text:
Tag: USA
Radical Left's Hatred of America & Israel Binds Them: 'Democrats Keep Pushing to Unravel U.S.–Israel Relationship'
Dems hate Israel and support those who hate Israel; ergo a vote for a Dem on any level of politics (local, State and National) is a vote for racist Jew-Hatred Antisemitism. That includes self-loathing Left-Wing Jews who'd rather support Marxist Dems than their Jewish heritage in Israel.
Adina Kutnicki essentially states my position.
Flags: USA & Israel allies
Commentary By Adina Kutnicki
AdinaKutinicki.com
{Published at AmericasCivilWarRising.org}
The Democrat Party of yesteryear, tradition-wise, has always been supportive of Israel. No longer. At its base, this support, for the most part, has always been derived from the shared values inherent within both nations.
As it stands, the Party's current incarnation (as it moved left-ward, incrementally, over a period of years) is ideologically imbued and invested in Israel's destruction. America's, too. This tragic truth is plain for all to see, that is, if one's eyes are wide open enough to absorb the seismic upheavals taking place all over America.
Indeed, those pulling the strings within the Democrat Party are more than thrilled that domestic terrorists are tearing the nation down. To wit, they lend them more than a wink and a nod. In reality, they are cheering them on and funding them! For starters and for further edification, commence your educational journey here:
'ANTIFA Announces Formation of a Red Army in U.S. The Violent Left Says They Want a Shooting Civil War' – BLM in the Forefront
Not only that, the ammunition being used to separate the heretofore special bond between the U.S. and Israel is based on the mother of all lies, that is, that Israel is a usurper and an "illegal occupier" of another's land!
But don't take this word for setting the record straight towards the truth of all truths. Rather, read for yourselves what is enshrined in international law, as well as in historical fact. The preeminent expert in this legal arena is Howard Grief (deceased, June 2013).
Legal Rights and Title of Sovereignty of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel and Palestine under International Law
In this regard, the following should be more than enough reason — at least, for all those who still believe that truth matters — for so-called traditional Democrats, centrists, if you will, to jump ship. Overboard.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Democrats Keep Pushing to Unravel U.S.–Israel Relationship
New letter from progressives to Pompeo brings harmful ideas to the forefront of American politics – By Steve Postal | July 9, 2020
The Lawfare Project sent House Speaker Nancy Pelosi a letter opposing progressive Democrats' "uninformed and inaccurate" policy proposals towards Israel. The Lawfare Project, according to their website, provides legal counsel and services to, and protects the free speech of, members of the Jewish and pro-Israel community. According to the Lawfare Project, the progressive Democrats' labeling Israel's plans to establish control over parts of Judea and Samaria as "annexation" rather than "sovereignty" places the Democrats at odds with U.S. law, "which has long recognized the rights of the Jewish people to a national home in Palestine."
The Lawfare Project's letter to Speaker Pelosi was in response to another letter sent by progressive Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, and Ilhan Omar, Sen. Bernie Sanders, and others to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in late June. This progressive letter is the latest in a series of Democratic communications that serve to harm the U.S.–Israeli partnership. Democrats are now bringing harmful and false ideas, once considered taboo, to the forefront of American politics. Those ideas are the following:
The "settlements" in Judea and Samaria are illegitimate.
Contrary to popular wisdom, Israel has a right to build the "settlements," which are Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, the heartland of the Land of Israel. (There are currently about 450,000 Israeli citizens living in Judea and Samaria, in addition to another 215,000 living in eastern Jerusalem.) The Trump administration, in the Pompeo Doctrine, stated that it does not recognize the "settlements" as illegal.
In contrast, the progressive Democrat letter mentioned above calls the "settlements" "illegal" under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Presidential candidate Joe Biden also recently said that continued "settlement" building "will choke off any hope for peace," despite the Palestinians' consistent rejection of any peace proposal regardless of the presence, absence, and number of "settlements."
Israel's claim to Judea and Samaria is an "occupation."
Israel's claim to Judea and Samaria is not one of "occupation," and Republicans know this. I could not find any reference of the Trump administration referring to the "occupation." Also, a letter addressed to Netanyahu in support of Israel, signed by 120 House Republicans in late June, does not mention "occupation."
In contrast, Democrats are convinced otherwise. The progressive Democrat letter mentioned above refers to Judea and Samaria as "occupied Palestinian territory," "Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967," and "occupied West Bank," with Israel being the "Occupying Power." Biden is also on the record for opposing the so-called "occupation."
Israel does not have a right to apply sovereignty to at least some of Judea and Samaria.
Israel has a right to apply sovereignty at least some of Judea and Samaria, and Republicans know this. The Trump administration has recognized that right by allowing Israel to apply sovereignty to about 30 percent of Judea and Samaria. The House Republican letter, mentioned above, states that "Israel has the right to make sovereign decisions independent of outside pressure," and "reaffirm[s] Israel's right to sovereignty."
In contrast, Democrats are convinced otherwise. Biden has stated, "I do not support annexation. The fact is, I will reverse Trump's undercutting of peace." Further, over 190 House Democrats signed a letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Alternate Prime Minister and Defense Minister Benjamin Gantz, and Foreign Minister Gabriel Ashkenazi opposing any Israeli move of "unilateral annexation" to any part of Judea and Samaria. The progressive Democrat letter threatens "nonrecognition of annexed territories." A letter signed by Senate Democrats, including Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, written to Netanyahu and Gantz in May also opposed "annexation" six times in four paragraphs.
The U.S. should condition aid to Israel on Israel not building in Judea and Samaria.
U.S. aid to Israel dates back to the 1973 Yom Kippur War and is money that Israel spends mostly in the United States. This aid has long been independent of Israel's relationship with the Palestinians. Continuing this tradition, Biden said that he would not place conditions on military assistance to Israel. But the progressive Democrat letter threatens legislation that would cut U.S. aid to Israel if the latter moves forward with sovereignty. The progressives are thus "subordinating [the U.S.–Israel relationship] to the Palestinians or, more precisely … subordinating it to the extensive demands American progressives make on behalf of the Palestinians." Bernie Sanders, IfNotNow, and 1,000 alums of J Street U, the student arm of J Street, supported such conditioning of aid to Israel in separate statements.
The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement is OK.
The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement is an anti-Semitic campaign to destroy Israel. President Trump signed an executive order, which in part threatens to withhold funding of universities that support BDS. To his credit, Biden "firmly reject[s]" BDS. But the progressive Democrat letter, while it does not expressly address BDS, is endorsed by multiple organizations that support BDS, including American Friends Service Committee, American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), Churches for Middle East Peace, Defense for Children International — Palestine, and the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights. Each of these organizations is additionally problematic, as reported by the Washington Free Beacon. For example, AMP, Defense for Children International — Palestine and U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights have been connected with fundraising for terrorist organizations. In fact, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez purposefully sought support of the progressive Democrat letter from these groups.
Recent statements by Democrats is the latest in a push to continue to make Israel a partisan wedge in U.S. politics, one that I previously discussed in The American Spectator. It remains to be seen if moderate voices within the Democratic party will be able to reclaim the narrative. Until then, the Democratic party will continue to undermine the U.S.–Israel relationship.
AOC Antisemitic Hate of Israel
MEMO: FB's censors are limiting the sharing of Adina Kutnicki: A Zionist & Conservative Blog! Indeed, the following message from FB's censors is crystal clear:
MESSAGE FAILED:
This message contains content that has been blocked by our security systems.
If you think you're seeing this by mistake, please let us know. Yes, additional "proof-in-the pudding" as to why "BANNED: How Facebook Enables Militant Islamic Jihad" had to be written!
Author oneway2dayPosted on July 10, 2020 July 10, 2020 Categories Antisemitism, Christian Politics, Conservative, Democrats, Elections, Foreign Policy, Israel, Left Wing, News and politics, Organizations, TerrorismTags Adina Kutnicki, Dem-Marxist Antisemites, Faux-Palestinians, Israel, Israeli Sovereignty, Jew-Hatred, Jewish Heritage, Judea-Samaria, USA2 Comments on Radical Left's Hatred of America & Israel Binds Them: 'Democrats Keep Pushing to Unravel U.S.–Israel Relationship'
Abu Mazen on Trump's Deal of the Century
For those of you who might only have a cursory knowledge of Islamic Terrorism aimed at Israel, the Abu Mazen in the title is the same person as Mahmoud Abbas. The "Abbas" name is the one used most often by the American Press.
Ari Bussel has been supportive of President Trump actions toward Israel in the past (e.g. moving U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem: HERE & HERE), but here – if I am understanding correctly – Ari is not pleased with Trump's Deal of the Century, not pleased with Prime Minister Netanyahu's cooperation with the Deal AND highlights Mahmoud Abbas speaking threats if any action is taken to enact The Deal of the Century.
On a personal level I have not read the Deal so I am not surprised by the Faux-Palestinian vitriol who seek to deny the existence of a Jewish State. BUT from Ari's tone the Deal must be too conciliatory toward Arabs pretending to be Palestinians. I trust Ari. So I am now going to have to locate some Deal of the Century details for future reference.
BLOG EDITOR: I've apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protestor restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: "You're temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM." THAT MEANS Facebook has blocked me from ALL Pro-Israel, Pro-Jewish, Pro-Zionist, Pro-Christian Zionist and Anti-BDS Groups until 4/18/20. SO PLEASE SHARE THIS INFO in those Groups I am restricted.
By Ari Bussel
The Deal of the Century was announced this week by US President Donald J Trump. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Jewish donor Sheldon (& Dr. Miriam) Adelson were among those cheering onsite. The President also met with MK and former Chief of Staff Benny Gantz who currently is the forerunner to lead the country after the upcoming elections on March 2nd, 2020.
The responses were quick to arrive, and we can divide them into categories: Organizations who have to comment about anything and everything (e.g. the Reform Movement or the Zionist Organization of America); organizations who are focused on Israel (e.g. CAMERA or Arab America); and those who derive a direct benefit, some type of personal gain. Although many in these categories employ top thinkers and analysts, allow us to ignore them all and focus on one and only one reaction.
Abu Mazen expressed what the entire Palestinian tribal collection wants to hear and what it believes:
"Jerusalem is not for sale, and all our rights are neither for sale nor for compromise. This scheme will not succeed!"
Compare the reaction on the Palestinian side and that on the Jewish side. The Palestinian position is Simple. Concise. Clear. Unwavering. Full of Conviction. And now check the Israeli and Jewish side that has been entrusted with an undivided Jerusalem, the City where God resides among His people. We are weak. Ready to compromise. Debate. Give up. Divide. A sure recipe for destruction and fall; exactly what took place some two thousand years ago when the Second Temple was destroyed.
Not only do the Palestinians confuse sick-imagination with reality-transposed, they are not even sure who they are. For a people that cannot even pronounce its own name (the letter "p") or realize the root of the word is invaders to a land-not-theirs, they so crave to make their dream of a county void of Jews a reality, that anyone who is not Jewish must therefore be a Palestinian. Jesus apparently was a Palestinian. He is still "standing" at the checkpoints designed to prevent terrorists from passing. Israeli citizens who happen to be Muslim are Palestinians (previously they were 1967 Arabs and before that 1948 Arabs, then 1947 Arabs and now pure "Palestinians"). So are members of the Israeli Knesset, who spew hatred toward Israel and against the Israel Defense Forces from the podium at the parliament. Full Israeli citizens call themselves "Palestinians," but they will not give up their Israeli passports or all the benefits to which they are entitled as Israeli citizens.
There is supposedly a talk about some "border," but the Palestinian have only one border in their mind: The entire country, from the River to the Sea, is theirs! No Jews allowed! Al Quds (Jerusalem) is their eternal capital, has always been; will always be. It is not up for dividing, sharing or bargaining. And all the millions of eternal refugees are waiting to go back to their homes throughout the country. In short: No Israel. No Jews. Viva Palestine!
To this theater comes the Most Crazy American President in an announcement: "I have the Deal of the Century!" Is he the clown during intermission? He is definitely not entertaining. Does he think that the Palestinians can be bought like Putin, China or North Korea? He simply does not understand with whom he is dealing; who really stands in front of him. He is a most useful puppet in the hands of his Jewish Handlers. Look, there is the Adelson couple opening their purse and pulling the strings. What has the President not done for them already! All will be reversed as the first order of action as soon as the new President is sworn in and replaces this travesty in announcing to DJT: "YOU ARE FIRED!"
The Deal of the Century is weak because it has exposed what is important for the Jews and their puppets, including sovereignty and control over the West Bank, no Right of Return of the Palestinians, Jerusalem remaining under Israeli control and end of BDS and claims in international bodies such as the International Criminal Court. Even Gantz (who ran on a platform "Just Not Bibi (Netanyahu)") is supporting this plan. All that the Deal has done is to show where Israel really hurts, both what subjects and what effective tools are currently working effectively against her. In short, the Deal has emboldened the enemies of Israel that their struggle is working.
A President under Impeachment. A Prime Minister who has been Indicted. A main puppeteer, a filthy-wealthy Jew who controls the scene. And a Circus like no other. How good that people of conscience, including so many Jewish Americans and so many leading Israelis stand united against this evil plan!
To all lovers and protectors of Israel: Israel's enemies do not want peace. They aspire death and destruction; a place clean of Jews. They have no plan for the day after, for they only want the death of the Jewish body. This is what cancer is all about, and any doctor who will prescribe the following course of treatment will likely lose his license:
"Listen Cancer, you may not even be able to pronounce your own name and likely you do not even know from where you came, but we propose the following to you: Restrict yourself to the ovaries, stop dreaming on the liver, the lungs and the brain. We will then let you thrive in the ovaries. Grow and expand. Go from strength to strength. We love and respect you. We will feed you and take care of you. We will continue adoring you. We realize you want the entire body, and that you have no plan for the day after. (The day after, you are dead.) We (the world) really, really like you. We admire your convictions. We stand with you regarding your aspirations and efforts. Give them all up. stay in the ovaries."
Not only does the idea make no sense whatsoever, why would someone feeling strength, ever-growing strength, restrict oneself from taking, devouring, enjoying and destroying more and more? The cancer has metastasized to the liver and the stomach and the lungs and the brain. So why stop? Because an American President decided to say so? Even notable Israelis and many American Jews have succumbed to the cancer and have declared "Viva Palestine! End the Occupation! Free, free Palestine! A country of all its people!"
Those who love Israel awake! Not only the timing, but the mere idea of a Deal right now is contrary to basic business practices (which the President understands). One does not negotiate from an inferior position of weakness, and both Israel and the USA are weak.
We must learn from the Palestinians. They speak clearly. They are unified. They know exactly what they want, and this is everything. And they have the courage to stand by their convictions.
Ari Bussel
Blog Editor: More info added after signature in the same email:
For those who want to expand, you are invited to continue reading:
The Deal of the Century was not a secret. There was access to it on the White House website in the weeks leading to the announcement. For very many months, it was mentioned in every opportunity. The timing of the celebratory announcement is questionable, for the President is trying to ignore the Impeachment proceedings in the US Senate, possibly to deflect attention, while in Israel nothing can be done permanently binding by a temporary government. Netanyahu's government is twice temporary, after he forced the country to go into an election following which neither he nor his opponent was able to form a government. A second election was called with practically the same result, and now the country faces a third election in less than a year. Without a proper budget, nothing operates as usual, and with a country under the iron grip of the judiciary and advisors who grab power, even appointments or removal of bureaucrats translate to lengthy battles.
The US Administration is aware of what is happening in Israel, so what might be the specific reason for the release at this time? Possibly a parting gift to Prime Minister Netanyahu before his defeat and removal? Alas, this is not a reason for policy that is shaping a new Middle East.
As much as everyone likes to think Israel is the center of the universe, Israel is a tiny country with nine million people. It is the home of the Jewish people – all 14 to 15 million of us around the world – and the only country we can call our home. By any stretch of the imagination, Israel is tiny. In China, the center of outbreak of the current Corona Virus is much larger than Israel, both in size and in population. But the world continues to focus only on Israel, as if it is the source of energy for the entire universe.
The powers in the Middle East are impressive: A Turk who wants to become a Sultan over a re-emerging Ottoman Empire. Iran whose tentacles are pressing the Mediterranean on both sides, from its southern and northern shores. A KGB Uber-Oligarch who is meddling in Syria and wants to establish his country's dominance in the region. A Kingdom that is always on a threat of collapsing. The persecuted Christians, who are raped, murdered, kidnapped, sold for slavery (sexual and labor) and burned alive in their churches throughout the region and the continent of Africa, and the world stands silent. And then, there are the Palestinians.
The Palestinians invented a nationhood and borrowed the craving of the Jews to return to their homeland. They are a very special breed. Their brethren in the Arab world view them as inferior. They never wanted anything to do with them. It is a class structure, where the Iranians view themselves as superior to all, and the Arabs view the Palestinians as inferior. Indeed, who are the Palestinians? Their forefathers emigrated to Palestine when the Zionists from Europe came and turned a desolate area into a blooming oasis. They (the Zionists) dried the swamps, defeated the malaria that was carried by mosquitos, created new technologies (such as drip irrigation and water desalination) and made areas previously uninhabitable into thriving communities basking in greenery, a light unto the nations, a source of goodness to the world.
Israel became a miracle, and it attracted workers. Many came from Egypt, and among them Yasir Arafat and Abu Mazen's family, as well as the families of many of the Palestinian leadership. The area was called "Palestine," the Jews and their institutions were often referred to as "Palestinians" and Arab nationalism was alive and thriving. There were Arabs and Jews, the Arabs did not want the Jews, and the superpowers who inherited and dived the Ottoman Empire kept slicing the area designated for the Jews into an ever diminishing slice of land.
After the formation of the modern State of Israel, the nascent country absorbed some 750,000 Jewish refugees expelled from Arab countries. Those Arabs who fled Israel – under the false promise "you will get to your homes within days, after we defeat and eliminate the Jews" – were never assimilated. They remained as garbage in the countries to where they fled momentarily. No one wanted them; no one was interested. But then something unique happened: The United Nations has created a special body to treat the newly formed "Palestinians." They and their descendants forever, for all eternity, are called "Refugees." There is no need to assimilate; there is no need for anyone (their own brethren) to absorb them. It is very big business, employing tens of thousands of UN employees, and channeling billions of Dollars to corrupt people. Why rattle such a thriving and successful business?
For several decades the Arab nations went along with this ploy, as they realized that Israel cannot be defeated militarily, despite all odds stacked against the nascent Jewish state. Something bigger is protecting Israel (and it is NOT the United States of America). 1956. 1967. 1973. Nothing helped. The Jews survive and thrived. To the Arabs, right in their corner were the Palestinians, a disposable, no-cost commodity that could be utilized to harm Israel. Thus, for instance, Gaza remained as it is – an open wound – where Israel left it and Egypt does not want it.
The refugee camps in Lebanon are a source of endless liberation fighters willing and able to sacrifice themselves. Keep them! And in Jordan, a full majority of the entire Kingdom is made of Palestinians creating an entire Eastern front against Israel. [The situation in Jordan has changed since Jordan is the only country that absorbed the real Syrian Refugees, and they realize what "refugee-dom" is all about and how the Palestinians are not "refugees" by any stretch of the imagination.]
With the advance of Iran and the real threat to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries, with the Arab Spring that turned quickly in Winter and the Muslim Brotherhood stronghold on Egypt, and with the continued slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Muslims by their Muslim brethren in Syria, the Arab World has realized the utter and complete fallacy of the Palestinians and their dream to eradicate Israel, to wipe Israel off the map.
The Palestinians squander the money they receive and stash it in secret bank accounts in Switzerland and France. The Palestinians cry foul all the time, crying and bickering. They work with Iran. They send their young ones to explode themselves – and soon the Arabs realized that what is effective against the Jews, is also employed against them!
And Israel? Contrary to what the Palestinians teach their children and the hatred they spew at every opportunity, Israel does good. Israel extends a helping hand at a time of disaster. Israel brings new technologies about water and agriculture in the times of peace. Commerce with Israel is bilateral. Israel opens field hospitals for Syrian refugees and brings the wounded from Lebanon, Syria and even Gaza to her hospitals. Israel is the only deterrent against the spread of Iran, and she is not afraid to act – at whatever time and place she sees fit. Israel can be trusted – by friend and foe alike. She is always true to her word.
Israel wants what every normal human being wants – to live, raise her children, thrive. She is focused on herself, not on harming others. She has no aspirations at expanding, colonizing or occupying. It is not easy for Israel, for where there are two Jews, there are five opinions. And Israel has always been a country of all generals! They Arabs see Israel; the Arabs hear the pleas and contact demands by the Palestinians; and when the Arabs do an accounting, or simple arithmetic, they understand they want to be associated with the Israelis, not with the Palestinians.
And so there is a titanic shift, which is based on much common sense. What would we do if faced in the same situation: on the one hand a group that whines and brings death and mayhem, evil and bickering; on the other a group that is good for you, and good for the entire world and humanity, that does not talk much but acts, and when it acts – there are no boundaries to the love shown.
The Palestinians feel neglected, left behind. They are angrier than ever. Remember, the Palestinians are a business. Their main stronghold, the United Nations, that seems to be serving them and ignoring everyone else (e.g. the really-persecuted Christians) is on shaky grounds as well. The United States, the UN's main financial sponsor, has woken up and is bringing common sense back to the playground. And the European Union has finally started limiting the flow of money, as a major part of it goes to reward terrorists and their families for life – for every person murdered or injured.
And so comes The Deal of the Century. The USA (what one commonly refers to as "America") has a crazy President. He dares stand up to Putin (the Democrats say he cooperates with him), to China, to North Korea. And now he decided to tackle the Israeli-Arab Conflict. Alas, the Conflict seems to have resolved itself – between Israel and the real Arabs.
The only thing that is left from the "Conflict" (the objective of the Arabs to "throw the Israelis to the (Mediterranean) Sea") is Iran's promise to "Wipe Israel Off the Map" (and this must be taken seriously; with one qualification that the only reason for Iran to do so is that Israel is the only obstacle standing in its way to control the entire region, and Europe should be concerned for Europe's sake) and the Palestinians who do not even show Israel on their maps.
So if there is no Israeli-Arab Conflict, what is the deal to do? Appease the so-called Palestinians? Serve the Jewish Puppeteers of the President of the US?
Whether the Deal of the Century has been in the works for the past three years or not at all, it matters not. Also the timing of the announcement which is most suspect is not very important. Be the reasons what they might be, they are irrelevant. Both the US President and the Israeli Prime Minister quickly understood it – their folly was exposed, no one treats it seriously, not even those cheering in the background. The Prime Minister announced, even before leaving DC, "we are going to annex next Sunday," and the Trump-Team (Administration) replied "not so quickly, let us wait until after the elections." So quickly the two main players realized it was an exercise of hot air, that the entire exercise became beneficial only to all those "experts" and organizations that benefit from it (on the pro-Israel or anti-Israel side).
A Peace Plan has to be achieved by two sides who want it. And a lasting peace will continue as long as both sides really want it. Israel has a peace treaty with Egypt and another with Jordan. Israel could have had a peace treaty with Syria, had it not been for the Civil War there and Assad's butchering hundreds of thousand of his own people.
Another Peace Plan that should serve as an applicable example is the one between the Allies and the Nazis. Except, the Middle East is not there yet. The main lesson is that one side really wanted "Peace" to bring the cessation of its utter and complete decimation, and the other side was both benevolent and smart to help the Germans rebuild.
The Palestinians live a very good life. Visit their homes and see. Visit their shopping centers. Watch their tv channels. The Palestinians need Israel. They come to work in Israel. They sell products to Israel. They depend on Israel as a neighbor and partner. And they want to eliminate her and have an area free and clean of Jews.
Instead of investing in infrastructure and institutions of civil society, they dig death tunnels, manufacture weapons of mass destruction and excel in death and mayhem. In short, they do everything opposite logic.
In addition to glorifying homicide martyrs as deserving 72 virgins, they propagate and expand the fantasy that the Jews will be eliminated, that the Jews do not deserve to live. They twist history, using elements they like as their own and others to their advantage. So they tell the Jews to pack their belongings and "go back." They remove the archeological findings under the Temple Mount and trash them as rubbish, and then they declare the Temple Mount was really never there, the Jewish "story" of the Bible has not connection to the place.
They do excel, however, in a thousand and one Arabian nights – weaving a story like no other. And the story resonates with people around the world. Where a story takes hold, no deal or reality program can overcome. The Deal of the Century has not even lived its millisecond of fame, it was an orchestration that failed, a momentary distraction. Until Israelis take hold of the helm, until they start fighting for their own existence and survival, no substitute (as good and well-intentioned as it might be) will succeed. Now, let us return to real life.
© Ari Bussel
Ari Bussel Bio via BeverlyHills.org
Ari Bussel is Vice President of Operations at Saybrex International, a privately held family business specializing in the distribution of fine wines and spirits. He is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the company and has held various positions in the company since 1993.
Prior to joining Saybrex, Mr. Bussel served as First Lieutenant in the Center for Systems Analysis at General Headquarters of the Israel Defense Forces, where he led the implementation of the Logistics War Doctrine in the Computerized Wargame Program.
Mr. Bussel is involved in a variety of philanthropic and civic activities. Mr. Bussel completed the Team Beverly Hills Leadership Program and served on the Environmental Sustainability Topic Committee of the City of Beverly Hills. He was a member of the Steering Committees of former Beverly Hills Mayor MeraLee Goldman and the current Beverly Hills City Treasurer, the Hon. Eliot Finkel. Mr. Bussel also completed and participated in the Community Emergency Response Training Program of the City of Beverly Hills as well as … READ THE REST
Author oneway2dayPosted on January 31, 2020 Categories Foreign Policy, Islamism, Israel, News and politics, Organizations, TerrorismTags Abu Mazen, Ari Bussel, Deal-Century, Donald Trump, Faux Palestine, Israel, Mahmoud Abbas, USA1 Comment on Abu Mazen on Trump's Deal of the Century
Dreams of Prosperity and an Inflated Currency
I actually comprehend little when it comes to economics and numbers. But history is easier to grasp. History informs us a Capitalist based Market System has enabled a Liberty-minded America to prosper more than the fail. While oppositely a Socialist based Government Managed System robs Liberty from citizens stifling individual prosperity and increasing government despotism and oppression.
Though I have difficulty grasping the actual effects of a repo (buyback) stocks market on the economy I grasp well that an unrestrained Federal Reserve with near zero checks and balances adds to government despotism and decreases Liberty and Freedom of America's individual citizens. And so … here are Justin Smith's thoughts on American Markets and the actions of the Federal Reserve.
Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in
the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy coffee.
Congressional Warning Bells Are Silent
Sent 10/8/2019 10:42 PM
"Long before we wake up from our dream of prosperity through an inflated currency, our gold, which alone could have kept us from catastrophe, will have vanished and no rate of interest will tempt it to return." U.S. Senator Elihu Root (R-NY) 1913
The Federal Reserve Bank has been a bone of contention, since our nation's founding. This rogue agency has proven itself to be the evil entity that many early American leaders believed it to be, but not one word on the Fed was forthcoming, when Congresswoman Maxine Waters announced the schedule of the House Financial Services Committee on October 3rd, after the Federal Reserve Bank started transferring billions of dollars into the Repurchasing Market on September 17th. This activated its proposal to hand seventy-five billion dollars a day to unnamed banks on Wall Street, until November 4th, the first such intervention since the 2008 economic collapse and the bailout of financial organizations deemed "too big to fail"; and, it is just one more criminal act in a long line of abuses committed against all America.
In 2011, James Felkerson wrote in an academic piece, that from 2007 to 2010, the Fed had funneled an unbelievable $29 trillion in revolving loans to Wall Street and global banks. It did this without any apparent realization and authority from Congress, even though by law both the House Financial Services and the Senate Banking Committees are to be briefed on any such emergency loans, including the names of those banks taking the loans.
[Blog Editor: I am not an economist. In trying to make sense of the repo market and reverse-repo market the information muddied rather than bring clarity to my understanding. Since it is my mantra that Dems lie and deceive I become skeptical when the likes of Dem candidates for President (e.g. Elizabeth Warren & Bernie Sanders among others) begin to rail against the buyback repo markets. I'll start with an explanation of repo markets then add some criticism titles for you to look noting who the critics are:
Repo vs. Reverse Repo: What's the Difference? Nick K. Lioudis; Investopedia; Updated 4/26/19
What's Holding Up the Market? Charles Hughes Smith; OfTwoMinds.com; 10/7/19
After $1 Trillion In Stock Buyback Spending, Companies Keep Their Wallets Open; By SCOTT LEHTONEN; Investor's Business Daily; 1/12/19
Stock buybacks are set to hit a record $1 trillion this year, even as presidential candidates try to restrict them; Rebecca Ungarino; BusinessInsider.com; 7/2/19 01:09 PM
U.S. repo rates surge on tax payments, bond settlements; By Richard Leong; Investing.com; 9/16/19 02:46 PM ET
Like I said, I am no economist. BUT the tax issue seems less about taxpayers funds and more about banks and corporations taking advantage of tax breaks to expand money returns which may or may not blow up DEPENDING on the security controls of the money-printing Federal Reserve. Not being an economist means my take could be entirely off basis.]
These Big Banks and corporations are taking this "free" taxpayer dollars and buying back stocks in their own companies, rather than risk investment in productive investments, which creates an illusion of economic growth. The purchases give companies the appearance of being more profitable than they actually are, even though their earnings have remained stagnant. And it is the Fed's perverse incentives that have given rise to this debt-dependent speculative system that allows companies to pocket their profits, while at the same time, they socialize their losses and pass them along to the taxpayer, 'We the People'.
In 1832, President Andrew Jackson, extremely antagonistic towards the Bank of the United States, stated: "Gentlemen! I too have been a close observer of the doings of the Bank of the United States. I have had men watching You for a long time, and am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter I shall ruin [a] thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I have determined to rout you out, and by the Eternal, I will rout you out." [Bold-Italics Blog Editor's]
We are currently witnessing a continuation of the malinvestments that led to the 2008 economic collapse and massive loans combined with another huge expansion of credit. When banking institutes issue huge credit lines, any future economic collapse is proportional to that amount of outstanding credit.
This isn't a true "boom economy" and the current boom is the culmination of monetary inflation and an expanded credit cycle, in the wake of the residential property and stock market booms, between 2005 and 2007, and malinvestments that have not yet been fully corrected. To date, this is by far a larger credit elevation than that of 1922-1929, and the Great Depression on the 20th century.
It seems as though everyone in America has bought into the promise of applied macroeconomics, refusing to acknowledge the contrary signals through the prism of classic economics, while they accept macroeconomist premises that economic truths on a micro-level are not applicable to the whole at the macro-level. This level of ignorance will soon prove to be a huge mistake, since nobody can live forever beyond their means and ability to repay amounts owed.
One should note that the JP Morgan Bank, one of the largest in the United States, was hit with three felony counts under the RICO Act last month, concerning the precious metals market. This is particularly alarming in light of JP Morgan's $158 billion cash reduction in the Federal Reserve, between January and June of 2019, a fifty-seven percent decline this year.
Why hasn't the need of the United States' largest bank to acquire such a large loan over a six month period raised any warning bells in Congress? Why does JP Morgan need such a large loan if it has $1.6 trillion in deposits and a "fortress balance sheet", as asserted by JP's CEO, Jamie Dimon?
By the end of June 2019, America's four largest banks had a combined $5.45 trillion in deposits: JP Morgan claimed $1.6 trillion; Bank of America claims $1.44 trillion; Wells Fargo posts $1.35 trillion, and Citibank holds a bit over $1 trillion.
So why the current panic at the Fed? If the liquidity doesn't exist to allow these banks to issue billions in loans, when they supposedly hold $5.45 trillion, something very serious has occurred in the financial industry and another economic crisis looms on the horizon.
Recently, CNBC reported that U.S. manufacturing purchasing managers' index was the lowest it's been since June 2009, at 47.8 percent, and in recent days, many hundreds of Americans have been laid off from companies, such as Kroger and many others. Bayou Steel just laid off 376 workers, according to Market Realist; Daimler Trucks North America is laying off 450 people; WeWork is set to end five thousand jobs, one-third of its workforce; Hewlett Packard Inc is cutting approximately 8,000 positions, and lets not forget that Walmart was forced to close 63 locations last year.
This isn't a "boom economy" anyway one looks at it, especially when we see Democrats and Republicans alike engaging in out-of-control deficit spending, as if the U.S. Treasury is their own personal piggy bank and there is no tomorrow. If this were truly such a golden period of economic recovery, our financiers wouldn't be clamoring for interest rate cuts, when they are already at historically low levels.
America has seen this greed motivated reach for more and more before, as the borrowers seem not to have one care on how their loans will be repaid, and most of America cares not so long as they get their cut. It is this extreme callous character flaw and apathy and a complacency and the turning of a blind eye by corrupt Congressmen, a national immorality, that is allowing the Fed to once more bail out the worse white collar criminals on Wall Street, as they continue to take huge portions of bail out funds to reward themselves with tens of millions of dollars in bonuses and billions of dollars to lawyers to prevent them from being prosecuted for fraud.
It is an indication of America's collective genius or its collective madness that permits Her people to hold so many contradictory assumptions, combined under the same economic system, and blindly and blithely proceed as if they were all joined by perfect cogent thought, logic and reason. And yet, many Americans cannot escape the nagging feeling that something is going extraordinarily wrong, as our best and brightest economic experts call madness "common sense", denying that their deal with the devil doesn't come at some terrible price eventually.
The impeccable and brilliant Senator Elihu Root strongly opposed the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, noting in a blistering and prescient manner that "the Federal Reserve … provides an expansive currency, not an elastic one". He noted that the temptation to expand the currency would cause the Fed to create the very cycles it was supposed to prevent.
It is far past time to eradicate the Federal Reserve Bank and the economic sickness that accompanies centralized banking, wherever one finds it.
Whatever a man sows, so shall he reap. Need little, want less and love more.
+++++++++++++++++
Source links and text embraced by brackets are by the Editor.
Author oneway2dayPosted on October 10, 2019 Categories Congress, Conservative, Conspiracy/Secret Society, Economy, History, Left Wing, News and politics, Organizations, TaxesTags Bank Bailouts, Congress, Corporations, Corrupt Banks, Economics, Economy, Elihu Root, Fed Fraud, Federal Reserve, JP Morgan Corruption, Justin Smith, Repo Stocks, USALeave a comment on Dreams of Prosperity and an Inflated Currency
Israel's flailing democracy
Caroline Glick views parallels between the Marxist-Dems fabricating allegations against President Trump and Israel's Left loosely examining Israeli statute law to render Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a criminal to question his legitimacy as a Prime Minister. It's an interesting read for both Americans and Israelis.
President Trump & PM Netanyahu
By Caroline B. Glick
CarolineGlick.com
Originally published at Israel Hayom.
US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's announcement Tuesday that she is opening an official impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump struck many Israelis as yet another sign that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Trump are in the same boat. Both are hounded by legal elites who will stop at nothing to oust them from office.
There are parallels between the two leaders.
Pelosi's move followed the leak of a whistleblower complaint to the US intelligence community's inspector general. The complainant alleged that during a telephone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in July, Trump sought the Ukrainian leader's assistance in advancing his 2020 reelection prospects. This is arguable.
During the course of the phone call, Trump asked Zelensky to speak with US Attorney General William Barr about the private cybersecurity company Crowdstrike. Crowdstrike is the private contractor that was hired by the Democratic National Committee in the spring of 2016 to investigate the alleged hack of the DNC's computer server.
Crowdstrike concluded that the DNC's server was hacked by entities related to the Russian government. The DNC never permitted federal investigators to take possession of the breached server, or receive Crowdstrike's full report. Despite the fact that they were never given the opportunity to verify Crowdstrike's claims, those claims were the basis of the US intelligence community's assertion in December 2016 that the Russian government hacked the DNC server to interfere in the 2016 election. It was also a foundation of the claim that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia against the Hillary Clinton campaign in 2016.
In his conversation with Zelensky, Trump said, "Our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike…the [DNC] server, they say Ukraine has it…I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it."
Trump also talked with Zelensky about Democratic presidential aspirant, former vice president Joe Biden.
During his tenure in office, Biden was responsible for US ties with Ukraine. As investigative journalist Peter Schweitzer reported, in April 2014, Biden's son Hunter was appointed to the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian gas company. Over the next 16 months, Bursima paid Hunter Biden $3.1 million. Biden joined the company while Burisma was under criminal probe by British and Ukrainian investigators.
In a post-vice presidency appearance before the Council on Foreign Relations, Biden bragged that he had conditioned the provision of $1 billion in US loan guarantees to the Ukrainian government – loan guarantees that had already been approved by Obama – on the firing of the Ukrainian prosecutor carrying out the investigation against Burisma. Given the stakes, the Ukrainian government bowed to his demand. The prosecutor was fired and the loan guarantees were extended.
Speaking of Biden's admitted intervention with the Ukrainian prosecution, Trump said, "There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it…It sounds horrible to me."
Democrats claim that Trump's discussion with constitutes an illegal solicitation of foreign assistance for his 2020 campaign for reelection. Republicans counter that Trump was reasonably trying to understand what happened to the DNC server in 2016. The story has served as a basis for claims that his presidency is illegitimate, and continuous investigations of his campaign.
Leaving aside the weight of the opposing claims, the fact is that there is nothing unique about Trump's actions. As Mark Thiessen noted in the Washington Post, in 2018, three Democratic senators urged the Ukrainian government to continue investigations into Trump's alleged collusion with Russia during the 2016 presidential campaign.
National Review noted that during the 2016 campaign, the Obama administration asked the Ukrainian government to open a criminal probe against Trump's campaign chairman Paul Manafort. So too, revelations regarding the origins of the Trump-Russia probe which fomented the nearly two-year Special Counsel investigation showed that the Obama Justice Department based wiretap requests against Trump campaign officials on a dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC, and compiled by a former British spy on the basis of contacts with Russian operatives.
Democrats braying for impeachment have never shown the slightest interest in investigating the Obama administration's actions. No Democratic lawmakers has called to impeach Obama or members of his administration.
The criminal probes against Netanyahu relate to actions he took to secure positive media coverage that are similar, if not identical to routine political behavior. The two major probes against Netanyahu – dubbed Case 2000 and Case 4000 allege that Netanyahu acted criminally when he met with media owners in bids to secure more positive coverage.
In Case 2000, Netanyahu is accused of having breached the public faith when he met with Yediot Ahronot publisher Arnon Moses in an effort to secure positive media coverage. Yediot Ahronot's coverage of Netanyahu has been unstintingly negative. In Case 4000, prosecutors allege Netanyahu accepted a bribe in the form of positive media coverage on Walla news portal from Walla owner Shaul Alovich. Like Yediot, Walla coverage of Netanyahu has almost uniformly hostile.
Leading jurists from Prof. Alan Dershowitz of Harvard University to Prof. Avi Bell from Bar Ilan University agree that the legal proceedings against Netanyahu are political and based on prejudicial and selective enforcement of statutes which prosecutors are interpreting inventively.
As is the case with the allegations related to Trump's dealings with Zelensky, the first problem with the probes against Netanyahu is that his actions were far from unique – although less successful than similar actions by other politicians.
In just one striking example of the inherent bias of the charges against Netanyahu consider the behavior of the prosecutors in relation to Blue and White party co-chairman, and Yesh Atid party leader Yair Lapid.
While serving as finance minister in 2013 and 2014, Lapid held regular meetings Mozes. Government ministries controlled by Lapid's party colleagues provided millions of shekels in government advertising to Yediot Ahronot. And Lapid and his Yesh Atid party received unstintingly positive coverage in Yediot Ahronot.
Lapid has never been investigated for his actions.
Today, post-election wranglings in Israel over governing coalitions are guided by varied assessments of the likelihood that Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit will indict Netanyahu. During the campaign leading up to the April elections, Mandelblit cast legal norms distinguishing politics from law to the seven winds. He took the unprecedented step of announcing that pending the outcome of Netanyahu's pre-indictment hearing, which is scheduled for next week, he intends to indict the premier on bribery and breach of trust charges over his dealings with Mozes and Alovich.
Now, as Netanyahu prepares for his pre-indictment hearing, the prosecution has leaked its intent to indict Netanyahu by mid-November. In other words, they have no intention to consider Netanyahu's defense claims. The outcome is preordained.
For many Israelis, Pelosi' decision to begin an impeachment investigation parallels moves by Mandelblit and State Prosecutor Shai Nitzan to fast track the probes against Netanyahu. But the opposite is the case.
Pelosi's impeachment bid is a sign that America's legal system and indeed its democracy is far healthier than Israel's.
For nearly two years, Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his partisan investigators spent millions of dollars on a massive, and barely veiled bid to find a legal excuse to oust Trump from office. But in the end, they failed. The evidence of collusion between Trump and his campaign and Russia, simply wasn't to be found.
Mueller could have kept going. The media wanted him to. The Democrats wanted him to. But after feeding the media prejudicial leaks against Trump and aggressively prosecuting Manafort and other Trump officials on unrelated issues, Mueller ran out of steam. Although in his final report Mueller tried to provide Democrats with the means to continue the Russia probe on the political level, he closed down his investigation and went home. US practice doesn't permit the indictment of a sitting president. But even if it allowed for indictments, the materials he had assembled were too weak to justify and indictment.
In other words, Mueller walked his prosecutors to the brink of political interference, and then he walked them back. He did not replace politicians with prosecutors.
Until Mueller submitted his report, Pelosi used his ongoing probe to fend off pressure from the increasingly powerful radical members of her Democratic caucus to initiate impeachment proceedings against Trump. Since then, Pelosi argued, rightly, that impeachment proceedings require a huge political investment and hold little chance for success. Most Americans oppose impeaching Trump. The Republicans control the Senate. If the House votes to impeach Trump, chances of getting the two-thirds majority of Senators required to convict an impeached president and remove him from office are effectively non-existent.
Unfortunately for Pelosi – the Democratic base, including the media and the empowered radical faction of her Democratic caucus – have become deaf to reason. According to a Politico poll, whereas 70 percent of Democrats support impeachment, only 37 percent of the public does. The likes of Anastasia Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib, like the New York Times and the Washington Post live in an echo chamber. Members of the echo chamber are so cut off from those outside it that just as they cannot fathom anyone objecting to socialism, so they cannot imagine that anyone supports Trump or accepts the validity of the 2016 election results.
It is hard to know how the impeachment proceedings will play out. But a likely scenario is that the proceedings will damage Democrats more than they will damage Trump.
This then brings us back to Israel.
Like Pelosi and her colleagues, Blue and White leaders Benny Gantz and Lapid and their colleagues on the Left claim that the very fact that Netanyahu is under investigation renders him illegitimate. They refuse to form a unity government with Likud unless Netanyahu is first ousted as Likud leader.
But unlike Pelosi, Gantz and Lapid don't need to make their claims themselves. Lapid, whose ministers gave preferential treatment to Yediot through government advertising contracts and received glowing coverage in the paper, does not have to argue the case for impeaching Netanyahu. He stands behind the ostensibly "objective" state prosecutions.
Pelosi's decision to open impeachment proceedings against Trump despite the great political risk involved going into an election year indicates that the radical faction of the Democratic party has swallowed the party. But more importantly, her move is a testament to the abiding power and fortitude of American democracy. The difference between the situation in Israel, where the prosecutors happily abuse their legal power for transparently political aims and the US, where politically motivated prosecutors backed away from the brink and compelled politicians to take over their political investigations, is the difference between a flailing democracy and a resilient democracy.
© 2013 All Rights Reserved to Caroline Glick
All rights reserved to Israel Hayom
About Caroline B. Glick
Caroline B. Glick is a senior columnist at Breitbart News and the senior contributing and chief columnist for The Jerusalem Post. She is also a senior columnist for Maariv. She is the author of The Israeli Solution: A One State Plan for Peace in the Middle East, (Crown 2014) and of Shackled Warrior: Israel and the Global Jihad (Gefen 2008). The Israeli Solution was endorsed by leading US policymakers including Vice President Mike Pence, Senator Ted Cruz and National Security Advisor John Bolton. Shackled Warrior was endorsed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former CIA director James Woolsey.
Glick is the adjunct senior fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and directs the Israeli Security Project at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. She travels frequently throughout the world to brief policymakers on issues related to Israel's strategic environment and other related topics. She lectures widely on strategic and political issues affecting global security, Israel and the Jewish people, US-Israel relations, Israel-Diaspora affairs and Israel's changing strategic landscape.
In 2008 Glick founded Latma, the Hebrew language satirical media criticism website. She served as editor in chief of the site until it ceased operations in 2015.
Latma changed the face of Israel's social media and revolutionized the Israeli entertainment industry by bringing an alternative voice to the popular culture. Latma launched "Hakol Shafit," a primetime, half hour satirical newscast on Israel television Channel 1. Glick served as the editor in chief of the program.
Glick was born in Houston, TX and grew up in Chicago, IL. She moved to Israel in 1991, two weeks after receiving her BA in Political Science from Columbia University. She joined the Israel Defense Forces that summer and served as an officer for five and a half years.
From 1994-1996, as an IDF captain, Ms. Glick served in the Defense Ministry as a core member of Israel's negotiating team with the Palestinians.
In 1997 and 1998 Ms. Glick served as Assistant Foreign Policy Advisor to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.
From 1998-2000 Ms. Glick studied at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government and received a Master's in Public Policy in June 2000. … READ MORE
Author oneway2dayPosted on September 27, 2019 Categories Democrats, Elections, Left Wing, News and politics, OrganizationsTags Benjamin Netanyahu, Caroline Glick, Corrupt Left, Donald Trump, Israel, USALeave a comment on Israel's flailing democracy
If There Is a Neocon Warning – Pay Attention
© June 26, 2019
The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) in conjunction with the Think Tank American Enterprise Institute (AEI) has put together a report measuring Russia's potential threat to American interests today.
In the Bush II Presidential years the AEI had a Neoconservative reputation in its policy advocacy. In this day and age Neocons are pretty much castigated by the American Left and American Right.
On a personal level I have been an admirer of Neoconservatism's American Exceptionalism and a Foreign Policy based on military strength. Traditional Conservatives (sometimes called Paleocons) view this kind of aggressive Foreign Policy as a Big Government budget destroyer. There are those the American Left would label as the racist Right who castigate Neocons as ex-Communist Jews that can't be trusted.
There is a large amount of truth to the "ex-Communist" association since a large number of early Neocon proponents were indeed Communists or at least Marxist sympathizers, BUT these rebels against Communism woke up to the ideological failures. Socialism (and yes this includes National Socialism aka Nazism) and varieties of Marxism have led to much of history's oppressive regimes and the genocide of huge groups of human beings.
However, to label a "Communist" a "Jew" is a bit of an oxymoron. Communists are anti-religion atheists by nature and a good Jew practices the religious faith of Judaism. It is true there are people of a Jewish heritage that have repudiated the religious tenets of Judaism and embraced Marxist-Communist ideology. If one embraces Communism one rejects religion. That would make a Jew who became a Communist an ex-Jew. Incidentally, a person of Christian heritage, Islamic heritage, Buddhist heritage or any religious heritage who embraces Communism have rejected their religious heritage and have become an ex-whatever heritage.
Condemning all Jews because a few rejected their religious heritage should logically lead to the same condemnation of other people rejecting their religious heritage. I doubt Jew-haters follow that logic since one rarely hears the label that all Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, etc. are evil because a few accept atheistic One World Government Communism. Hence the hypocrisy of hating Jews because of Communism is just plain racism. (Muslims hate Jews because their revered writings tell them to hate Jews [Percentages]. That's a whole different kind of racism. One sees that kind of racism among idiot Christians who believe all Jews are responsible for killing Jesus when it was a secret night tribunal of Jewish leaders fearing a rebellion would displace status among their Roman overlords. Human fear and jealousy got Jesus Crucified. God's love Resurrected the Son of God which offers Saving Redemption to ALL who Believe in the Risen Savior – to the Jew first then to the non-Jew.)
The American Left deride the Neocons' American Exceptionalism as nationalistic anti-globalist rejectors of Socialism/Marxism.
Have Neocons made mistakes? DEFINITELY! The principle of nation-building based on American Republic Representative-Democracy only works in cultures amenable to the Western heritage. This unfortunate discovery became evident in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Those cultures have been brainwashed into Islamic thought for too long for the populace to understand let alone accept Western Representative Democracy.
When Neocons have a warning about Russia in relation to American National Interests and National Security the benefit of the USA is what is in mind.
CONFRONTING THE RUSSIAN CHALLENGE
Russian Soldier
By Frederick W. Kagan, Nataliya Bugayova, and Jennifer Cafarella
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (PDF)
[Institute for the Study of War (ISW) and Critical Threats Project (CTP) at the American Enterprise Institute]
Russia poses a significant threat to the United States and its allies for which the West is not ready. The West must act urgently to meet this threat without exaggerating it. Russia today does not have the military strength of the Soviet Union. It is a poor state with an economy roughly the size of Canada's, a population less than half that of the U.S., and demographic trends indicating that it will lose strength over time. It is not a conventional military near-peer nor will it become so. Its unconventional warfare and information operations pose daunting but not insuperable challenges. The U.S. and its allies must develop a coherent global approach to meeting and transcending the Russian challenge.
[Download the full report here and the Executive Summary here.]
The Russian Threat
President Vladimir Putin has invaded two of his neighbors, Georgia and Ukraine, partly to stop them from aligning with NATO and the West. He has also illegally annexed territory from both those states. He has established a military base in the eastern Mediterranean that he uses to interfere with, shape, and restrict the operations of the U.S. and the anti-ISIS coalition. He has given cover to Bashar al Assad's use of chemical weapons, and Russian agents have used military-grade chemical weapons in assassination attempts in Great Britain. Russia has threatened to use nuclear weapons, even in regional and local conflicts. And Moscow has interfered in elections and domestic political discourse in the U.S. and Europe.
The Russian threat's effectiveness results mainly from the West's weaknesses. NATO's European members are not meeting their full commitments to the alliance to maintain the fighting power needed to deter and defeat the emerging challenge from Moscow. Increasing political polarization and the erosion of trust by Western peoples in their governments creates vulnerabilities that the Kremlin has adroitly exploited.
Moscow's success in manipulating Western perceptions of and reactions to its activities has fueled the development of an approach to warfare that the West finds difficult to understand, let alone counter. Shaping the information space is the primary effort to which Russian military operations, even conventional military operations, are frequently subordinated in this way of war. Russia obfuscates its activities and confuses the discussion so that many people throw up their hands and say simply, "Who knows if the Russians really did that? Who knows if it was legal?"—thus paralyzing the West's responses.
Putin's Program
Putin is not simply an opportunistic predator. Putin and the major institutions of the Russian Federation have a program as coherent as that of any Western leader. Putin enunciates his objectives in major speeches, and his ministers generate detailed formal expositions of Russia's military and diplomatic aims and its efforts and the methods and resources it uses to pursue them. These statements cohere with the actions of Russian officials and military units on the ground. The common perception that he is opportunistic arises from the way that the Kremlin sets conditions to achieve these objectives in advance. Putin closely monitors the domestic and international situation and decides to execute plans when and if conditions require and favor the Kremlin. The aims of Russian policy can be distilled into the following:
Domestic Objectives
Putin is an autocrat who seeks to retain control of his state and the succession. He seeks to keep his power circle content, maintain his own popularity, suppress domestic political opposition in the name of blocking a "color revolution" he falsely accuses the West of preparing, and expand the Russian economy.
Putin has not fixed the economy, which remains corrupt, inefficient, and dependent on petrochemical and mineral exports. He has focused instead on ending the international sanctions regime to obtain the cash, expertise, and technology he needs. Information operations and hybrid warfare undertakings in Europe are heavily aimed at this objective.
External Objectives
Putin's foreign policy aims are clear: end American dominance and the "unipolar" world order, restore "multipolarity," and reestablish Russia as a global power and broker. He identifies NATO as an adversary and a threat and seeks to negate it. He aims to break Western unity, establish Russian suzerainty over the former Soviet States, and regain a global footprint.
Putin works to break Western unity by invalidating the collective defense provision of the North Atlantic Treaty (Article 5), weakening the European Union, and destroying the faith of Western societies in their governments.
He is reestablishing a global military footprint similar in extent the Soviet Union's, but with different aims. He is neither advancing an ideology, nor establishing bases from which to project conventional military power on a large scale. He aims rather to constrain and shape America's actions using small numbers of troops and agents along with advanced anti-air and anti-shipping systems.
A sound U.S. grand strategic approach to Russia:
Aims to achieve core American national security objectives positively rather than to react defensively to Russian actions;
Holistically addresses all U.S. interests globally as they relate to Russia rather than considering them theater-by-theater;
Does not trade core American national security interests in one theater for those in another, or sacrifice one vital interest for another;
Achieves American objectives by means short of war if at all possible;
Deters nuclear war, the use of any nuclear weapons, and other Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD);
Accepts the risk of conventional conflict with Russia while seeking to avoid it and to control escalation, while also ensuring that American forces will prevail at any escalation level;
Contests Russian information operations and hybrid warfare undertakings; and
Extends American protection and deterrence to U.S. allies in NATO and outside of NATO.
Such an approach involves four principal lines of effort.
Constrain Putin's Resources. Russia uses hybrid warfare approaches because of its relative poverty and inability to field large and modern military systems that could challenge the U.S. and NATO symmetrically. Lifting or reducing the current sanctions regime or otherwise facilitating Russia's access to wealth and technology could give Putin the resources he needs to mount a much more significant conventional threat—an aim he had been pursuing in the early 2000s when high oil prices and no sanctions made it seem possible.
Disrupt Hybrid Operations. Identifying, exposing, and disrupting hybrid operations is a feasible, if difficult, undertaking. New structures in the U.S. military, State Department, and possibly National Security Council Staff are likely needed to:
Coordinate efforts to identify and understand hybrid operations in preparation and underway;
Develop recommendations for action against hybrid operations that the U.S. government has identified but are not yet publicly known;
Respond to the unexpected third-party exposure of hybrid operations whether the U.S. government knew about the operations or not;
Identify in advance the specific campaign and strategic objectives that should be pursued when the U.S. government deliberately exposes a particular hybrid operation or when third parties expose hybrid operations of a certain type in a certain area;
Shape the U.S. government response, particularly in the information space, to drive the blowback effects of the exposure of a particular hybrid operation toward achieving those identified objectives; and
Learn lessons from past and current counter-hybrid operations undertakings, improve techniques, and prepare for future evolutions of Russian approaches in coordination with allies and partners.
The U.S. should also develop a counter-information operations approach that uses only truth against Russian narratives aimed at sowing discord within the West and at undermining the legitimacy of Western governments.
Delegitimize Putin as a Mediator and Convener. Recognition as one of the poles of a multipolar world order is vital to Putin. It is part of the greatness he promises the Russian people in return for taking their liberty. Getting a "seat at the table" of Western-led endeavors is insufficient for him because he seeks to transform the international system fundamentally. He finds the very language of being offered a seat at the West's table patronizing.
He has gained much more legitimacy as an international partner in Syria and Ukraine than his behavior warrants. He benefits from the continuous desire of Western leaders to believe that Moscow will help them out of their own problems if only it is approached in the right way.
The U.S. and its allies must instead recognize that Putin is a self-declared adversary who seeks to weaken, divide, and harm them—never to strengthen or help them. He has made clear in word and deed that his interests are antithetical to the West's. The West should therefore stop treating him as a potential partner, but instead require him to demonstrate that he can and will act to advance rather than damage the West's interests before engaging with him at high levels.
The West must not trade interests in one region for Putin's help in another, even if there is reason to believe that he would actually be helpful. Those working on American policy in Syria and the Levant must recognize that the U.S. cannot afford to subordinate its global Russia policy to pursue limited interests, however important, within the Middle East. Recognizing Putin as a mediator or convener in Syria—to constrain Iran's activities in the south of that country, for example—is too high a price tag to pay for undermining a coherent global approach to the Russian threat. Granting him credibility in that role there enhances his credibility in his self-proclaimed role as a mediator rather than belligerent in Ukraine. The tradeoff of interests is unacceptable.
Nor should the U.S. engage with Putin about Ukraine until he has committed publicly in word and deed to what should be the minimum non-negotiable Western demand—the recognition of the full sovereignty of all the former Soviet states, specifically including Ukraine, in their borders as of the dates of their admission as independent countries to the United Nations, and the formal renunciation (including the repealing of relevant Russian legislation) of any right to interfere in the internal affairs of those states.
Defend NATO. The increased Russian threat requires increased efforts to defend NATO against both conventional and hybrid threats. All NATO members must meet their commitments to defense spending targets—and should be prepared to go beyond those commitments to field the forces necessary to defend themselves and other alliance members. The Russian base in Syria poses a threat to Western operations in the Middle East that are essential to protecting our own citizens and security against terrorist threats and Iran. Neither the U.S. nor NATO is postured to protect the Mediterranean or fight for access to the Middle East through the eastern Mediterranean. NATO must now prepare to field and deploy additional forces to ensure that it can win that fight.
The West should also remove as much ambiguity as possible from the NATO commitment to defend member states threatened by hybrid warfare. The 2018 Brussels Declaration affirming the alliance's intention to defend member states attacked by hybrid warfare was a good start. The U.S. and other NATO states with stronger militaries should go further by declaring that they will come to the aid of a member state attacked by conventional or hybrid means regardless of whether Article 5 is formally activated, creating a pre-emptive coalition of the willing to deter Russian aggression.
Bilateral Negotiations. Recognizing that Russia is a self-defined adversary and threat does not preclude direct negotiations. The U.S. negotiated several arms control treaties with the Soviet Union and has negotiated with other self-defined enemies as well. It should retain open channels of communication and a willingness to work together with Russia on bilateral areas in which real and verifiable agreement is possible, even while refusing to grant legitimacy to Russian intervention in conflicts beyond its borders. Such areas could include strategic nuclear weapons, cyber operations, interference in elections, the Intermediate Nuclear Forces treaty, and other matters related to direct Russo-American tensions and concerns. There is little likelihood of any negotiation yielding fruit at this point, but there is no need to refuse to talk with Russia on these and similar issues in hopes of laying the groundwork for more successful discussions in the future.
1400 16th Street NW, Suite 515 Washington, DC 20036
©2007 – 2019 THE INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF WAR
Author oneway2dayPosted on June 26, 2019 Categories Conservative, Foreign Policy, NeoConservative, OrganizationsTags American Exceptionalism, Communist Failure, Hybrid Operations, ISW, Jew-Hatred, National Interests, National Security, Neoconservatism, Russia, Russian Agenda, USA, Vladimir PutinLeave a comment on If There Is a Neocon Warning – Pay Attention
Trump accuses NY Times of 'virtual treason'…
President Trump is accusing the New York Times of treason because the Leftist rag told the world about a classified U.S. mission to mess with Russia undoubtedly due Russian cyber warfare being conducted against the United States. The most public of which is cyber meddling in U.S. election cycles.
I would not be surprised to find out some day the USA and Russia have been exchanging cyber barbs for quite some time. Is it ethical or even legal for the NYT to expose clandestine and probably Classified cyber missions intended as bloodless reprisals to Russian cyber-crimes? It's definitely not ethical! If exposing Classified actions against a foreign enemy isn't illegal, IT SHOULD BE!
Justin Smith pointed this post on my Facebook Group Social Media Jail Conversations for Conservatives & Counterjihadists
(yeah I know, lengthy title. I had just emerged from Facebook jail and was quite annoyed at the time. So I created the group. Feel free to join the still relatively small group). The group URL to Justin's share is HERE.
Justin did not include the URL from whence he found the post. Justin's reason: The "URL is being banned by Facebook". The banned website is The Patriot Brief. Interestingly The Patriot Brief picked up the article from The National Sentinel. It is from the original source I am cross posting below. In case you are curious The Patriot Brief link to the article is HERE.
Trump accuses NY Times of 'virtual treason' after report exposing U.S. cyber-targeting of Russian infrastructure: He's right
By Jon Dougherty
The National Sentinel
NYT Building
(NationalSentinel) We have made the observation before that in the age of Donald Trump, the establishment media has become a national security liability due to the fact that major outlets will publish just about anything in order to undermine him.
But in doing so, these same outlets also undermine our country — and some 312 million American citizens — making them as big a threat to our security as any foreign power.
The New York Times did it again Sunday with a story claiming that the Trump administration has escalated attacks on Russia's power grid:
The United States is stepping up digital incursions into Russia's electric power grid in a warning to President Vladimir V. Putin and a demonstration of how the Trump administration is using new authorities to deploy cybertools more aggressively, current and former government officials said.
In interviews over the past three months, the officials described the previously unreported deployment of American computer code inside Russia's grid and other targets as a classified companion to more publicly discussed action directed at Moscow's disinformation and hacking units around the 2018 midterm elections.
Advocates of the more aggressive strategy said it was long overdue, after years of public warnings from the Department of Homeland Security and the F.B.I. that Russia has inserted malware that could sabotage American power plants, oil and gas pipelines, or water supplies in any future conflict with the United States.
But it also carries significant risk of escalating the daily digital Cold War between Washington and Moscow.
"It has gotten far, far more aggressive over the past year," one senior intelligence official told the Times. "We are doing things at a scale that we never contemplated a few years ago."
You know what else carries "significant risk?" Reporting classified information that provides valuable insight and intelligence for a nuclear-armed adversary.
So much for "Russia collusion," right?
The revelations infuriated POTUS Trump, and rightfully so. He said on Twitter the paper committed "a virtual act of Treason" over its report, The Hill noted.
"Do you believe that the Failing New York Times just did a story stating that the United States is substantially increasing Cyber Attacks on Russia," Trump tweeted. "This is a virtual act of Treason by a once great paper so desperate for a story, any story, even if bad for our Country."
"Anything goes with our Corrupt News Media today," he added. "They will do, or say, whatever it takes, with not even the slightest thought of consequence! These are true cowards and without doubt, THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE!"
He also claimed the Times report was "NOT TRUE."
Do you believe that the Failing New York Times just did a story stating that the United States is substantially increasing Cyber Attacks on Russia. This is a virtual act of Treason by a once great paper so desperate for a story, any story, even if bad for our Country…..
The fact is the Times report most likely is true. Rational people understand that in light of report after report regarding Russia/China/Iran/North Korea targeting U.S. infrastructure, it makes sense for America — which is a cyber superpower — to respond in kind.
But these kinds of operations are not meant to be revealed. Doing so not only compromises said operations, but foreign intelligence agencies gleaning details from published open source information very often learn things that help them counter our moves.
Which, again, puts our country at risk.
The Times editors know this. They understand full well what revealing this kind of highly classified information can mean to an adversary.
And yet, they published it anyway. Just to 'get Donald Trump.'
What does that say about them? It says — again — that the president has been right about our own press since he took office: They are more of an enemy than some of our adversaries. Or at least the equivalent.
Even though we have speech protections written into our Constitution via the First Amendment, you still can't slander someone, libel them, yell 'fire' in a theater, or engage in various forms of "hate" speech.
Publishing highly classified information that provides 'aid and comfort' to an adversary should be legally actionable as well. Doing so harms our country by weakening our national security.
Think about it: Does anyone believe that FDR would not have punished the NYTimes or the Washington Post if either paper had published plans for the D-Day invasion, just because their editors believed Americans 'had a right to know'?
Granted, we were in an actual war then, and we're not fighting Russia — now. Though you could argue that in places like Syria, where Russian-sponsored mercenaries from the Wagner Group attacked U.S. forces and their allies early last year, amounts to a real conflict. Or Russia putting forces into Venezuela, in our hemisphere. Or encroaching on NATO's eastern flank.
We have argued before that reporting the details about these highly classified operations are harming our national security at a time when the world is more dangerous than ever, not less, and for no good reason. The Times is just as guilty, in our view, as the U.S. officials who leaked the information. If they can be charged under the Espionage Act, then the 'paper of record' that published the information should be equally culpable.
The president is right.
Follow Jon Dougherty on Twitter at @JonDougherty10
© 2017-2019 USA Features Media LLC.
ABOUT The National Sentinel
The National Sentinel is a fiercely independent, non-corporate-owned news site dedicated to bringing our readers fresh, informative content and the news of the day, without the bias and political chicanery of the so-called "mainstream" media.
Updated daily and throughout the day, rely on us to provide you with unfiltered news and information you won't find anywhere else that helps you to make informed decisions. Like the media is supposed to do.
The National Journal is part of the USA Features Media network of sites. Follow USA Features on Facebook (click here).
A note about our advertisers: In accordance with Federal Trade Commission regulations, we are disclosing that our site earns a commission off of items we advertise and sell, as an affiliate. Think of it like a tip for bringing you awesome content! In any event, we have an advertising relationship with the stores we link to. Now you know.
See usage rights/permissions here. … READ THE REST
Author oneway2dayPosted on June 17, 2019 Categories Conspiracy/Secret Society, Crime, Espionage, Foreign Policy, Left Wing, News and politics, Organizations, WarTags Cyber Warfare, Donald Trump, NYT, Russia, Treason, Trump Derangement Syndrome, USALeave a comment on Trump accuses NY Times of 'virtual treason'…
The United States and China Collide
Justin Smith addresses the ever looming confrontation between the United States and Communist China.
America Must Ensure Her Global Dominance
"Tariffs will make our Country MUCH STRONGER, not weaker. Just sit back and watch! In the meantime, China should not renegotiate deals with the U.S. at the last minute. This is not the Obama Administration, or the Administration of Sleepy Joe, who let China get away with "murder!" ~ President Trump on May 10th 2019
The first opening salvos in the most bitter trade war between the United States and China, unlike any witnessed since the 1930s, are simply part of a broader agenda, as both nations jockey for positions of dominance on the global stage. For those who are crying that tariffs are a tax on the consumer, they are much more than a simple tax, and they are a means to ensuring our economy leads on all fronts in the global markets and the U.S. dollar remains the global reserve currency. And as such, this isn't so much a trade war as it is an effort by President Trump to ensure America's global dominance and national security far into the future, by increasing and safeguarding our technical advantage and ability to win any war forced upon us, including the next world war.
The U.S. and China relations are testing a new low and the United States and China are on a collision course. Goodwill between the two that was purchased by U.S. dollars is rapidly breaking down.
As promised, President Trump raised duties on $200 billion of Chinese imports to twenty-five percent from ten percent on May 10th, and in response, China's commerce Ministry has vowed "necessary countermeasures" are forthcoming. After eleven rounds of negotiations and no deal, President Trump is also now considering applying tariffs to the $300 billion in Chinese goods that are currently tariff free.
Even the Obama administration complained during Obama's second term about China's unfair trade practices, such as duties on U.S. chicken, Chinese protectionist acts in the aircraft industry, Chinese subsidy of its corn, rice and wheat production and export duties on various metal.
At the heart of the matter, China has stated its plan to be the world's leading superpower, and they are positioning themselves to rocket past the U.S. in economic and military strength on the back of technology China steals from the United States and every other nation that does business with China. China's President Xi Jinping believes he can turn China into a super competitive nation and a technical juggernaut and superpower by 2025, in the areas of information technology, aerospace, advanced robotics and artificial intelligence.
Although China is more than willing to increase its purchases of U.S. goods, especially soybean and natural gas purchases to offset last year's record $419 billion trade deficit, China will not accept any limitation on its grander vision and its desire to control the technological mountain top. They may stop talking about it, but they'll never end China's Made In China 2025 program; they may become even more secretive, but they will never cease their industrial espionage, and they will continue to coerce technology transfers, if only in a less blatant manner.
Since 2010, China has promised eight times to stop forcing foreign companies to transfer technology to China, as a cost of doing business in China. And yet according to a 2018 Office of U.S. Trade report, the coercion has continued.
Noted by two retired senior Department of Defense officials in 2017, a problem that costs America $600 billion annually, technology and intellectual property theft must be America's primary focus over the trade deficit. Although few companies publicly acknowledge the problem, forty-four percent of those aerospace companies and forty-one percent of the chemical concerns operating in China felt pressured to "share" technology with China, according to AmCham Shanghai Business (July 2018), and Rand Corp warns its employees against taking their personal electronics with them to China, since several U.S. businessmen have caught people (spies) searching their rooms. Chinese spies have already stolen documents concerning the U.S. F-35 fighter and the space shuttle, along with secrets on our most significant weapons systems.
All of this only confirms that the widening rift between D.C. and Beijing goes beyond trade, and it is further exhibited by China's massive military buildup, which was only made possible through the near $500 billion trade deficit — or more once one includes intellectual property theft — and U.S. wealth. Among other problems, China is claiming ownership and control of international waterways in the South China Sea and disregarding other nation's territorial claims, as well as the 2016 International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea ruling (although I'm not a big fan of sovereign nations bowing to international entities), it has significantly suppressed liberty in the ostensibly autonomous region of Hong Kong, and it is increasing pressure on Taiwan — a de facto independent and sovereign nation — to reunite with "the Motherland".
"It was way past time to confront China on many of these problems", Michael Wessel, a member of the congressionally chartered U.S-China Economic Security Review, recently stated. "They've been allowed to skate for too many years."
In the meantime, complaints that the cost of these tariffs will be borne by Americans is exaggerated, since it appears that China absorbed the last round of tariffs out of their profits rather than raising the cost of goods at Walmart. It also appears that China underestimated President Trump's resolve on this issue and their own miscalculation is biting them in the rump right now. President Trump couldn't have picked a better time for this confrontation, with the American economy riding high.
China also didn't count on the rising antipathy of Americans towards it, as Americans see China unfairly undercut our economic prosperity, threaten our security and challenge our values. Republicans and Democrats alike are rallying around the flag on this issue, in a rare bipartisan consensus that America must stand up to China.
If nothing else, any shift away from China will only be a benefit to America, when U.S. businesses and manufacturers return to America out of cost concerns. Although tariffs do hit consumers, they don't if one chooses not to buy those particular goods, opting instead to buy comparable goods made in other nations or America. So, President Trump should place tariffs on all Chinese goods and cripple China's economy, however long or temporary.
Just as the Plaza Accord of 1985 forced Japan to act more fairly on trade, by devaluing the dollar against the yen, and eliminated trade barriers, it also demonstrates that White House initiated trade wars do not automatically end in disaster. Aggressive trade measures can and often do work and succeed in placing the global economic system on a more feasible trajectory of an open and rules based economic order.
Pat Buchanan recently noted: "Of the nations that have risen to economic preeminence in recent years — the British before 1850, the United States between 1789 and 1914, post-war Japan, China in recent decades — how many did so through free trade? None. All practiced economic nationalism."
President Trump recognizes the party is coming to an end and that America must extricate Herself from the unholy alliance with "the Dragon" and enabling its path to global dominance. He understands that economics do not receive an exemption from the dynamics of geopolitical competition and growing national security concerns associated with China; and, by walking a fine line and between targeted measures and negotiations, President Trump should be able to hand China a face-saving defeat that protects and saves America's own economic independence, sovereignty, greatness and national identity, without devolution into all-out war. Simply stated, this is one war America must win.
Author oneway2dayPosted on May 15, 2019 Categories Conservative, Foreign Policy, News and politics, Organizations, WarTags Donald Trump, Geopolitics, Intellectual Theft, ITLOS, Justin Smith, Military Superiority, Plaza Accord, Red China, Taiwan, Territorial Disputes, Trade Deficit, Trade Wars, USA, Xi JinpingLeave a comment on The United States and China Collide
Bolton: 'Palestine' is not a state
National Security Advisor John Bolton stated the obvious about the Arabs pretending to be Palestinians; viz., Palestine is not a State.
