clinton during the last election cycle – in order to put himself and those close to him above the law.

It’s the kind of juicy, implausible story that the “Democracy Dies in Darkness” crowd has been known for since Trump was elected. The claim that the president’s legal team is examining the backgrounds of Team Mueller – as these attorneys are perfectly entitled to do – is much more plausible, though, according to Chait, such actions mark Trump as a budding dictator.

As left-wingers like Chait see it, the president isn’t allowed to defend himself from scurrilous, malicious allegations when he’s a Republican.

Confusing matters is the fact that the straight-shooting president delivered an extraordinarily unusual public flogging of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, upbraiding him behind enemy lines in the New York Times interview. Trump said it was a mistake for Sessions to recuse himself from the Russia probe and that he may not have nominated him for the post if he had known beforehand that the attorney general would make the recusal decision.

It is true that with the benefit of hindsight, Sessions’ recusal, hailed at the time by the media and the rest of the Left as a noble, unifying gesture after a very, very nasty, hard-fought election, now looks boneheaded. Sessions is a good man and an outstanding public servant but he may have been in too much of a hurry to be liked by the Washington swamp. Appointing a special counsel calmed the Left down only briefly. Appeasing the radicals of today’s Democratic Party doesn’t work.

Although the unusual rebuke of Sessions may suggest the former Alabama senator’s days at the Justice Department may be numbered, White House Deputy Press

Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said yesterday the president “still has confidence” in Sessions despite the high-profile criticism.

“As he said yesterday, he was disappointed in Attorney General Sessions’ decision to recuse himself, but clearly he has confidence in him or he would not be the attorney general,” she said. Sessions said at a presser the same day that he planned to stay at his post for as long as “appropriate.”

The public relations debacle that was the Times interview was barely noticed by much of the mainstream media as news that the far-from-humbled-sociopath O.J. Simpson was paroled in Nevada sucked up much of the available media oxygen.

Some observers think Trump is setting the stage for firing Mueller, or at least finding a way to clip his wings a bit.

In a post at NRO titled, “Yeah, Trump Is Probably Going to Fire Robert Mueller,” Rich Lowry called Trump’s comments “a wholly gratuitous slap” at Sessions. “The 3-D-chess theory of the interview would be that Trump is trying to force Sessions out in favor of a non-recused attorney general who can rein in Mueller,” he wrote.

President Trump is right to be concerned. Mueller’s investigation increasingly resembles a massive anti-Trump fishing expedition.

The problem here is the special counsel system, Charles Krauthammer told Tucker Carlson on Fox News Channel last night. “Their mandates are essentially unlimited.”

He’s right. Independent prosecutors just keep digging until somebody stops them. Justice is rarely achieved, or even sought. Their purpose is to vex and harass for political purposes, so in that sense, Special Counsel Mueller is right on-track.

And Mueller is the Washington swamp’s best hope to oust the 45th president.

Categories: Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Great Trump - Russia conspiracy, Special Counsel Mueller
Tags: , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »