Donald Trump Latest Ad Featuring Anthony Weiner, Clinton Emails On Weiner’s Laptop
Posted November 4, 2016 by Joseph WoukCategories: Uncategorized
HAMAS dba CAIR Using 2016 Muslim GOTV Campaign to Fund Jihad
Posted November 4, 2016 by danmillerinpanamaCategories: 2016 elections, CAIR, Hamas, Islamists in America, Muslim Brotherhood
Tags: CAIR, Hamas, Islamists in America, Muslim Brotherhood
HAMAS dba CAIR Using 2016 Muslim GOTV Campaign to Fund Jihad, Center for Security Policy, November 3, 2016
The Center for Security Policy reported in its September 2015 publication Star Spangled Shariah that the Muslim Brotherhood was actively setting its sights on the 2016 election cycle and preparing for a ‘get out the vote’ operation to mobilize its base. The United States Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO), the first U.S. political party openly associated with the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood, is aggressively pursuing many of its operational objectives behind a screen of feigned ‘patriotism’. Since the inception of the USCMO in March 2014, the Muslim Brotherhood-led organization more than once has relied upon a less-than-transparent modus operandi that obscure its true agenda, activities, and intentions for the U.S. political process from the general public and even members of Congress.
The Muslim Brotherhood agenda for the United States includes the subversive infiltration of every sphere of American society and recruitment of assistance in the subversive process from unwitting American themselves. The Muslim Brotherhood understood that the successful execution of its plan for societal destruction from within depends on what it calls the ‘settlement process:’ ‘In order for Islam and its Movement’ to become ‘a part of the homeland’ in which it lives, ‘stable’ in its land, ‘rooted’ in the spirits and minds and people, ‘enabled’ in the life of its society, and firmly established within organizations through which the Islamic structure is to be built, the Movement must work to obtain ‘the keys’ and tools of this of this ‘Civilization Jihadist’ project that is the responsibility of its vanguard, the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.
The USCMO and its Secretary General Oussama Jammal relied upon the expertise of veteran Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood leader Sabri Samirah, banned and deported from the United States for a decade until his (apparently temporary) 2014 return. Samirah worked as chairman of the Islamic Association of Palestine, the progenitor to the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). It will be recalled that the IAP was established in 1981 by HAMAS operative Mousa Abu Marzook. Samirah has functioned effectively as a catalyst for the next steps of Civilization Jihad described in the 1991 document ‘An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for North America’ by working closely with USCMO leadership to ‘get out the vote’ to influence key elections before his return to Jordan in October 2015.
Today, the principal leader of the Muslim Brotherhood-led USCMO is none other than Foreign Terrorist Organization-listed HAMAS doing-business-as CAIR. In the fall of 2016, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad unveiled the first-ever Muslim Brotherhood ‘Muslims GOTV’ campaign. As noted on the CAIR website, donations to support the ‘Muslims GOTV’ campaign are both tax deductible and zakat eligible. As explained in Islamic Law (shariah), however, ‘zakat’ is not merely ‘charity,’ but rather an obligatory tax on all Muslims and Muslim firms. According to shariah, all zakat proceeds collected anywhere on earth must be distributed among a legally-fixed set of recipients, at least one-eighth of which is always jihad.
In essence, therefore, HAMAS dba CAIR and the USCMO are not only running an influence operation under cover of ‘citizen activism’ during the 2016 U.S. presidential election, but using proceeds dishonestly acquired under the cloak of star spangled shariah to support enemies of the United States and the Free World.
Ex-NATO Commander Calls for Non-Cyber Response to Russia
Posted November 4, 2016 by Peter HofmanCategories: Uncategorized
Tags: Breedlove, Middle East, Middle East War, Nato, Obama, Russia, USA
Ex-NATO Commander Calls for Non-Cyber Response to Russia’s Election Hacks Breedlove: ‘Null’ response from Obama admin will reward Russia for bad behavior.
BY:
November 3, 2016 4:26 pm
Source: Ex-NATO Commander Calls for Non-Cyber Response to Russia
Philip Breedlove / AP
NATO’s former top commander recommended the U.S. government respond to Russia’s attempts to influence the presidential election through non-cyber means, emphasizing that a “null” answer would merely reward Moscow’s bad behavior.
Gen. Philip Breedlove, former NATO supreme allied commander for Europe and head of the U.S. European Command, said that the United States should considering using a combination of its diplomatic, information, military, and economic tools to punish Russia for directing hacks into U.S. political institutions.
“I don’t believe that a null set is the answer. I believe that we cannot reward bad behavior with no answer,” Breedlove told an audience at the Atlantic Council, a Washington-based international relations think tank, on Thursday when asked to recommend an appropriate U.S. response to the election-related cyber attacks.
“I also believe—and this is discussed quite openly—we rely so much more on cyber than some of our competitors in the world that if we were to start a big fight in cyber, we stand to lose so much more,” Breedlove said. “I don’t think that necessarily is the answer. Again, what I think is that our nation has a broad series of tools—diplomatic, information, military, economic. That’s a crude approximation, but there’s a lot of tools to use and I think that we need to do that creatively, judiciously.”
The retired four-star Air Force general echoed warnings previously sounded by cyber security experts about the vulnerabilities of the United States in starting a “tit-for-tat” cyber conflict with Russia.
Last month, the U.S. intelligence community formally blamed the Russian government for directing cyber attacks on U.S. individuals and organizations, including the Democratic National Committee, in order to influence the presidential election, an accusation that Moscow has denied. The White House has promised to deliver a “proportional” response to Russia for orchestrating the hacks.
Breedlove’s own private emails were released by DC Leaks, a website that has been linked to Russian hackers, earlier this year. The DNC emails, as well as those from the personal email of Hillary Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, have been released by WikiLeaks, which has denied having connections to the Russian government.
Breedlove described Russia’s provocations in cyber space, including the attempted election interference, as an element of Moscow’s “hybrid” warfare or pursuits of conflict “below the threshold.” He criticized the United States for exhibiting “tolerance” for Moscow’s actions.
“What does our tolerance say? What does our action or inaction say as it relates to everything from cyber in an election to continually meddling in the borders in South Ossetia? Where are we setting the bar as it relates to this conflict below the lines or below the thresholds, and what, again, does inaction mean?” Breedlove asked.
The retired general recommended that the next U.S. administration consider using a more “balanced” combination of diplomatic, information, military, and economic tools to deal with Russian aggression, rather than the Obama administration’s current approach of using economic sanctions and pursuing diplomatic relations to turn a corner with Moscow.
Breedlove also said Russia has been emboldened in recent years and views its global influence more positively.
“What Russia wants first and foremost is to be seen as an equal and be treated as a world superpower in a multipolar context. And frankly, what is the view from Moscow right now? They are probably pretty happy,” Breedlove observed. “They see themselves at the center of most of the great power conflict that is going on. They see themselves even at the center of the discussion about the U.S. election. So, I would say that right now Russia feels better about themselves on the world’s stage than they did years before.”
Breedlove retired from his dual-hatted post in May after 39 years of military service. Since his departure, already tense relations between the United States and Moscow have worsened over developments in Syria and a breakdown in cooperation between the powers on nuclear energy. NATO’s decision to deploy four battalions to the Baltic States and Poland on its eastern flank over Russia’s continued intervention in Ukraine has also aggravated Moscow, which has begun deploying forces and military equipment westward.
Breedlove acknowledged the high tensions with Russia but spoke optimistically about the opportunity of the next administration to find a path toward productive dialogue and cooperation with Russia.
At the same time, he expressed concern over Moscow’s pursuit of “below the threshold” competition and its willingness to escalate conflict, as well as the reemergence of the nuclear issue. This week, a high-level Russian official indicated that Norway would become a nuclear target after giving the United States permission to station hundreds of Marines on its borders.
The former commander also highlighted the improvements in Russia’s military capabilities that have been exhibited over the course of Moscow’s interventions in Georgia, Ukraine, and Syria over the last eight years.
“In the western and central and southern military districts, Russia is able to amass force and capability very quickly,” Breedlove explained. “The Russian force is a learning and adaptive force. It did not do so well in the first incursion into Georgia. It got much better when it went into Crimea. It learned in Crimea and was even better when it went into Donbass, and then was even better at several of the things they needed to be good at when they went into Syria.”
“It’s not the 10-foot-tall Soviet Union, but clearly it is a capable force,” he added.
Assange: Clinton & ISIS funded by same money, Trump won’t be allowed to win (JOHN PILGER EXCLUSIVE)
Posted November 4, 2016 by Peter HofmanCategories: Uncategorized
Tags: Assange, Donald Trump, Isis, Islamic Jihad, Islamic slaughter, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Islamic terrorism, John Podesta, Middle East, Terrorism, USA, WikiLeaks
Assange: Clinton & ISIS funded by same money, Trump won’t be allowed to win (JOHN PILGER EXCLUSIVE)
Published time: 4 Nov, 2016 05:00 Edited time: 4 Nov, 2016 09:15
In the second excerpt from the John Pilger Special, to be exclusively broadcast by RT on Saturday, courtesy of Dartmouth Films, Julian Assange accuses Hillary Clinton of misleading Americans about the true scope of Islamic State’s support from Washington’s Middle East allies.
In a 2014 email made public by Assange’s WikiLeaks last month, Hillary Clinton, who had served as secretary of state until the year before, urges John Podesta, then an advisor to Barack Obama, to “bring pressure” on Qatar and Saudi Arabia, “which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL [Islamic State, IS, ISIS] and other radical Sunni groups.”
“I think this is the most significant email in the whole collection,” Assange, whose whistleblowing site released three tranches of Clinton-related emails over the past year, told Pilger in an exclusive interview, courtesy of Dartmouth Films.
“All serious analysts know, and even the US government has agreed, that some Saudi figures have been supporting ISIS and funding ISIS, but the dodge has always been that it is some “rogue” princes using their oil money to do whatever they like, but actually the government disapproves. But that email says that it is the government of Saudi Arabia, and the government of Qatar that have been funding ISIS.”
Assange and Pilger, who sat down for their 25-minute interview at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the whistleblower has been a refugee since 2012, then talk about the conflict of interest between Clinton’s official post, which held throughout Obama’s first term, her husband’s nonprofit, and the Middle East officials, whose stated desire to fight terrorism may not have been sincere.
John Pilger: The Saudis, the Qataris, the Moroccans, the Bahrainis, particularly the first two, are giving all this money to the Clinton Foundation, while Hillary Clinton is secretary of state, and the State Department is approving massive arms sales, particularly Saudi Arabia.
Julian Assange: Under Hillary Clinton – and the Clinton emails reveal a significant discussion of it – the biggest-ever arms deal in the world was made with Saudi Arabia: more than $80 billion. During her tenure, the total arms exports from the US doubled in dollar value.
JP: Of course, the consequence of that is that this notorious jihadist group, called ISIL or ISIS, is created largely with money from people who are giving money to the Clinton Foundation?
JA: Yes.
READ MORE: Clinton knew Saudi Arabia, Qatar provide ‘clandestine’ support to ISIS – WikiLeaks
Pilger also questioned Assange over increasingly frequent accusations from the Clinton camp, and Western media, that WikiLeaks is looking to swing next week’s US presidential election in favor of Donald Trump – perhaps at Russia’s behest.
But Assange dismissed the prospect of Trump, who is behind in the polls, winning as unlikely – and not necessarily due to his standing with the electorate.
“My analysis is that Trump would not be permitted to win. Why do I say that? Because he has had every establishment off his side. Trump does not have one establishment, maybe with the exception of the Evangelicals, if you can call them an establishment,” said Assange. “Banks, intelligence, arms companies, foreign money, etc. are all united behind Hillary Clinton. And the media as well. Media owners, and the journalists themselves.”
READ MORE: ‘Slaughter Donald for Putin bromance’: #Podesta15 emails reveal ISIS strategy diversion for Clinton
Caroline Glick: Trump’s true opponent
Posted November 4, 2016 by Joseph WoukCategories: Uncategorized
Source: Column One: Trump’s true opponent – Opinion – Jerusalem Post
If Trump wins on Tuesday, it will be the establishment he defeats.
As these lines are being written it is Thursday morning in the US. Wikileaks announced hours ago that it is about to drop the mother lode of material it has gathered on Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.
Previous Wikileaks document drops set the stage for FBI director James Comey’s letter to Congress last Friday, when he informed lawmakers that he has ordered his agents to reopen their probe of Clinton’s private email server, which he closed last July.
One week on, the FBI probe still dominates election coverage. If Wikileaks is true to its word, Clinton and her campaign team will be unable to shift public attention away from the ballooning allegations of criminal corruption. This will remain the story of the election when polls open Tuesday morning.
The focus on Clinton’s alleged criminality in the final weeks of the election brings the 2016 presidential race to full circle. Since the contest began in the summer of 2015, it was clear that this would be an election like no other.
After eight years of Barack Obama’s White House, America is a different place than it was in 2008, when Obama ran on a platform of hope and change.
Americans today are angry, scared, divided and cynical.
The outcome of this presidential election will determine whether Obama’s fundamental transformation of America will become a done deal. If Clinton prevails, the Obama revolution will be irreversible.
If Republican nominee Donald Trump emerges the winner, America will embark on a different course.
But even support or opposition to Obama’s revolution is not what this election is about. The anger that Americans’ feel is more powerful than mere policy differences – no matter how strongly felt.
More than a referendum on Obama, Tuesday vote will be a vote about Republican nominee Donald Trump and what he has come to represent. Voters on Tuesday will have to decide what they oppose more: Trump or what he stands for.
Trump is without a doubt a morally dubious candidate.
His prolific record of trash talking make the allegations of sexual harassment leveled against him by multiple women in recent weeks ring true. So too, his willingness to truck in racially charged rhetoric, like his accusation that the Mexican government is sending its rapists and violent criminals across the border for Americans to deal with, has made him a deliberate object of revulsion for millions of American voters.
But for his supporters, who Trump is, is less important than what he represents. And what he represents is the voters’ rebellion against the American establishment – not just the political establishment, but the full spectrum of the American elite. From Washington to Wall Street, from college campuses to the media, tens of millions of Americans believe that their establishment is rotten to the core. And they support Trump because he is running against the establishment.
Popular resentment and animosity towards the powers that be was enough to win Trump the Republican nomination. And as he closes the gap with Clinton in the lead up to Tuesday, chances are rising that it will be enough to get him into the White House as well.
How did we get to this point? Trump’s rise has been in the making for a decade.
During the Bush administration, many Republicans quietly fretted that George W. Bush and his advisers didn’t know what they were doing in Iraq. They were angered even more by his bank bailout in 2008 and Bush’s massive increase of the national debt.
But as angry as they were at Bush, Republican anger at their leaders has grown exponentially during Obama’s tenure in office.
Since Obama entered office he has used the powers of his office to seize powers no president had ever dared to claim. And Republicans – who bore the brunt of the damage his policies caused – expected their presidential nominees and congressional representatives to protect them. They expected them to curb Obama’s perceived abuses at the IRS, the EPA, at the border with Mexico, the Justice Department, in the healthcare industry, the military, the State Department and beyond.
In both the 2008 and 2012 elections, millions of Republican voters were appalled by their successive nominees’ refusal to go on the offensive against Obama. In 2008, Sen. John McCain refused to mention Obama’s deep and longstanding ties with radical political and social forces, including his decades’ long relationship with his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, who regularly preached hatred for America from his pulpit.
In 2012, Mitt Romney simply choked. He couldn’t make a competent case against Obama or withstand media criticism, that as the Republican nominee he should have expected.
Indeed, in both cases, Republican voters walked away from their party’s defeat with the sense that their candidates care more about what media said about them than they cared about winning.
Republican voters took an even dimmer view of their congressional leadership. In both the 2010 and 2014 congressional elections, Republicans won majorities in both houses of Congress. The voters’ clear wish was for the Republican lawmakers to check Obama. But instead, the Republican leadership lashed out at their own voters while failing time after time to check Obama’s perceived abuse of power.
Case in point of course was the Republican Senate leadership’s failure to view Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran as a treaty, despite the fact that it clearly met the standard to be so viewed. By going along with Obama’s lie that the nuclear deal, which destroyed 70 years of US nuclear nonproliferation policy in one fell swoop, was a mere presidential agreement, the Senate leaders enabled Obama to implement his radical deal with little difficulty.
Trump was elected to be the Republican presidential nominee because Trump is the opposite of McCain, Romney and their counterparts in the GOP’s congressional leadership ranks. Trump isn’t merely running against Democrats and the liberal establishment. He is running against the Republican establishment as well. And his supporters love him for it.
Trump began building his anti-establishment credentials as soon as he announced his candidacy. At the first Republican primary debate in August 2015, he effectively declared war against the Republican establishment when he refused to pledge to support whatever candidate the party elected to serve as its nominee.
And the establishment understood that he was the gravest threat to their power and began attacking him.
What they didn’t understand was that he had goaded them into a fight that they could only lose.
The secret of Trump’s success has been a simple logical calculation. As the anti-establishment candidate, he has managed to castigate every criticism launched against him – no matter how valid – as the ravings of the corrupt establishment.
According to one analysis. 91 percent of the media coverage of Trump’s campaign has been negative.
But the negative press has only strengthened his supporters’ conviction that he is the man of the hour.
A poll taken by USA Today earlier this week makes the point clear. The poll asked likely voters, “What do you think is the primary threat that might try to change the election results?” For months, the Clinton campaign has claimed that Russian President Vladimir Putin is interfering in the election on Trump’s behalf. Yet a mere 10 percent of voters polled said that “foreign interests such as Russian hackers,” would try to steal the elections.
On the other hand, 46 percent said the news media would. Another 21 percent said “the national political establishment” was intervening in the elections to shift the vote in the direction they wish.
In other words, 67 percent of voters believe that the establishment Trump is running against is trying to steal the elections.
Anti-Trump voters can be grouped into three often overlapping categories. First, of course there are the Democrats. These voters want Clinton to win. They support what Obama has done as president. They support Clinton because they want to see Obama’s policies continued and because they think she is the best candidate for the job.
Second, there is the establishment itself. In August The Washington Examiner polled Washington elites.
Among members of the Beltway establishment, support for Clinton is overwhelming. She beat Trump 62-22 percent. Twenty percent of Washington Republicans said they support Clinton.
These first two groups of anti-Trump voters support Clinton, because they are more or less satisfied with the way things are.
The third group of anti-Trump voters oppose him, because they believe that he is unfit to serve. They are Republicans and Independents.
It is this third group that brings us to the greatest anomaly of the election. According to Real Clear Politics’ average of polling data, Trump is trailing Clinton in national polls in a four-way race 43-45 percent. But at the same time, a mere 38 percent of Americans have a favorable view of him. In other words, millions of Americans who cannot stand Trump intend to vote for him on Tuesday.
This anomaly is explained by the public’s revulsion with the establishment. And this brings us to the Wikileaks documents and the FBI’s reopening of its criminal probe of Clinton and her team.
Clinton’s support levels have not dropped in the polls in the week that passed since Comey informed Congress that he had reopened the email probe.
On October 28, the Real Clear Politics poll average placed voter support for Clinton at 44.9 percent. On November 2, it had risen to 45.3 percent.
In the same time period, Trump’s support level rose from 41 to 43.6 percent.
Trump is rising because Republicans who have been undecided or have supported Libertarian Gary Johnson have decided to make their peace with him.
The renewed investigations against Clinton are not driving her voters away from her. As Clinton herself argued hours after Comey’s decision became public, her supporters have already factored in her legal difficulties. Trump is rising because with every new report of Clinton’s alleged corruption, Republican and Independent voters are reminded of how corrupt the establishment has become.
Their view of the lesser of two evils is shifting.
By Wednesday we will know whether the Republicans and Independents who are now accepting Trump will be enough to put him over the top. But what is clear enough today is that the voters who reject the establishment and view it as incurably corrupt will give Clinton no quarter if she manages to eke out a victory. At the same time, the establishment’s hatred of Trump will foment Washington battles the likes of which we have never seen, if he wins on Tuesday.
There is a lot hanging in the balance in this election.
But only one question will determine the outcome.
If Trump wins on Tuesday, it will be the establishment he defeats.
http://www.CarolineGlick.com
Possibly the most pro-Israel president ever
Posted November 3, 2016 by danmillerinpanamaCategories: 2016 presidential debates, Donald Trump and Israel
Tags: Donald Trump and Israel
Possibly the most pro-Israel president ever, Israel National News, Michael Green, November 3, 2016
Last week, Donald Trump’s supporters held a rally in Jerusalem, during which, a short, taped message from Trump was shown. In it, Trump said he loved Israel – but of course, he says he loves everyone – and that he would work to bridge the gap between Americans and Israelis and help restore security to both countries.
The question is, can we really trust that Donald Trump will be pro-Israel? Have we not seen past Presidential candidates make pro-Israel declarations only to change their tune once elected? Furthermore, it seems that Trump has flip-flopped on some of his statements about Israel.
What makes a pro-Israel President?
First, a President who respects Israel’s strategic predicament in the Middle East and allows Israel to make its own decisions – regarding peace and war – without putting undue to pressure on it.
Second, a President who sees Israel as a strategic asset and thus pursues opportunities for joint cooperation and increased cooperation in various areas.
Third, a President who stands by Israel diplomatically at the UN and in other international forums.
If elected, Donald Trump might be the most pro-Israel President in US history, and this assessment has virtually nothing to do with anything he has said about Israel. It is based on his character traits and the central message of his campaign – both of which bode well for Israel.
Donald Trump appreciates strength, distinguishes between the bad guys and the good guys, loves to enjoy life, and is frugal with his money. Trump has spoken often about the need for strength, for a strong military, for toughness against US enemies, even his wife talks about the need to be strong. Trump understands who the good guys and bad guys are. He isn’t confused by certain ideologies which justify terrorism or even give it some credence due to socio-economic or other conditions. He understands the connection between Islam and terror and their hatred for people who are not like them.
This bodes well for Israel since he will appreciate the strength of the Israeli army in dealing with all of its enemies, and the resolve of the Israeli people not to be affected by terrorists trying to destroy their lives. He will appreciate the valuable assets that Israel provides as a strategic ally, and understands that a strong Israel not only makes the U.S safer, but allows for the U.S. to have a reduced footprint in the Middle East. Furthermore, his sense of right and wrong allows him to correctly understand the fundamental difference between Israel trying to defend itself and the Palestinians who educate their children to hate while training them to be terrorists.
Trump’s love of life and its pleasures makes him particularly averse to terrorists and criminals. For him, not only are they bad people, but they disturb people who want to enjoy life. This is why one of Trump’s strong messages throughout his campaign has been restoring law and order, so everyone can enjoy life.
Trump comes to political life without a set ideology. While some parts of his character are more conservative, others are more liberal, but in general he is a problem solver. Thus, he has no preconceived notions about the Middle East nor is he obligated by how past US Presidents have viewed the Middle East. He is not bound by the idea of land for peace, or a two state solution, he calls the Middle East as he sees it, which is that there are lot of ‘bad dudes’ and there is one normal, peaceful democratic country in the whole area.
Piers Morgan once commented that Trump looks at everything in life like a deal, and he likes to make good deals as he said thousands of times throughout the campaign. Part of his ‘deal-making’ is paying as little as possible and getting maximum returns. Throughout the campaign he has bragged about spending so much less than his opponents but still winning. He has managed to spend less money on buying media coverage by noting that he receives so much free media. The fact that he is raising most of the money for his campaign from small donors only reinforces this notion of trying to spend as little money as possible. Additionally, he has attacked NATO partners for not paying their fair share, and explicitly criticized the US for defending other nations without receiving anything in return.
If Israel looks to take the lead as a regional power in the Middle East, Trump will have no objection. He will also not object to Israel doing what is necessary to make itself safer, which for Trump means reducing the power of the bad guys. Trump will be more than happy to save American money and lives while letting Israel advance its agenda. Moreover, in the event of an attack on Iran, Trump would be more than happy to let Israel take the lead.
Trump is running for President to make America great by focusing on America’s issues. Trump’s only interest in foreign policy is to protect America from those whom he believes rip off the US in trade, bombing ISIS and stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. Therefore, Trump will not be embarking on adventures worldwide for world peace and certainly will not be wasting his time forcing Israel into negotiations, or into deals that it is uninterested in.
In short, because of his character traits and his central agenda, Trump will allow Israel to make its own decisions, while simultaneously understanding there is much to gain through increased partnering with Israel. He will back Israel unwaveringly at the UN since he understands that Israel and America have shared goals and interests, and because of his common sense approach, he really has no problem with Israel building on whatever land is under their control, especially since he is aware that the land that has been given up by Israel has been used as a launching pad for attacks.
But its not only his character traits and campaign themes which signal a stronger relationship in the next 4 years, it’s also his many advisers – VP Pence, Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani, Dr. Walid Phares, Michael Flynn, who are all either outright pro-Israel or who understand the realities of the Middle East in the sense that the Middle East is laced with problems and the central issue is radical Islam and not the Palestinian Arabs.
A Trump Presidency will be a time where Israel becomes stronger and expands its partnership with America, and a time where Israel and the US will stand shoulder to shoulder facing the many evils of the world.