The remarks came at a White House presser announcing the USA is no longer a party to the world body International Court of Justice (ICJ). The move primarily asserts that the United States will not lose its National Sovereignty to a world government body. And secondly the remarks thumb a news at those who interfere in Israel's National Sovereignty by telling the Jewish State where and where not it can place its Capital City within the (true) Nation's national borders.
JRH 10/5/18 (Hat Tip: Ali H. of G+ Community United We Stand One Nation Under God)
In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.
By Batya Jerenberg
World Israel News
US National Security Adviser John Bolton speaks during a briefing at the White House in Washington, Oct. 3, 2018. (AP/Susan Walsh)
"It's not a state now. It does not meet the customary international law test of statehood," US National Security Adviser John Bolton stated.
US National Security Adviser John Bolton put the Palestinian Authority's (PA) official status into perspective at a Wednesday press briefing when he announced that the United States would no longer be a signatory party to the United Nations' International Court of Justice (ICJ).
"The president has decided that the United States will withdraw from the optional protocol and dispute resolution to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. This is in connection with a case brought by the so-called state of Palestine naming the United States as a defendant [in the ICJ], challenging our move of our embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem," Bolton said.
White House reporters immediately jumped on the adjective, asking whether calling the Palestinian Authority (PA) a "so-called state" was "productive," considering that President Donald Trump had said he was working towards a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Bolton's answer was unequivocal.
"It's not a state now. It does not meet the customary international law test of statehood," he said. "It doesn't control defined boundaries. It doesn't fulfill the normal functions of government. There are a whole host of reasons why it's not a state."
"It could become a state, as the president said, but that requires diplomatic negotiations with Israel and others," he added. "So calling it the 'so-called state of Palestine' defines exactly what it has been. [That's] the position that the United States government has pursued uniformly since 1988, when the Palestinian Authority declared itself to be the State of Palestine."
VIDEO: At White House presser, National Security Advisor Bolton insists Palestine has no claim to statehood
[Posted by Raw Story
Published on Oct 3, 2018]
Bolton might have been referring to the fact that 137 countries have recognized the PA as a state since that date. He reiterated the US rejection of this position on a bipartisan level.
"We don't recognize it as a state… We have consistently, across Democratic and Republican administrations, opposed the admission of 'Palestine' to the UN as a state because it's not a state."
Although the PA is only a "non-member observer state" at the UN, it was allowed to formally join the International Criminal Court in 2015. Since the court's decisions are binding, the US, by leaving the protocol, blocked the Palestinian case.
Bolton added that the withdrawal was part of a general effort by the Trump administration to protect US sovereignty from the reach of the international court.
"We will commence a review of all international agreements that may still expose the United States to purported binding jurisdiction dispute resolution in the International Court of Justice," he said. "The United States will not sit idly by as baseless politicized claims are brought against us."
About WIN
World Israel News (WIN) is an online news outlet that presents
readers with important news from Israel and around the world.
Our audience consists of people who are concerned about Israel and
seek the truth. They want to know what's really happening in Israel
and how these events can impact the world.
The goal of this website is to provide easy access to the latest news from Israel, presented in a truthful, honest way, with a focus on maximizing the user experience.
Constructive debate and exchange of ideas about the Jewish State is warmly welcomed.
We encourage our readers to participate openly and honestly.
It's important to constantly improve the World Israel News website. Therefore, feedback and suggestions are greatly encouraged and appreciated!
Author oneway2dayPosted on October 5, 2018 Categories Conservative, Courts, Foreign Policy, Israel, Left Wing, News and politics, OrganizationsTags ICJ, Israel, John Bolton, National Sovereignty, Pseudo-Palestinians, USALeave a comment on Bolton: 'Palestine' is not a state
The Clarion Bell Warning
As I was putting together my own warning about Islam's danger to America's culture of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, Justin Smith sent a similar and admittedly much more erudite submission than my effort. Justin's patriotism in this essay is justifiably passionate and undoubtedly drive Multicultural Leftists into apoplexy.
I have been ringing the clarion bell warning on the existential threat of Islam for years — since 1979 — and it is only in the last few recent years, even after 9/11, that Americans even seem to remotely understand the methodology and machinations within Islam, Sharia law and all that it demands of its adherents and all non-Muslims they engage.
There are some who foolishly believe Muslims are just like us and only differing by praying on mats pointed to Mecca, with their faces on the floor. Wrong! Their history belies their intentions toward you. Do not be beguiled by the weakest among them; be warned by their most violent and pernicious and be aware it is impossible to tell the difference.
Muslims aren't necessarily trying to "change our Constitution", but they do use its freedoms to support their call for Sharia Law in America. They work continually to try to codify Sharia Law into U.S. Law, but fortunately, many states have passed the American Laws for American Courts bill that prevents a judge from considering any Sharia precedent in a case.
This does not stop the current advancement of Sharia Law as a parallel system in our communities, which leads to the Balkanization of any nation. Sharia Law is the mechanism primarily behind the creation of entire Muslim operated communities, cities and regions — the "no go zones" one finds in France, Germany and the U.K and now here in America, in places like Dearborn, Michigan, Minneapolis, Minnesota and Islamberg, New York.
Ask yourself, what is the value to us from the world of Mohammedanism and Islam? What value has Islam contributed to human society in the last 500 years? Name one worthy thing besides couscous it has given the world in that time?
In every country where Muslims are in the minority, they are obsessed with minority rights. In every country with a Muslim majority, there are no minority rights.
But it's not just the Muslims who are representing the threat to our Constitution and the entire nation by way of Sharia Law.
During her tenure as Dean of Harvard Law School, Elena Kagan, now a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, revealed, inadvertently or not, the evil agenda of the Leftists in her May 2007 presentation, in which she stated that Sharia Law was compatible with our Constitution and could be incorporated within U.S. law. In Dec. 2005, she accepted $20 million from Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal for her pet project at Harvard, the Islamic Legal Studies Program.
There exists an entire group of people in all echelons of our government, from the local and state to the federal, some citizens and some not, who have been educated and lived much of their lives abroad. From the former "president" on down, many of these people have little connection and even less love for our Republic and the traditional American culture and principles upon which the U.S. was founded. These collaborators and traitors continue to tolerate the abuses and acts of terrorism those sons of Mohammed commit, and while they do not hesitate to command a 95 year old invalid to remove her diaper in an airport, a "possible security risk", due to their own cowardice and complicity, they cannot and will not name the enemy, because the enemy is them and their Muslim allies.
There is one common thread for all the misery, death and suffering in the Middle-East, which is pervasive and dominant…Islam. To welcome its adherents and believers into your midst is to welcome coming misery, suffering and death in equal proportions to the size of any host nation's Muslim population, until they reach majority at which time misery metastasizes.
The formula here is not hard to discern. They complain about discrimination as a minority until they gain control, at which time their discrimination against other ideologies and all religions is all consuming.
The enemy is Islam and the Sharia Law doctrine that accompanies it!
There is a ring of fire and death around Muslim territory in the Middle-East, South-East Asia, Africa and the "Stans" regions. Any area Islam touches is consumed by and impaled by the eon-and-a-half-old program of proselytizing with force and conquest, by the zealots of the ideology of Islam, the Muslim so-called "religion of peace". To invite them in is to invite the enemy into your camp. Keep Islam confined within the ring.
One should note that Japan does not allow Islam to exist inside its country. Islam cannot be practiced and Muslims are not allowed to live or work there. Muslims are not allowed to immigrate to Japan; and just recently, on Friday June 8th, Austria announced that it would expel sixty Turkish-funded imams and close seven mosques, in their crack-down on political Islam.
Marine Le Pen, former French presidential candidate stated: "Austria is taking things in hand and showing that 'when you want to, you can!'"
Matteo Salvini, Italy's new interior minister, exclaimed: "Those who exploit their faith to endanger a country's security should be expelled!"
And that is why our future elections remain critical, if we do not want to continue on our own current path of Islamization and become just as cowed and badgered and suppressed, especially through hate-speech "laws", as Eurabia. We need to elect people who understand the existential threat of Islam and who will pass laws aimed at deporting Muslims and extinguishing and eradicating Islam's influence and presence in our country.
All Muslims must be expelled from America and all mosques destroyed. Muslim immigration to America must be halted.
All source links are by the Editor.
© John R. Houk
Author oneway2dayPosted on June 11, 2018 Categories Activism, Conservative, Constitution, Counterjihad, Immigration, Left WingTags Ban Islam, Elena Kagan, Hate-Speech Laws, Islam Incompatibility, Justin Smith, Law Exploitation, Sharia Law, Silent Jihad, USALeave a comment on The Clarion Bell Warning
Russian Strategy and Europe's Refugee Crisis
Paul Sutliff sent me a link to a Center for Security Policy (CSP) pdf link with this recommendation:
This is a must read. I am hoping to have at least one of the authors on my June 28th show when I move to Thursdays. This is a must read!
That show, by the way, is Civilization Jihad Awareness with Paul Sutliff on Blog Talk Radio. The show comes on live, but it is archived. You should go there and catch up.
The pdf is 20 pages with foot notes. Take your time and thoroughly read the CSP analysis. I could probably write a whole other post trying to introduce this extremely important analysis, but I won't.
That which I say will little justice to the content presented, but here goes a brief thought. The central bad guy as to American National Security is Russia. You will discover that Russia is at the heart of the Muslim Refugee crisis smacking Europe. AND in relation to that you should understand the Russian goal is destabilization first in Europe and second in the USA. Russia even has tentacle infiltrating European Nationalist movements to foment societal chaos while also publicly supporting the Multicultural Left ideals. This duo strategy has only one purpose: cultural destabilization designed to disunite European resolve and alienate a united Europe away from America.
TRUST ME! Those brief words about "Russian Strategy and Europe's Refugee Crisis" is only the mere tip of the iceberg that I pray you take the time to fully understand what the authors J.R. Nyquist and Dr. Anca-Maria Cernea are trying to enlighten you concerning the survival of our Western Culture via strategic concepts of National Security and National Interests.
By J.R. Nyquist and Dr. Anca-Maria Cernea
Center for Security Policy
Forty years ago, a serious long-term problem confronting Moscow was the USSR's fast-growing Muslim population. It was then speculated that the Soviet Union's high Muslim birthrate would turn the USSR into a majority Muslim country by the middle of the twenty-first century. It is a strange joke, and more than a curious twist of fate, that NATO faces this same prospect today.
The Russian armed forces officially moved into Syria on 30 September 2015. Already a massive Muslim "refugee" invasion of Europe was underway, stretching through the spring and summer of that year. This migrant flood occurred without a dramatic change in the Syrian crisis. According to a report by investigative journalist Witold Gadowski, published in mid-September 2015, the people then pouring into the heart of Europe included more than refugees, and possibly included ISIS terrorist infiltrators.1
Gadowski was a well-known war reporter, documentary film director, and winner of several journalism prizes in Poland and abroad. He went to Syria in 2015 and discovered that in the territory controlled by the Islamic State (ISIS), there was no chance for anyone to leave ISIS-controlled territory without permission. As he explained, the punishment for attempting to escape was crucifixion.2
In Gadowski's opinion, the flood of refugees had been triggered by decisions made in Moscow, and perhaps in Tehran. In fact, the mass killing of Syrian civilians was an ongoing project of the Russian-backed Syrian dictator, Bashar al-Assad – whose troops were killing seven times more civilians than ISIS.3 Once the Russian bombers arrived, even more civilians were targeted.4
Of special interest, and contrary to public declarations, Russian and Chinese technicians were busy helping ISIS to maintain its captured oil rigs and refineries, while Russian trained Iraqi military officers (formerly in Saddam Hussein's army), were leading ISIS forces against the Baghdad government (which government set up a joint intelligence headquarters in league with Iran and Russia).5 From this and other evidence it appears that Russia has been playing a double game in the Middle East.
Using the Iraqi oil infrastructure, relying on clandestine Russian technical support, ISIS earned $800 million in annual revenues by "selling more than 60,000 barrels of oil per day." But this was not the Islamic State's only source of income. According to Gadowski:
…the Islamic State trades artworks and archeological artifacts. It is not true that the monuments of antique culture are destroyed. They are sold and bring a large income. In 90 percent of the cases, this is happening through the Russian mafia. The Islamic State and the wave of refugees bring profits to the Russian, Turkish and Albanian mafias.6
In this matter the Russian mafia is not simply the Russian mafia, and the same can be said of mafia organizations which have appeared throughout the "former" communist world. As noted by Brian Whitmore of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, "Organized crime is now a major element of Russian statecraft."7 According to Gadowski, Russia's game is to "checkmate Europe, and to a lesser extent the United States." Outwardly Russia pretends to fight ISIS. In reality, Russia helps ISIS. Essential to the plan, the Syrians were generating refugees by terrorizing civilians in Syria. As stated above, Gadowski believed that a secret Islamic State Terrorist Unit (AMNI) was placing fanatical killers among the refugees. In this way a vast network of suicide bombers and murderers entered Europe.8
After arriving in Syria, Russian air units launched bombing raids against Syrian civilians, adding to the refugee flow in late summer. Of course, the refugee crisis was well under way before the Russians arrived. It had peaked earlier. What the bombing showed, however, was Russia's strategic intention. The Syrians and the Russians were following a pre-defined path. The bombers were the icing on a cake already baked. Long before the Russian bombers arrived other means of pressure had been employed by Syria – including the use of chemical weapons. Refugees (and terrorists) had long since flooded into neighboring Turkey. Through the spring and summer of 2015, the numbers were getting larger and larger. A significant proportion of these masses moved into Europe. This paper will present evidence and arguments that Russia and her allies (Syria and Iran) set this process in motion as part of a larger strategic design. The authors believe that Moscow does not act haphazardly. Rather, its moves are carefully thought-out in advance. The strategy being applied is complex, its objectives masked by disinformation and subterfuge, extortion and blackmail, organized crime and false flag terrorist operations.
