White House Accuses Syria Of Planning Another Chemical Attack, Warns “Will Pay Heavy Price”

Posted June 27, 2017 by joopklepzeiker
Categories: Uncategorized

Source: White House Accuses Syria Of Planning Another Chemical Attack, Warns “Will Pay Heavy Price” | Zero Hedge

Less than three months after the US launched 49 cruise missiles at a Syrian airbase in early April, allegedly in retaliation for a chemical attack conducted by Assad forces, in an ominous statement issued with no supporting evidence or further explanation, on Monday night the White House warned that the U.S. has “identified potential preparations for another chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime” in Syria and warned that Assad would “pay a heavy price” if one took place.

Such an attack “would likely result in the mass murder of civilians, including innocent children,” White House (outgoing) spokesman Sean Spicer added, noting the activity is “similar to preparations the regime made before its April 4, 2017 chemical weapons attack.”

“As we have previously stated, the United States is in Syria to eliminate the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.  If, however, Mr. Assad conducts another mass murder attack using chemical weapons, he and his military will pay a heavy price,” the White House added on Monday night.

According to AP, a non-governmental source with close ties to the White House said the administration had received intelligence that the Syrians were mixing precursor chemicals for a possible sarin gas attack in either the east of south of the country, where government troops and their proxies have faced recent setbacks.

Further quoted by AP, several State Department officials typically involved in coordinating such announcements said they were caught completely off guard by the warning, which didn’t appear to be discussed in advance with other national security agencies, perhaps an indication of just how powerful the Deep State has become under Trump. Typically, the State Department, the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence agencies would all be consulted before the White House issued a declaration sure to ricochet across foreign capitals.

As a reminder, the justification for Trump’s strike on the Shayrat airfield in Syria in April was to retaliate for what the White House said was a poison gas attack by Assad’s government that killed at least 70 people in rebel-held territory. Syria denied it carried out the attack. Overnight, however, a new article by Pulitzer winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh (in a German newspaper of all places) has again accused the US of lying about Syria’s chemical weapons, and claims that the US bombed Syria in what was the latest attempt to “rally around the flag” and distract from Trump’s ongoing domestic scandals.

Predictably, the White House has provided no immediate evidence to back up its claims, however in a media world that is desperate for clicks, we doubt many will demand proof this time, unlike the April strike, when Russia requested a broad UN inquiry into whether Assad indeed used chemical weapons, in which the US has declined to participate for obvious reasons.

April’s strike put Washington in confrontation with Russia, which has advisers in Syria aiding its close ally Assad. US officials at the time called the intervention a “one-off” intended to deter future chemical weapons attacks and not an expansion of the U.S. role in the Syrian war. The United States has taken a series of actions over the past three months demonstrating its willingness to carry out strikes, mostly in self-defense, against Syrian government forces and their backers, including Iran.

And, as if expressly intending to further deteriorate already abysmal relations with Russia, shortly after the White House statement, the US ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said on Twitter: “Any further attacks done to the people of Syria will be blamed on Assad, but also on Russia and Iran who support him killing his own people.

Since the April military strike, Washington has repeatedly struck Iranian-backed militia and even shot down a drone threatening U.S.-led coalition forces. The U.S. military also shot down a Syrian jet earlier this month. Trump has also ordered stepped-up military operations against the Islamic State militant group and delegated more authority to his generals.

So far Russia has refused to respond in deed to repeated US provocations over Syria.

Seymour Hersh: US Lied About Syrian Chemical Attack Then Bombed Them Anyway

Posted June 27, 2017 by joopklepzeiker
Categories: Uncategorized

Source: Seymour Hersh: US Lied About Syrian Chemical Attack Then Bombed Them Anyway | Zero Hedge

Liberty Blitzkrieg’s Mike Krieger notes that part of Trump’s appeal to many of his voters was, at least ostensibly, the idea that he would employ a less hawkish/neocon foreign policy than his opponent Hillary “We Came, We Saw, He Died” Clinton.

While it’s still too early to decisively say that Trump will usher in yet another foreign policy disaster for these United States and the world, it’s certainly not looking good.

 

The lobbing of tomahawk missiles into Syrian based on the fairytale that Assad launched a chemical weapons attack was the first sign that Trump is easily manipulated and impulsive. In fact, the episode bothered me so much I wrote a post detailing the dire ramifications titled, Prepare for Impact – This is the Beginning of the End for U.S. Empire.  I suggest taking a read if you missed it the first time, it’s my most popular post of the year.

 

While that was bad enough, Trump’s cozying up to the barbaric, terrorist-supporitng leaders of Saudi Arabia has been by far the most concerning aspect of his foreign policy (if you can call it that) so far. This policy has become even more dangerous now that the 30-year old princeling who is leading the Saudis’ increasingly aggressive stance in the region has been named crown prince. It appears Trump is willing to let the Saudis do whatever they want in the region, which is guaranteed to have disastrous implications for America and the Middle East.

But a new Seymour Hersh article is out showing that the US knew there was no Assad chemical attack in April, but President Trump decided to bomb anyway.

And the details are shocking… as TheAntiMedia.org’s Darius Shahtahmasebi details, never one to accept the U.S. government’s official explanation of events without question, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh has investigated Donald Trump’s decision to strike the al-Shayat Airbase in Syria in April of this year, which the president launched amid widespread allegations that the Syrian government committed a chemical weapons attack.

In a report entitled “Trump’s Red Line,” published Sunday in the daily German newspaper Die Welt, Hersh asserts that President Donald Trump ignored important intelligence reports when he made the decision to attack Syria after pictures emerged of dying children in the war-torn country.

For those of us without goldfish memories, Hersh’s recent investigation is reminiscent of his previous examination of the alleged chemical weapons attacks in 2013, detailed in an article entitled “Whose Sarin?” That article was published in the London Review of Books.

The official White House explanation for the events in April of this year was that Donald Trump was moved by the suffering of “beautiful” Syrian babies – the same Syrian babies he doesn’t want to set foot in the United States – and decided to punish the Syrian government for the attack two days after it allegedly occurred. This punishment came in the form of an airstrike despite the lack of a thorough investigation regarding what took place that fateful day in April and who was ultimately culpable (though the Trump administration insisted they were certain that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was to blame).

In that context, it should come as no surprise that Trump acted rashly without consideration of the facts on the ground. However, what is most disturbing about Hersh’s account is the fact that, according to his source, Trump was well aware that the U.S. had no solid intelligence linking the Syrian government to a chemical weapons attack — and that’s because, according to Hersh’s article, it’s doubtful a chemical weapons attack occurred at all.

Hersh reports:

“The available intelligence made clear that the Syrians had targeted a jihadist meeting site on April 4 using a Russian-supplied guided bomb equipped with conventional explosives. Details of the attack,  including information on its so-called high-value targets, had been provided by the Russians days in advance to American and allied military officials in Doha, whose mission is to coordinate all U.S., allied, Syrian and Russian Air Force operations in the region.”

 

“None of this makes any sense,” one officer reportedly told colleagues upon learning of the decision to bomb Syria, according to Hersh. We KNOW that there was no chemical attack … the Russians are furious. Claiming we have the real intel and know the truth … I guess it didn’t matter whether we elected Clinton or Trump.”

According to Hersh, Trump “could not be swayed” by 48 hours worth of intense briefings and decision-making following the initial reports of the alleged chemical weapons attack. Hersh, who reportedly reviewed transcripts of real-time communications, explains that there is a “total disconnect” between the president and his military advisers and intelligence officials.

As is the case with Syrian military operations, Russia gave the U.S. details of the carefully planned attack on a meeting in Khan Sheikhoun, according to Hersh’s  admittedly anonymous sources. The Russians had employed a drone to the area days before the attack to develop the intelligence necessary to coordinate it.

According to Hersh’s sources, the United States and its Russian counterpart routinely share information regarding planned attacks in order to avoid collisions. However, they also permit “coordination,”  a practice that involves giving the other side a “hot tip about a command and control facility,” which then helps the other side carry out their attack.

Therefore, there was no surprise chemical weapons attack, as the Trump administration alleged. In fact, Russia had actually warned its American counterpart on the off-chance that there were any CIA assets on the ground who should have been forewarned of an impending attack.

“They [the Russians] were playing the game right,” a senior adviser told Hersh.

Hersh continues:

“Russian and Syrian intelligence officials, who coordinate operations closely with the American command posts, made it clear that the planned strike on Khan Sheikhoun was special because of the high-value target. ‘It was a red-hot change. The mission was out of the ordinary – scrub the sked,’ the senior adviser told me. ‘Every operations officer in the region’ – in the Army, Marine Corps, Air Force, CIA and NSA – ‘had to know there was something going on. The Russians gave the Syrian Air Force a guided bomb and that was a rarity. They’re skimpy with their guided bombs and rarely share them with the Syrian Air Force. And the Syrians assigned their best pilot to the mission, with the best wingman.’ The advance intelligence on the target, as supplied by the Russians, was given the highest possible score inside the American community.

Hersh confirms Russia’s account of the incident, in which Russian authorities alleged that the Syrian Air Force bombed a “terrorist warehouse,” and that secondary bombings dispersed dangerous chemicals into the atmosphere.

Strangely, if Hersh’s reporting is accurate, it is not clear why Russia didn’t give the detailed account at the time — and why the Russians didn’t emphasize that they had shared information with the U.S. military well in advance of the attack, as this would have cast further doubt on the official U.S. narrative. In that context, Russia could have provided proof of any prior communications that took place within the so-called deconfliction channel. It also doesn’t explain why Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, appeared to endorse two competing theories behind the events at Khan Sheikhoun.

However, Hersh continues:

“A team from Médecins Sans Frontières, treating victims from Khan Sheikhoun at a clinic 60 miles to the north, reported that ‘eight patients showed symptoms – including constricted pupils, muscle spasms and involuntary defecation – which are consistent with exposure to a neurotoxic agent such as sarin gas or similar compounds.’ MSF also visited other hospitals that had received victims and found that patients there ‘smelled of bleach, suggesting that they had been exposed to chlorine.’ In other words, evidence suggested that there was more than one chemical responsible for the symptoms observed, which would not have been the case if the Syrian Air Force – as opposition activists insisted – had dropped a sarin bomb, which has no percussive or ignition power to trigger secondary explosions. The range of symptoms is, however, consistent with the release of a mixture of chemicals, including chlorine and the organophosphates used in many fertilizers, which can cause neurotoxic effects similar to those of sarin.

Hersh is not the first high-profile investigator to cast major doubts on the Trump administration’s official narrative regarding the events at Khan Sheikhoun. MIT professor emeritus Theodore Postol, who previously worked as a former scientific advisor to the U.S. military’s Chief of Naval Operations, poked major holes in the claims that the Syrian government had launched a chemical weapons attack at Khan Sheikhoun, noting the “politicization” of intelligence findings (you can access all of his reports here). Postol argued that there was no possible way U.S. government officials could have been sure Assad was behind the attack before they launched their strike, even though they claimed to be certain. Postol took the conversation even further, asserting that the available evidence pointed to an attack that was executed by individuals on the ground, not from an aircraft. Former weapons inspector Scott Ritter had similar concerns regarding the White House’s conclusions, as did former U.K. ambassador to Syria Peter Ford. The mainstream media paid almost zero attention to these reports, a slight that exposes the media’s complicity in allowing these acts of war to go ahead unquestioned.

“This was not a chemical weapons strike,” the adviser said. “That’s a fairy tale. If so, everyone involved in transferring, loading and arming the weapon – you’ve got to make it appear like a regular 500-pound conventional bomb – would be wearing Hazmat protective clothing in case of a leak. There would be very little chance of survival without such gear. Military grade sarin includes additives designed to increase toxicity and lethality. Every batch that comes out is maximized for death. That is why it is made. It is odorless and invisible and death can come within a minute. No cloud. Why produce a weapon that people can run away from?”

According to Hersh’s source, within hours of viewing the footage of the ‘attack’ and its aftermath, Trump ordered his national defense apparatus to plan for retaliation against the Syrian government. Hersh explains that despite the CIA and the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) having no evidence that Syria even had sarin, let alone that they used it on the battlefield, Trump was not easily persuaded once he had made up his mind.

“Everyone close to him knows his proclivity for acting precipitously when he does not know the facts,” the adviser told Hersh. He doesn’t read anything and has no real historical knowledge. He wants verbal briefings and photographs. He’s a risk-taker. He can accept the consequences of a bad decision in the business world; he will just lose money. But in our world, lives will be lost and there will be long-term damage to our national security if he guesses wrong. He was told we did not have evidence of Syrian involvement and yet Trump says: ‘Do it.”’ [emphasis added]

At a meeting on April 6, 2017, at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, Trump spoke with his national security officials regarding the best way to move forward. The meeting was not to decide what to do, Hersh explains, but how best to do it (and how to keep Trump as happy as possible).

Trump was given four options. The first one was dismissed at the outset because it involved doing nothing. The second one was the one that was decided upon: a minimal show of force (with advance warning to Russia). The third option was the strike package that Obama was unable to implement in 2013 in the face of mounting public opposition and Russia’s threats of intervention. This plan was Hillary Clinton’s ultimate fantasy considering she was encouraging it moments before Trump’s lone strike actually took place. However, this would have involved extensive air strikes on Assad’s airfields and would have drawn in the Russian military to a point of no return. The fourth option involved the direct assassination of the Syrian president by bombing his palaces, as well as his underground bunkers. This was not considered, either.

As we all witnessed in April, the second option was adopted, and the airbase Trump struck was up and running again in less than 24 hours, making it a very symbolic and empty show of force.

Hersh’s insight into the way Trump is conducting his foreign policy does not bode well for the future of the Syrian conflict (or anywhere else in the world, for that matter). Trump was not interested in the intelligence or the facts on the ground — if he had been, he would have waited until an investigation had determined culpability before ordering a strike.

Missing from Hersh’s account, however, is the fact that it was newly appointed national security advisor General H.R. McMaster who laid out the military strike proposals to the president at his resort on April 6. McMaster replaced former national security advisor Michael Flynn after the latter was forced to resign due to leaks from within the intelligence community. Due to Flynn’s alleged ties to Russia, it seems unlikely he would have proposed such a strike on Russia’s close ally to begin with.

It is unclear whether McMaster proposed the strikes in order to appease Trump or because McMaster ultimately wants Trump to adopt a tougher stance against Syria and Russia; McMaster has a history of pro-interventionism and anti-Russian sentiment.

Those commentators who can review these startling revelations but still condone Trump’s actions with a lazy ‘Assad is still a bad guy and must be overthrown’ mindset argument are being intellectually dishonest, with themselves and others. As was the case in 2013, there is still very little evidence that Assad has ever used chemical weapons — particularly in the attacks that the U.S. has tried to pin on him — yet this is the standard by which the corporate media and our respective governments have instructed us to judge Assad. Even without this conclusive evidence, shortly after the April events, U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley stated Assad will fall from power.

Hersh’s investigation bolsters many claims that the U.S. acted rashly without first conducting or ordering an impartial inquiry regarding what happened in April of this year. Hersh’s report also serves as a reminder to the world of the warpath we are continuing down, spearheaded by an impulsive and reckless megalomaniac who has no interest in ascertaining fact from fiction.

*  *  *

Liberty Blitzkrieg’s Mike Krieger also notes that just as interesting as the information above, is the fact that Hersh had to turn to a German newspaper to publish it. This makes perfect sense, because the one area where U.S. corporate press maintains unassailable consistency is when it comes to cheerleading for an interventionist, imperial foreign policy based on unverified claims and outright lies. Trump’s little fireworks display checked all those boxes, which is why the corporate media drooled all over the bombing, celebrating Trump for the first time of his Presidency. As Hersh notes:

After the meeting, with the Tomahawks on their way, Trump spoke to the nation from Mar-a-Lago, and accused Assad of using nerve gas to choke out “the lives of helpless men, women and children. It was a slow and brutal death for so many … No child of God should ever suffer such horror.”

 

The next few days were his most successful as president. America rallied around its commander in chief, as it always does in times of war.

 

Trump, who had campaigned as someone who advocated making peace with Assad, was bombing Syria 11 weeks after taking office, and was hailed for doing so by Republicans, Democrats and the media alike. One prominent TV anchorman, Brian Williams of MSNBC, used the word “beautiful” to describe the images of the Tomahawks being launched at sea. Speaking on CNN, Fareed Zakaria said: “I think Donald Trump became president of the United States.” 