And as Mike Pence has said many times: “If the world knows nothing else, let it know this – America stands with Israel.”
Putin hits Europe for letting Muslim migrants get away with crimes: “A society that cannot defend its children has no future”
Posted November 3, 2016 by danmillerinpanamaCategories: Europe, Islamic invasion, Islamist terrorists, Islamists and children, Putin
Tags: Europe, Islamic invasion, Islamist terror, Islamists and children, Putin
Russia has become the bogeyman of the 2016 presidential election, with the Democrats far more exercised about the threat from Moscow than they ever were during the Cold War (which they spent ridiculing those who thought there was a genuine threat from the Soviet Union). But however villainous one may think Putin is, he is absolutely right here: the massive influx of Muslim migrants in Europe has caused a “dissolution of traditional national values,” and indeed, “a society that cannot defend its children has no future.” That’s the United Kingdom, with its massive Muslim rape gang activity that authorities feared being called “racist” and “Islamophobic” if they stopped, and Austria with its release of the Muslim migrant who raped a 10-year-old boy — indeed, the illness has overtaken all of Europe’s political and media elites.
“‘A society that can’t defend its children has no tomorrow’: Putin condemns Europe’s handling of migrants and says the child rape in Austria shows ‘a dilution of national values,’” by Jennifer Newton, MailOnline, November 3, 2016:
Vladimir Putin has waded into the migrant crisis condemning Europe’s handling of asylum seekers and saying a case of child rape in Austria ‘dilutes national values’….
The Russian president has largely kept quiet over the refugee crisis in Europe but has now spoken out of his disbelief over its handling claiming that a continent that ‘can’t protect its children’ has no future.
His comments come off the back of a case in Austria last week, which saw an Iraqi migrant have his conviction of raping a 10-year-old boy at a swimming pool in Vienna overturned.
He was originally convicted of the crime but it was overturned because a court didn’t prove he realised the boy was saying no.
It came after the migrant, identified as 20-year-old Amir A., claimed that it was a ‘sexual emergency’ because he had not had sex for four months.
A second trial for the rape is expected to take place next year, but the attacker is likely to remain in custody until then.
And speaking at a press conference this week, Putin slammed Europe’s migration policy and cited the case, where the victim was from a Serbian family living in Austria.
He said: ‘In a European country, a child is raped by a migrant, and the court releases him.
‘It doesn’t fit into my head what on earth they’re thinking over there.
‘I can’t even explain the rationale – is it a sense of guilt before the migrants? What’s going on? It’s not clear.’
He also claimed that the case highlighted ‘the dissolution of traditional national values’ adding: ‘A society that cannot defend its children has no future.’
And Putin’s words appeared to have struck a chord, as he is extremely popular with Serbs.
In the rape case, the boy had arrived in Austria with his Serbian mother, who paid for him to go to the Theresienbad swimming pool, where he was violently attacked.
The boy was so badly injured that he needed hospital treatment but he will be forced to go back to court for the Iraqi man’s second trial, outraging the Austrian Serbian community….
In March, Konstantin Romodanovsky, head of Russia’s Federal Migration Service accused leaders of willfully ignoring cultural differences that have caused such widespread friction and chaos across the Continent.
He also added that ‘multiculturalism has failed’ because Europe never formed a unified strategy to integrate refugees into Western society….
Romodanovsky also accused EU countries of ignoring the ‘differences in culture, religious traditions, and customs’ with the refugees, the vast majority of whom are Islamic.
LIVE Stream: Melania Trump Rally in Berwyn, Pennsylvania (11/3/2016) Trump Live Berwyn PA Speech
Posted November 3, 2016 by danmillerinpanamaCategories: 2016 elections, Donald Trump campaign, Melania Trump, Trump rallies
Tags: Donald Trump campaign, Melania Trump, Trump rallies
(Melania Trump’s address begins at approximately one hour into the video — DM)
Germany Captures ISIS Infiltrator in Refugee Flow
Posted November 3, 2016 by danmillerinpanamaCategories: Europe, Germany, Germany open borders, Islamic invasion, Islamic terror groups, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation
Tags: Europe, Germany, Germany open borders, Islamic invasion, Islamic terror groups, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation
Germany Captures ISIS Infiltrator in Refugee Flow, Counter Jihad, November 3 , 2016
How many of those who have “gone missing” did so in order to build terrorist cells, or to plan attacks? We will likely find out only as each attack occurs, as the police resources are vastly overstretched by the scale of the refugee flows. Belgian police correctly identified some of the Brussels bombers, but had to drop its inquiry into them because it could not spare the resources for that particular case. German police are likewise facing a crime wave that is overwhelming their available resources. Leaked reports indicate that German police only expect this refugee crime wave to worsen, as they lack the resources to stop it — or even to track where the refugees go once admitted to the country.