THE ARAB SPRING
When rebellions began to break out in the Middle East several years ago, the former chief of Romanian intelligence, Ion Mihai Pacepa, wondered why the first rebellions in the series took place "only in Islamic countries that are pro-American." He asked why the rebels were burning American flags. He thought it suspicious that the United States had no advanced warning of the mass demonstrations that swept the Arab world from Morocco to the Persian Gulf. Pacepa noted that "on the first day of the Cairo uprising" the demonstrators "were carrying flags displaying the hammer and sickle." He called this "a mistake caused by overzealousness…."9
The rebellion that began on 17 December 2010 in Tunisia, and spread across the Arab world, was an attempt to sweep away "moderate" Arab regimes. It was not a revolution for freedom or democracy. As Richard Miniter wrote in a 2011 Forbes article, "Virtually every element of the media narrative [on the Arab Spring] … is wrong or misleading." The rebellion was not a spontaneous reaction to local dictatorships. According to Miniter, Egypt's chief of intelligence warned Gen. David Petraeus in 2010 that Iran – a close ally and client state of Moscow – was preparing to "bring down [Egypt's] Mubarak regime."10
Miniter was told by intelligence officials that "Iran's agents are behind the street demonstrations and violent attacks on government buildings." 11 Iran's revolutionary activity throughout the region, however, was not merely Iranian. This activity was connected to Russia, and to Russia's past support for the communist cause. According to an Iranian specialist, the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ali Khamenei, was educated in Moscow and may be a Russian intelligence asset. Worse yet, other top leaders in Iran were also educated in Russia, with ongoing ties to Moscow.12
In a recently published article by the Katehon Institute13 in Russia, B. Ozerov explained that the Soviet government in 1918 "was guided by understanding Islam as a close ideology to the communist doctrine." After all, Islam favored ideals of equality, social justice, and the redistribution of wealth. According to Ozerov, Moscow's initial plan in the region was "to transform Islam into an Eastern edition of Communism…."14
In a 4 July 1925 interview with the Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shimbun, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was asked if he believed revolutionary turmoil in China, India, Persia and Egypt was bound to sweep away the Western powers. "Yes, I do," said the communist leader, who added that the West would be "attacked on two sides – in the rear as well as in front."
RELATED INSIGHTS OF V. KALASHNIKOV AND A. ILLARIONOV
In June 2013 J.R. Nyquist interviewed a disaffected KGB officer in Russia named Viktor Kalashnikov. In reference to Syria, the former KGB lieutenant colonel said, "It's all about struggle against the United States. All allies are measured in terms of their anti-Americanism. If they are anti-American, they are our friends." Kalashnikov then referred to the deployment of "terrorist armies." Armies composed of terrorists, said Kalashnikov, were better than old-fashioned Soviet tank armies. They were more flexible, and cheaper than tanks. "The head of the Russian state has publicly warned the West that … arms deliveries to the opposition in Syria might result in terrorist attacks against Europe. That's a clear causus belli – a real terrorist threat," said Kalashnikov.15
When Nyquist advanced the idea that the Cold War was over, Kalashnikov scoffed. This is yet another topic, he said. "But we have to ask what happened to the Soviet Union in 1991. It was dismantled for the sake of reorganization and for the sake of Russian power." The Soviet generals were not happy with the strategic situation. The large tank armies of the Soviet Union were, in Kalashnikov's words, "a wasting asset, especially after 1983."16
The core strategy, he explained, "was splitting Europe from America." In the 1980s this was attempted with the threat of war. But now, under present circumstances, a different method would have to be devised. "What happened on 9/11 was just an omen of things to come," he explained.
In Part 1 of the interview, headlined "Russia's Islamist Alliance, Plans to Destroy NATO," the former KGB lieutenant colonel, who had been trained as a strategist, attempted to draw the interviewer's attention to Russia's support for the anti-immigrant parties in Europe. Here Kalashnikov referred to Islam as a Russian weapon in the destruction of NATO. Realizing the interviewer was perplexed, Kalashnikov said, "Let me talk about [the neo-fascists] in Hungary. They are pro-Putin. They are nationalists, and of course, they are absolutely anti-Semitic and anti-American."17
What did the anti-immigrant parties have to do with "terrorist armies" in the Middle East? What did any of it have to do with splitting America off of Europe? Here was a question requiring careful consideration. To answer this question, one might well imagine how NATO would have prospered if Hillary Clinton and Marine Le Pen had won their respective elections. What if Europe followed France's lead? Would the politically correct Americans remain allies with the new Europe? "What I would suggest," said Kalashnikov, "is that your anti-terror experts read Vladimir Lenin who provided the textbook for terrorists. How they should set up combat units; who is to be killed first and second; what strategy and tactics to adopt. Lenin developed a complete theory for using terrorism to take power and govern a huge state. That was the beginning of Soviet strategy, statehood and government, as well as international policy."18
Was Kalashnikov talking about Europe?
More than one year after Kalashnikov's curious pronouncements, a former Kremlin economic advisor named Andrei Illarionov, made an even more curious statement. In a December 2014 television interview, Illarionov noted that Europe had reached its lowest level of defense readiness. He also noted that Russia was openly threatening the West with nuclear war. Illarionov then made an astonishing prediction, adding that "the European nations will not be very much surprised, let's say, if in the spring of next year, 2015, there will be some kind of massive political movement – let's say a kind of 'Islamic spring.'"19
Being Russian himself, having worked in the Kremlin, it seems obvious that Illarionov had access to high-level sources. The coming "Islamic spring," he said, would not occur in the Middle East, "but in Europe." He mentioned destabilizing effects on "certain European countries" where the crisis would "consume the energy and attention of European leaders at a time when Mr. Putin would try and fulfill his neo-imperial project…."20
Illarionov was quite specific when he said the coming "Islamic spring" in Europe would involve "movements and activities … in European countries themselves." When asked if this could be triggered by Russia, Illarionov said, "I am just warning … when it should happen … European societies should not be [too] much shocked and surprised."
Illarionov's prediction carries forward the suggestion that Moscow instigated the migrant crisis. For how else could Illarionov have known about an "Islamic spring" involving "movements and activities … in Europe"? His prediction was an unlikely direct hit. To know something in advance is to know something is being planned. Illarionov clearly predicted the most significant event of the following year. He also implied this event was planned to distract the West from Russia's aggression against Ukraine. And this prediction fits perfectly with the analysis of Lt. Col. Viktor Kalashnikov, a resident of Moscow, who warned of Russia deploying "terrorist armies" in 2013. The fact is, people in Moscow knew what was coming. And why wouldn't they? It takes enormous resources and real planning to move millions of people from the Middle East to the heart of Europe. A lot of people had to know in advance, if only to set up the needed transport system.
INSIGHTS OF A ROMANIAN GENERAL
Those who have lived under communist regimes, who were educated as strategists, are in a better position to properly evaluate recent events than their West European counterparts. During an August 2015 Adevarul Live television discussion, retired Army General Constantin Degeratu referred to the European refugee crisis as a "hybrid war" of aggression, conjured out of the Middle East by Russia. Superficially, the refugee crisis "completely covered the problem of the Russian aggression against Ukraine," Degeratu noted. He then stated that the whole refugee operation was "well organized." The general added, "Look at the people who are coming. They are better dressed and better fed than 10 to 15 percent of Romania's population. This is a planned invasion, it doesn't have a direct cause in the Middle East…." He then pointed out the logistical difficulties involved in moving millions of people hundreds or thousands of miles. "If somebody is to come from Afghanistan with a trolley to the border of Macedonia, this requires logistics."21
As if to clarify Kalashnikov's earlier point about Hungary, Degeratu pointed to a curious anomaly. "It is said that this threefold increase in the number of refugees compared to the numbers of last summer is taking everyone by surprise. But [this] occurred a week after Hungary completed the building of [a large border] fence. Doesn't it seem interesting to you that first the fence was built and afterwards this migration started, in that particular area?"22
Retired Army General Alexandru Grumaz was also on the program. He agreed that the migration was "well supported." He added that Turkey also had an interest in pushing the refugees along, toward Europe. It was, said Grumaz, a crisis of European institutions. Degeratu said the problem of the refugee invasion could not be solved. Why? "Because it is managed by Russia and thus it is meant not to be solved, but to be maintained." The general then said, "Russia's interest is to maintain this crisis."
"It is clear," said Degeratu, "that if the European Union doesn't want to live the nightmare … which says that in the years 2030 to 2040 more than 60 percent of the active EU population will be Muslim … then the European countries should decide if they want to survive as a civilization or not." According to Degeratu's strategic assessment, "We have to understand that we are the target of a war, and we may call it hybrid, or an asymmetrical war, but this migrant wave is a consequence of it." He then summarized the perilous cost of the migrants for Europe, noting, "the cost for each one of these people is three times the minimum retirement pension in Romania!"23
Surely, said Degeratu, "The political attitude [in Europe] with regard to this situation needs to change. So far, it's been peace-time politics. Now we are the target of an aggression. Border control is absolutely mandatory."
According to Prof. Przemysław Żurawski vel Grajewski, who was asked by Dr. Cernea to comment on Gen. Degeratu's assessments, "The opinions of Gen. Degeratu are fully justified and I would subscribe [to] each of his statements…." Prof. Żurawski is one of Poland's best political analysts. He teaches social science at the University of Łódz and the National School of Public Administration, serving in the National Council for Development, an advisory board to President Andrzej Duda. He is also a counselor to the current Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jacek Czaputowicz. According to Prof. Żurawski, the Russians are not responsible for all the refugees who have flooded into Europe, but it is certain "they did their best to make [the problem] larger … to confuse the political scene in European countries … as much as they can. Russia is the main ally of Assad and Iran…." These allies of Russia, he said, have maximized "the scale of the refugees." Prof. Żurawski also pointed to "the semi-criminal FSB/local mafias and hybrid structures in Bosnia and Herzegovina." These also played a role in moving refugees through the Balkans into the heart of Europe. "The conclusion is," he said, "that Russia had instruments to maximize the troubles" despite Europe's inability to find "a smoking gun."24
Prof. Żurawski also noted that, "Anti-immigrant parties in the West are usually pro-Russian (Front National, AfD); so deepening the crisis helps Russia's followers in the West." This point should not be overlooked. (Kalashnikov hinted at this factor with reference to Hungary more than a year before the refugee crisis began.) Here the manipulation of the European right that takes center stage. Moscow has every reason to believe the European anti-immigrant parties will gain political traction as the refugee crisis intensifies. Moscow, therefore, has reason to invest in the European right. Simultaneously, Moscow also uses its agents on the European left. These agents intensify the crisis through "politically correct" policies. As the left drives the crisis forward, the right opposition grows and seeks ready allies – and is driven into Moscow's open arms.
This process may already be underway in Hungary where Prime Minister Viktor Orban has shifted toward Moscow.25 The Chief of the Hungarian General Staff, Gen. Tibor Benkő, says that Hungary does not have to buy equipment exclusively from NATO countries. Russia is currently modernizing Hungarian Mi-24 and Mi-17 helicopters for $64 million.26 Perhaps even more alarming is Prime Minister Orban's tolerance with regard to Russian infiltration of the Hungarian right. Former Hungarian anti-communists are now celebrating Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin, linking arms with Russian officials. According to authors Péter Krekó and Lóránt Győri, Russia has invested political capital in "hate groups in Central Europe," with financial ties "to violent organizations in Central and Eastern Europe as well…."27 This is a conscious strategy:
In Moscow's toolkit of active measures and hybrid warfare, the boundaries between violent and nonviolent tools are increasingly blurry. And this process is two-directional: not only can information be weaponized; violent organizations can be used as soft-power tools. The Kremlin is highly effective at infiltrating fringe parties and paramilitary organizations in Central Europe. They are easy to purchase or control, as these extremist groups tend to be small and easily manipulated.28
What is the ultimate strategic value of the infiltration and manipulation of fringe parties and paramilitary groups? Keeping this question in mind, when we look at the present-day chaos in the Middle East, Russia's past support for terrorist organizations of every kind becomes less and less of a riddle.
The former Romanian Minister for Communications and Information,29 Marius Bostan, was asked by Dr. Cernea if he agreed with Gen. Degeratu's remarks. Bostan replied, "From the perspective of my own experience in public service and politics, I do agree with Gen. Degeratu's opinion that Russia is likely to have been involved in the migrant crisis and … it should be regarded as a hybrid war operation against the West." Bostan emphasized that "a very important component of the hybrid war is the cultural dimension." Here the Internet plays a key role. The Russian long-term investment in "propaganda, disinformation, opinion and behavior-shaping" cannot be underestimated. A short-term view would be a mistake. Bostan explained,
There is something about the Russian strategy that is difficult to explain to our Western allies. It's the fact that Russia usually acts on both sides of a (real or manufactured) conflict. For instance, on [the] Internet we notice that Russian propaganda, disinformation or trolling activity on forums and social networks typically carry messages meant to create/amplify conflicts between different ethnic or religious groups – Romanians versus Hungarians, Poles versus Ukrainians, Christians versus Jews, etc. And they encourage at the same time groups with opposed views – far left anti-market tendencies [versus] libertarian ones, LGBT-rights [versus] conservative Christian activism, open-border multiculturalism [versus] anti-immigration movements, etc. Thus, Russia is able to provoke conflicts and crises, and to influence the public agenda of the countries it targets for subversion.
This ambivalence may seem paradoxical to Western minds, used to a binary logic according to which something cannot be black and white at the same time. Well, Russians are not Westerners. In the East, black and white may be defined in many different ways. Moreover, the Russian leaders still function according to a mentality shaped by Marxist dialectics, which says that progress results from the constant struggle between contrary elements.
It looks like the West is only now discovering that, for instance, Russian internet trolls simultaneously support a certain cause and its contrary.30
Bostan has laid out one of Russia's key strategies. He says this kind of strategy is "difficult" for the West to understand. As Rudyard Kipling expressed it, "East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet." At some point in the future, however, the West must learn to appreciate Russia's "scissors strategy" – "that Russia usually acts on both sides of a … conflict." If there is one central lesson to be drawn from this study, Bostan has underscored it.
In their Atlantic Council article, "From Russia with Hate," Péter Krekó and Lóránt Győri explain how Polish counterintelligence "is currently investigating Mateusz Piskorski, the leader of the Polish leftist party … as well as former activists of the far-right Polish Congress of the New Right (KNP) on charges of espionage on behalf of Russia."31 Here is the classic Russian "scissors strategy" at work If the refugee crisis is part of a Russian scissors strategy, how does Russia benefit? First, political tensions are intensified between the European right and left; second, the right can be pushed toward Moscow by a variety of mechanisms; third, a general weakening of NATO develops under a scenario of "divide and conquer"; fourth, a general demoralization and loss of belief in existing institutions naturally follows.