 

A review of the top 100 American newspapers showed that 39 of them published editorials supporting the bombing in its aftermath, including the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal.

Which once again goes to show just how worthless, irresponsible and downright dangerous U.S. corporate media really is.

Finally, as Ron Paul rages below, Republicans cannot let go of “regime change” for Syria and new Cold War with Russia — even as the Democrats are starting to back away. Will the mainstream media stick with the narrative as well? Or is it all about to come crashing down?

 

After IDF retaliates for spillover, Syrian army warns Israel

Posted June 26, 2017 by joopklepzeiker
Categories: Uncategorized

Regime says three Syrian soldiers killed, maintains it will hold Jewish state responsible for hostilities

June 25, 2017, 11:35 pm

Source: After IDF retaliates for spillover, Syrian army warns Israel | The Times of Israel

A picture taken from the Israeli side of the Israeli-Syrian border shows smoke rising near the border in the Golan Heights, during fights between rebels and the Syrian army on June 25, 2017. (Basel Awidat/ Flash90)

The Syrian army on Sunday issued a warning to Israel, following two IDF retaliatory strikes on its territory in as many days for spillover fire from the war-torn country.

The regime said that three Syrian soldiers had been killed by Israeli fire.

 Around 10 mortar shells from Syria struck the Golan Heights on Saturday, prompting an Israeli response that reportedly killed two Syrian soldiers. On Sunday, several more projectiles hit Israel, in what the army said was spillover fire.

The IDF on Sunday again responded to the errant fire, confirming it targeted a Syrian military vehicle. Arab media reports said five people were injured in the Israeli raid.

“The general staff of the Syrian army warns of the dangers of these aggressive actions and holds the Israeli enemy responsible for the grave consequences of these repeated actions, despite any excuse there may be,” the Ynet news site quoted the Syrian military as saying.

The Syrian general staff also published photos of at least three men it said were Syrian soldiers killed in Israeli strikes. It did not provide a date or any other information on when they were killed.

Also on Sunday, Syrian Defense Minister Fahd Jassem al-Freij visited troops in southern Syria to mark the end of the Ramadan monthlong fast where he vowed the regime would continue fighting until it conquers “every morsel of the homeland.”

In Sunday’s strike, the IDF “targeted two artillery positions and an ammunitions truck belonging to the Syrian regime,” an Israeli military statement read, noting the army had also ordered Israelis to keep away from open areas along the border near Quneitra, where internal fighting was heavy.

Archive photo: An Israeli army tank is seen stationed near the Golan Heights village of Majdal Shams, March 19, 2014. (AFP/Jalaa Marey)

Archive: An Israeli army tank is seen stationed near the Golan Heights village of Majdal Shams, March 19, 2014. (AFP/Jalaa Marey/File)

Sunday’s mortar fire was the seventh such incident in a week and came as fighting between Assad’s regime and the numerous rebel groups in southern Syria has been escalating.

Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman warned Saturday night that the regime would continue to “suffer the consequences” of any attack on Israel emanating from its territory.

Israel, he said, had “no intention of accepting challenges to our sovereignty and threats to our security, even if they are caused by ‘spillover’” from Syrian infighting.

“We will respond strongly, resolutely and with levelheadedness to any such case,” he said. “As far as we are concerned the Assad regime is responsible for what occurs in its territory and will continue to suffer the consequences if such events recur.”

Israel has tried to stay out of the six-year civil war in Syria and refrained from taking sides, but has responded to spillover fire on numerous occasions.

Israel also is believed to have carried out airstrikes on suspected weapons shipments to its archenemy Hezbollah, whose fighters are in Syria backing government forces.

AP, AFP contributed to this report.

Will Iran’s Israel doomsday clock join history’s list of failed predictions?