********************
A young Syrian man has been captured in Germany after conducting pre-attack surveillance and recruiting at least one German to join the fight for the Islamic State (ISIS). The Syrian, identified as Shaas Al-M., presented himself as a refugee from the conflict in Syria. In fact, he was an ISIS fighter on a mission to conduct terrorist attacks inside Europe.
He is not alone, the British newspaper Express reports.
There were two Islamist attacks by migrants in July.
Earlier this month another bogus Syrian migrant was captured after a bomb he was building was found in his apartment in the easter city of Chemnitz.
The phrase “bogus Syrian migrant” is confusing. This was a legitimately a migrant from Syria, and not (say) a Korean trying to pass himself off as Syrian in order to migrate to Germany. However, this migrant was not genuinely a refugee from the violence. Rather, he came for the express purpose of creating new Islamist violence. His job was to conduct attacks in Europe’s heartland in order to create pressure on them not to intervene against ISIS within the physical space of its Caliphate.
Politicians in Europe and America have alike defended the idea that refugees do not represent a serious security challenge to the West. Candidate Hillary Clinton has argued for an increase of 550 percent in the number of refugees admitted to the United States from Syria. Former political appointees from Homeland Security for the Obama administration have likewise tried to sell the idea that “vetting” will solve whatever problems these refugees pose, although in fact there are no longer intact security services within Syria with whom we might vet them — nor any reason the Assad regime, our enemy, would tell us the truth about them if it could do so.
Meanwhile, security professionals have been giving increasingly loud warnings about the danger of terrorists in the refugee flows. The Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, said that terrorists were appearing in refugee flows “daily.” Head of the CIA John Brennan said that terrorists were definitely using the refugee flows to penetrate Western Europe and, from there, America.
Even Hillary Clinton herself admitted in one of her private paid-for speeches, disclosed only by an unauthorized leak, that “we can’t possibly vet all those refugees.”
It turns out that even the ones who are not terrorists still bring substantial crime and social instability. Germany’s new police figures show a spike of well over a hundred thousand new crimes in the first half of this year, tied to refugees.
Migrants in Germany have committed 142,500 crimes in just six months, police figures have revealed
This was the equivalent of 780 crimes a day – an increase of nearly 40 percent over 2015, according to data from Germany’s Federal Criminal Police Office… ‘Migrant crime statistics for all of 2016, when they become available, are likely to show a significant increase over the 2015 numbers. One reason for this is that thousands of migrants who entered the country as ‘asylum seekers’ or ‘refugees’ have gone missing.’
How many of those who have “gone missing” did so in order to build terrorist cells, or to plan attacks? We will likely find out only as each attack occurs, as the police resources are vastly overstretched by the scale of the refugee flows. Belgian police correctly identified some of the Brussels bombers, but had to drop its inquiry into them because it could not spare the resources for that particular case. German police are likewise facing a crime wave that is overwhelming their available resources. Leaked reports indicate that German police only expect this refugee crime wave to worsen, as they lack the resources to stop it — or even to track where the refugees go once admitted to the country.
J-Street Makes Best Pro-Trump Pro-Israel Endorsement Video Ever
Posted November 3, 2016 by danmillerinpanamaCategories: 2016 elections, Donald Trump, Israeli media, J Street
Tags: Donald Trump, Israeli media, J Street
J-Street Makes Best Pro-Trump Pro-Israel Endorsement Video Ever, Jewish Press, November 3, 2016
Thanks to Brian of London, who only had to do some really minor tweaking, J-Street put out the best pro-Trump pro-Israel video ever.
The truth is, even without the tweaks the video would be a stunning endorsement for anyone who is pro-Israel.
anneinpt
artaxes
danmillerinpanama
davidking1530
Peter Hofman
Joseph Wouk
Peter
Louisiana Steve
Recent Comments