Posted June 26, 2017 by josephwouk
Categories: Uncategorized

Source: Will Iran’s Israel doomsday clock join history’s list of failed predictions? – Israel News – Jerusalem Post 

ByBecky Brothman
June 25, 2017 13:13
While we shake in our boots for the next 25 years, let’s take a look some of at history’s past failures.
Iran Israel

Iran unveils a clock to countdown to the destruction of Israel. (photo credit:screenshot)

Israel will be celebrating its 92nd — and supposedly last — birthday in 2040. Our day of destruction will also festively be shared with the 100th anniversary of the first remote operation of a computer; the 105th birthday of Israeli actor Chaim Topol of Fiddler on the Roof fame; and, oddly enough, the 47th anniversary of the Palestine Liberation Organization officially recognizing Israel as a legitimate state. Which one of these events will be worthy of a Google Doodle on September 9, 2040?

While we shake in our boots for the next 25 years, let’s take a look some of at history’s failed predictions.

The War to End All Wars
War ravaged the globe from 1914 to 1918. Millions of people were killed, new chemical weapons caused horrific injuries, and entire monarchies collapsed. No wonder people called it the War to End All Wars. Unfortunately, peace did not last long and the War to End All Wars was quickly followed up by another global war that unleashed even more destruction. The 1914-1918 war was thus renamed as the First World War.

Donald Rumsfeld on the Iraq War
Tensions with Iraq and the Bush administration were at an all-time high after 9/11 and everyone could see that war was on the horizon. When asked how long a war would last during a 2002 CBS radio interview, then US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, “I can’t tell you if the use of force in Iraq today would last five days, or five weeks, or five months, but it certainly isn’t going to last any longer than that.” In February 2003, prior to the March invasion of Iraq, Rumsfeld told people in a town hall meeting that “And it is not knowable if force will be used, but if it is to be used, it is not knowable how long that conflict would last. It could last, you know, six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.” The War in Iraq lasted nearly 8 years and 9 months, officially ending in December 2011, and US troops remain in the country in the fight against ISIS.

It’s the end of world as we know it
People, in their unwavering optimism, have been predicting the end of the world for millennia. Notable failed end of the world predictions have come from Pope Innocent III, who predicted that the world would end in 1284, 666 years after the founding of Islam; Sabbatai Zevi, who claimed to be the Messiah and used the Kabbalah to predict the Earth’s demise in 1648; and of course, the Mayan apocalypse theory that claimed the world would end on December 21, 2012. As far as we know, the world still exists and will continue to do so — at least until 2040 when we will all be destroyed.

An Iranian girl holds a model of a missile during the al-Quds Day rally in Tehran (photo credit: STRINGER / AFP)An Iranian girl holds a model of a missile during the al-Quds Day rally in Tehran (photo credit: STRINGER / AFP)

The cinema won’t last
“Cinema is little more than a passing fad. It’s canned drama. What audiences really want to see is flesh and blood on the stage.” Charlie Chaplin became one of cinema’s greatest stars of all time, so he learned first-hand how wrong his prediction, made in 1916, was. Likewise as talkies — aka movies with sound — made their debut in 1927, Harry Warner, one of the founders of Warner Bros. studios, was quoted as saying, “Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?”

Y2K bug fails to launch
If you were watching TV at any point in 1999, you’ll remember the mass hysteria that the fear of the Y2K bug produced. According to analysts, many computers registered dates as just two digits due to a programming issue and when the new year rolled around, these computer would read 00 as 1900 instead of 2000, causing major tech crashes. People were obsessed, many thought their bank accounts would disappear overnight and horded household supplies and canned food. The new year came and went, and with some minor exceptions, the Y2K bug did not sting. I hope the canned food was returnable.

A failure of Titanic proportions
Was this a failed prediction or a huge jinx? Probably owing to its never-before-seen size, people were worried about the Titanic. However they were reassured over and over again that the Titanic was unsinkable. A crew member exclaimed to Titanic passenger Sylvia Caldwell that “God himself could not sink this ship!” As rumors began to surface of disaster, Phillip Franklin, the vice president of White Star Line which made the ship, told reporters, “We place absolute confidence in the Titanic. We believe that the boat is unsinkable.” Well, we’ve all seen the James Cameron movie. The Titanic hit an iceberg and sank on April 15, 1912, killing more than 1500 people.

We here at The Jerusalem Post look forward to adding Iran’s countdown clock to the list on September 10, 2040.

Leftist Illegalophilia, Not Islamophobia, Killed a Muslim Teen

Posted June 26, 2017 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: Illegal aliens, Islamophobia, Media and illegal aliens, Media and Islam, MS-13 in America, Violent crime

Tags: , , , , ,

Leftist Illegalophilia, Not Islamophobia, Killed a Muslim Teen, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, June 26, 2017

Fairfax County’s refusal to investigate illegal aliens made it a magnet for a rising illegal alien population. Its jails have nearly 2,000 illegal aliens and the area has become a magnet for the El Salvadoran MS-13 gang. It’s unknown whether Torres was an MS-13 member, but his behavior matches the extreme brutality and fearless savagery that the group, which has been lethally active in Fairfax, is known for.

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

When Nabra Hassanen was killed by Darwin Martinez Torres, the media rushed to blame Islamophobia and Trump. The truth was simpler. It was the left’s own Illegalophilia that killed the Muslim teenager.

Torres, an illegal alien from El Salvador, had no interest in Hassanen’s religion. He got into an altercation with her friends. Hassanen happened to be the one he caught when her friends left her behind.

The murder happened in Fairfax County.

Earlier this year, Fairfax County Chief of Police Ed Roessler had assured illegal aliens that they had nothing to worry about. The police were not going to do anything about them until they killed someone.

“We’re not targeting someone on the street that we may or may not know is here unlawfully,” Deputy County Executive David Rohrer soothed.

Cecilia Wang, the Deputy Legal Director of the ACLU, demanded “accountability” for Hassanen’s death. That’s easy enough. The Virginia ACLU had pressured Fairfax County to go further in not cooperating with immigration authorities.  Wang can demand “accountability” from the ACLU for Hassanen’s death.

Fairfax County’s refusal to investigate illegal aliens made it a magnet for a rising illegal alien population. Its jails have nearly 2,000 illegal aliens and the area has become a magnet for the El Salvadoran MS-13 gang. It’s unknown whether Torres was an MS-13 member, but his behavior matches the extreme brutality and fearless savagery that the group, which has been lethally active in Fairfax, is known for.

13 MS-13 gang members were convicted of dismembering and burying their own members in a park.

“This problem is horrible,” Fairfax County Police Chief Ed Roessler had commented at the time. “This is four murders in this park.”

This year, ICE busted 11 MS-13 members in Fairfax County for, among other things, drug trafficking, weapons smuggling, human smuggling and murder. Ten were arrested for the murder of a 15-year-old girl who had been threatened by MS-13 members. The adults in the case were illegal aliens.

Maybe if she had been a Muslim, the media might have cared.

MS-13 sharply increased its presence due to Obama’s policy of open borders for “unaccompanied minors”. Meanwhile United We Dream, a Soros backed left-wing group passed out leaflets in Fairfax County urging illegal aliens not to open the door to immigration authorities and to “Fight Back”.

The left-wing group was protecting illegals like Darwin Martinez Torres from Trump.

Sharon Bulova, the Democrat serving as the chair of Fairfax County’s  Board of Supervisors, had been critical of immigration enforcement efforts by law enforcement elsewhere in Virginia.

“Fairfax County is a very, very diverse community,” Bulova had argued. “In Fairfax County we celebrate diversity; we consider it an asset… We, in this county, have chosen not to create what could be a poisonous atmosphere for our diverse community, a community that we value.”

After the Hassanen murder, Bulova stated, “A horrific tragedy like this should never ever happen in our community.” It didn’t have to happen. Shielding illegal aliens was a choice that Bulova had made.

In Loudoun County, where Darwin Martinez Torres lived, some efforts had been made to crack down. But there’s only so much good that one county cracking down can do when another acts as a magnet.

Fairfax County is indeed “diverse”. Around a third of it is foreign born. The media had notably little interest in crimes committed by illegal aliens in Fairfax County until Muslims were affected.

In April, Oscar Perez Rangel was arrested for sexually abusing a 12-year-old girl. Rangel was an illegal alien from Mexico who had already been arrested in the past for attempted robbery and the use of a firearm during a felony in Fairfax County. He was sent to prison and deported. He returned and was arrested again and deported. And then he popped up back in Fairfax County and abused a little girl.

Since the victim wasn’t Muslim and the perpetrator was one of those wonderful “undocumented immigrants” whom the media, along with Fairfax County Dems, was dedicated to celebrating and defending, the story did not receive a fraction of the attention that the Nabra Hassanen case did.

Even though the failures by the authorities were far more outrageous and egregious.

The left has only itself to blame for Nabra Hassanen’s murder. It makes a fetish of diversity. But there are rational limits to diversity. You can champion Muslims and illegal aliens against Trump. But eventually members of one group will kill another. And it won’t be Trump’s fault. It’ll be yours.

The utopian society that the left is building is as unstable and unsustainable as a nuclear meltdown.

Nabra Hassanen was one of the many victims of the left’s illegalophillic sanctuary crimes. Most of these victims never became national figures. They died unmourned except by their friends and loved ones.

If only they had been fodder for Islamophobia accusations, someone on the left might have cared.

The media has tried to hide behind accusations of Islamophobia. Even after the police made it clear that it was road rage, the worst of the mainstream media’s outlets tried to keep its old lie alive.

The Washington Post, which keeps digging a deep hole to an alternate reality, suggested that Nabra Hassanen, who was Egyptian Arab, was really attacked because she was geographically black. “African-Americans wondered whether this is another instance of them being targeted because of their race.”

Maybe the illegal alien killer hated the entire continent of Africa, regardless of race, and as a student of ethnography was able to recognize exactly which Arab country Hassanen’s father had come from.

Or maybe the media has exited reality and lives in its own matrix of lies and conspiracy theories.

The Post’s Petula Dvorak, who has scribbled numerous defenses of illegal aliens, had insisted that it might still a hate crime because “hitting a 17-year-old girl with a bat and dumping her body in a pond would be an act born of hate.” As opposed to most murders which are motivated by love.

Maybe we should prosecute all murders as hate crimes. Or only those that fit the media’s agenda.

“Nabra was killed by some kind of toxic mix of hate and rage, there’s no doubt about that– even if it doesn’t meet the legal definition of a hate crime,” Petula protested.

Nabra Hassanen was killed by the left’s love for illegal aliens. Hate and rage are abstracts. Letting a dangerous El Salvadoran gang set up shop in your community really does kill.

The left likes pretends that it’s all about love while its mean opponents represent fear and hate. Its love however is very narrow and specific.

And often lethal.

The left’s illegalophilic love for illegal aliens killed Nabra and many others. And it will go on killing.

Fairfax County’s safe space for violent El Salvadoran illegal alien thugs accidentally became national news when the media’s desperate search for Islamophobia briefly lingered on one illegal alien killer.

After some frantic efforts to obscure the identity of the killer, the lights, cameras and agendas will move on. But unless the law trumps the left’s illegalophilic love, the illegal alien killings will continue.

Judicial Watch Statement on U.S. Supreme Court’s Travel Ban Decision

Posted June 26, 2017 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: "Muslim ban", Certiorari granted, Executive order, Travel ban, Trump and Islamic terrorism, Trump and refugees, U.S. Supreme Court

Tags: , , , , , ,

Judicial Watch Statement on U.S. Supreme Court’s Travel Ban Decision, June 26, 2017

(Short and sweet. — DM)

Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton issued the following statement in response to today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning President Trump’s Executive Order that, among other anti-terrorist measures, temporarily restricts most travel from certain Middle East nations:

Today, in a historic decision, every Supreme Court justice agreed for now to reinstate practically all of President Trump’s executive order concerning travel. This is a major blow to anti-Trump activist judges on the lower courts.  And it is a big victory for our nation’s security, President Trump, and the rule of the law.  In light of today’s strong ruling, the Trump administration should consider additional steps to keep terrorists out of the United States.

FULL MEASURE: June 25, 2017 – Fast and Furious

Posted June 26, 2017 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: Deep state, Department of Justice, Fast and Furious, Obama administration

Tags: , , ,

FULL MEASURE: June 25, 2017 – Fast and Furious via YouTube, June 26, 2017

(The Department of Justice continues to resist efforts to obtain information on the Obama administration’s Fast and Furious gunrunning program. The Trump administration presumably has no interest in concealing that information. Is this another example of the deep state in action? — DM)