In his interview with Epoch Times in November 2015, General Degeratu showed the depth of this understanding when he said we "should see who takes profit" from the refugee crisis. "Well," he explained, the Russians profited, and many cracks appeared in NATO. "We see how 'united' Europe has been," Degeratu added. "Full unity! There have been 50 voices in our European 'unity.'"32
Those who have set up the exercise have understood all our weaknesses and have exploited them properly. What else have they obtained … does anyone still speak about the Ukrainian crisis? Not anymore. There are also 1 million – in fact, 800,000 – refugees, from Eastern Ukraine and Crimea, most of them from Donbass. Eight hundred thousand. There are 8,000 dead. Around 2,000 children and pregnant women have died in this crisis. We almost haven't seen them on the (TV) screen, there have been no gatherings, there was no session of the Romanian Parliament….33
Degeratu is extraordinarily perceptive, and other experts agree with his assessment that Russia is waging a hybrid war against Europe. "Maybe some of us are too militarily-minded and ask questions that shouldn't be asked," said Degeratu.
DIRECT TESTIMONY FROM A SYRIAN GENERAL ON RUSSIA'S DOUBLE GAME
There is a stunning revelation in the fragment of a September 2015 interview given to Witold Gadowski by Syrian Brigadier General Ahmad Aljjdeaa, a soldier with thirty years of experience in the Syrian Army who is also the deputy minister of defense in the Syrian government-in-exile. According to Gen. Aljjdeaa, "Russian officers are constantly present in the branches of the Syrian army supporting the regime of Bashar Assad…."
Then he added, "Russia is interested in confusion in Syria. There are also four military training centers in Russia, in which fanatics are trained, who then fill the ranks of the Islamic State troops (ISIS). Among the trained are also Chechens."34
Related to this, another curious headline reads: "In retreating from Iraq, ISIS terrorists
lost their Russian passports."35 The facts are reported as follows: "The Iraqi military, who at the end of last week occupied the university building previously held by ISIS in the city of Mosul, displayed what was found in evidence as the identification papers of Islamic State terrorists, which mostly turned out to be Russian."36
Again, it is a case of the "scissors strategy." Moscow has perfected the fine art of stage-managing fake wars and phony splits with false fronts made up of "useful idiots."37 Russia's deployment of terrorist and counter-terrorist forces in Syria and Iraq should surprise no one. This procedure was used during the Soviet-Afghan War in the 1980s and again during the recent wars in Chechnya.38
At this juncture it may be useful to recite a bit of history. In July 2005 the Russian KGB/FSB defector Alexander Litvinenko told the Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita that Ayman al-Zawahiri (then Al-Qaeda's second in command) was trained by the FSB in Dagestan in 1997. According to the former KGB foreign intelligence officer Konstantin Preobrazhensky, Litvinenko "was responsible for securing the secrecy of al-Zawahiri's arrival in Russia … in 1996-1997."39
The Romanian intelligence defector, Lt. Gen. Ion Mahai Pacepa, has described Moscow's use of Arab terrorist organizations throughout the Cold War in his books.40 We know that Russia stands firmly behind the Islamic terror regime in Tehran. Researcher Antero Leitzinger explained, "Modern terrorism was born within a year, 1967-68. International socialists (communists) started the fashion all over the world simultaneously, which should make us suspicious about the common roots. National socialists followed suit, turning Marxists of Muslim origin into Islamists of Marxist origin."41
Among the closest associates of Khomeini, there were many Communists who had conveniently grown beards. Mustafa Ali Chamran had studied in California and Egypt before he founded a Red Shi'ite secret society. His pupils included later foreign minister Ibrahim Yazdi, oil minister Mohammed Gharazi, and Lebanese fellow student in Berkeley University, Hussein Shaikh al-Islam, who led the occupation of the US Embassy in Tehran. This occupation, shortly before the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, focused Iranian radicalism into anti-Americanism…. Mohammed Beheshti, whose death at a bombing on June 28th, 1981, remained a mystery, had resided in East Germany. Khomeini's early companion and foreign minister, Sadegh Ghotbzadeh had successfully accommodated with the new regime. Both Ghotbzadeh and Chamran had received Palestinian terrorist training. As a student in the USA, Ghotbzadeh had been recruited by the [Soviet] GRU.42
With regard to the Soviet-Afghan War, Leitzinger explained that Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU) had developed special capabilities by the late 1980s, especially "how to manipulate Islamists and to make Communists (of the Khalq faction) to grow beards and join their declared enemies." According to Leitzinger, "This 'Khalq strategy" provided a successful alternative to the more orthodox "Parcham strategy" that relied on ideologically less unholy alliances."43
Leitzinger argued that the Russian secret services "gained a tight hold on international terrorism, and [especially] on Islamism" in the 1990s. The terrorist is, in essence, a special kind of agent provocateur. A Western analyst finds it difficult to see the Afghan-Soviet War or the first and second Chechen Wars as utilizing provocation techniques on a broad scale. Former CIA official T.H. Bagley and KGB defector Peter Deriabin noted, "Soviet provocation … remains little understood in the West. People safe in a democratic system may find it difficult to conceive that rulers would systematically use such hostile techniques against their own subjects."44
If Moscow's wars in Afghanistan and Chechnya were built around terrorist provocations, and the objective was to radicalize and infiltrate Islam, and reorient Islam against the West, then the wars in Afghanistan and Chechnya appear in a more intelligible light. The Soviet Union did not invade Afghanistan for conventional reasons, or to attain classical military control.
With the advent of the refugee crisis in Europe, with the likelihood of thousands of terrorists settled within a mass of protected Muslim refugees, the least sign of Russian involvement – or the involvement of Russia's Islamist surrogates – ought to inspire a shockwave of alarm through Europe's security establishment. Given the history of Moscow's infiltration of Islam, and the mounting evidence of Russia's double game, the Kremlin would be the most natural suspect in any close study of the refugee crisis. Arguably, any other focus would be irresponsible.
As reported by the BBC, U.S. Gen. Philip Breedlove, the senior NATO commander in Europe, said that Russia and Syria were "deliberately weaponizing migration in an attempt to overwhelm European structures and break European resolve." He cited Russia's use of barrel bombs against Syrian civilians. What was the purpose of such indiscriminate attacks? The purpose was, he said, to "get them [masses of people] on the road" to Europe.45
Masses of homeless people, adhering to an alien religion, is one problem for Europe. Terrorism is yet another. Since the refugee crisis began Europe has been hit with an unprecedented wave of terrorist attacks (not to mention rapes and robberies). First came the Paris killings of November 2015, then the Brussels bombings of March 2016, then the Nice truck attack and the Normandy church attack of July 2016. Then there was the string of Islamic stabbings across Europe.46
Some of our sources (quoted above) have claimed that modern terrorism was introduced to the Muslims by the communist bloc half a century ago. This point must not be forgotten when evaluating the left's strange love affair with Islam. "From the very beginning," said former KGB Lt. Col. Konstantin Preobrazhensky, "the so-called Bolsheviks, or communists, were considering Muslims as the reserve [army], as the human resource for the world revolution. Not all … people know that the second appeal by Lenin, after the Great October Socialist Revolution in 1917, was addressed to Muslim toilers…." Preobrazhensky continued:
At that time Islam was the religion of the oppressed … of the people colonized by the West. As Lenin said by the time of the … Communist International, 'The West is existing at the expense of the East.' Even now we can hear such conclusions, such ideas. And as soon as the Russian Revolution took place, Russian Muslims immediately supported it, so that the communist Muslim military organizations were formed. The Muslim communists were dethroning the local bourgeois Muslim governments which appeared in the Russian Empire47.
MUSLIM REFUGEES TO EUROPE: A RUSSIAN POLICY
According to Antoni Rybczynski, "The migratory crisis in Europe is largely a work of Russian policy…." He further stated, "Already … when nobody expected Russian raids in Syria, Vladimir Putin warned that Europe would face the great problems associated with the influx of immigrants." In this way Moscow supported Assad while undermining Europe.48
Another Niezalezna.pl headline underscores this same idea: "Putin's diabolical game, Exporting Muslim immigrants to Europe." The article begins, "The Norwegian authorities believe that the refugees' invasion of their country is a Russian provocation."49
In October 2015 the Czech Minister of Defense, Martin Stropnicky, suggested that Russia was possibly financing the transportation of refugees to Europe. "Although I do not have 100 percent proof of this information," he said, "I cannot discount it either."50 Given all we know, his surmise is logical. It is sensible. Why wouldn't Russia – which has armed Islamic terrorists throughout Asia – arm Islamic terrorists in Germany, Britain, France or Sweden?
According to a member of the Estonian National Defense League, Ants Laaneots, "Putin's aim is the disintegration of the European Union and NATO, if possible." Russia, he added, is promoting "Euroscepticism."51 More likely, Russia's strategy includes many subtle and indirect objectives. As with the work of the late Mohammad Fahim in Afghanistan, Russia can take over a NATO-defended country through the work of an enterprising criminal. Russia can thereby paralyze the heart of Afghanistan or the heart of Europe in a way that mocks European compassion.
The Chairman of the Supreme Council of Lithuania, Vytautas Landsbergis, made an observation on 15 September 2015 about the refugee crisis almost identical to others we have seen:
I was thinking who had to profit, and I know now. In the current crisis, the whole attention is focused on Europe. Nobody is speaking of Ukraine any more, although there are almost 2 million refugees there as well. Putin has chased them away, and nobody is proposing them to go where life is better….52
According to Landsbergis, the current migration crisis is a threat to European civilization.
Europe has met a big danger for its own system, even for its own civilization. The Germans earlier had illusions, that they would manage to integrate a million Turks, that the Turks would become Germans and there would be no problem. It didn't work. Ghettos were created, a state within the state, and these are big problems….53
The Ukrainian MP, Anton Gerashchenko, speaking on TV Channel News One, stated:
The crisis of migrants in Europe arose because of Putin. The war in Syria began in 2011, but migrants flooded [Europe] like a large river in the spring of 2015. Russia made a decision after Europe imposed economic sanctions on Russia: 'Let's create problems for them." They created a problem: $1,000 was allocated for the head of [each] refugee who will be taken from Syria to Europe. A million refugees are a billion dollars. This is nothing to Putin….54
The cost to Europe, however, is much more than a $1 billion. Gerashchenko added that an atmosphere of xenophobia has been created in Europe along with the growing influence of various nationalist parties, which are known for their favorable position toward Putin's Russia.
Whatever the causes of the Refugee crisis, Moscow's strategists have taken full advantage of the situation. Those who know Russian policy best, who are geographically further east, know that Russia has something to gain. If a "smoking gun" is absent, in a strict sense, there is yet a loaded gun. One might say this gun is pointed at the heart of Europe.
With regard to proof, the strategist does not wear a white lab coat or follow some academic procedure to understand the world. He is not a prosecuting attorney who has to prove his case in a court of law. He is engaged in "a duel on an extensive scale" – which was Carl von Clausewitz's famous definition of war. If military and political leaders only acted on the basis of scientific proof – or rely on proofs used to convince a jury – they would not be able to act at all. The soldier and the stateman exercise judgment on a more commonsense level.
Consider the following analogy: If it is 2 December 1941 and an American plane spots six Japanese aircraft carriers moving east between Alaska and Midway Island, a sensible strategist would assume that the Japanese were intending to attack the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor. The sensible strategist would be quite foolish to declare that "there was no proof" of a Japanese intention to attack. It would be pedantic, under the circumstances, to say there was "no smoking gun." Strategy dictates an entirely different epistemology. The reported movement of the Japanese aircraft carriers would constitute a loaded gun, aimed at the U.S. Pacific Fleet. A responsible military leader does not wait for that gun to be fired. An American admiral, drawing the proper inferences, would know exactly what to do. He would alert the fleet at Pearl Harbor and take countermeasures. He would know, as one who directs fleets, that every enemy move speaks to intention. That must be the foundation of his certitude, of his practical knowledge.
In terms of the Muslim refugee crisis in Europe: reports of ISIS training camps in Russia, reports of GRU/SVR and Russian Mafia assistance to a massive influx of refugees, reports of Russian infiltration of terrorist organizations throughout the Muslim world, etc., constitute a loaded gun. We must judge these reports as strategists – not as social scientists or academics. This must be the foundation of a new strategic methodology for the Muslim Refugee problem. Clearly, this is not simply about Islam. Russian involvement is indicated. Russian strategy must be understood as part of a greater strategic whole in order to properly assess the larger situation.
1 http://www.fronda.pl/a/gadowski-dla-frondapl-agenci-panstwa-islamskiego-wsrod-imigrantowf,57134.html?part=1
3 http://www.vocativ.com/news/224151/syria-government-assad-kills-more-civilians-than-isis/index.html
4 http://www.vocativ.com/news/247479/russian-airstrikes-killed-more-syrian-civilians-than-isis-fighters/
5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_military_intervention_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War
6 http://ileanajohnson.com/2015/12/witold-gadowski-polish-journalist-talks-to-fronda-pl-about-syrian-refugees/
7 http://www.businessinsider.com/organized-crime-is-now-a-major-element-of-russia-statecraft-2015-10
9 https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2011/02/usegypt_relations_under_attack_1.html#ixzz58Jw FkwoF
10 https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardminiter/2011/08/18/the-exciting-notion-of-arab-spring-is-a-jedi-mind-trick/#2ab603254ce7
12 The former intelligence official was interviewed by J.R. Nyquist on condition of anonymity.
13 Katehon's president is Konstantin Malofeev, a Russian oligarch with close ties to Aleksandr Dugin, previously the co-founder of the National Bolshevist movement (along with Eduard Limonov). This was a movement which combined nationalism and communism (i.e., a Red-Brown prototype movement). More recently Dugin changed his ideological formula, mixing pan-European or Eurasianist ideas with nihilistic metaphysics in order to justify a worldwide anti-U.S. alliance between traditionalist and Marxists. All this is interspersed with a thinly disguised Lenin-style anti-capitalist millenarianism which seeks to hasten the "end times" with the destruction of Carthage (i.e., the United States). Dugin's pretense at Orthodox Christianity should not be taken any more seriously than his nationalist pretenses. His entire ideology is an arcane justification for a renewed USSR/Third Rome. His enemies are the old enemies of the USSR. His friends are the old friends of the USSR. Dugin's philosophic sophistication is not to be taken seriously, though his past fascination with Aleister Crowley's black magic craves closer investigation. Of course, Dugin's flirtation with esoteric ideas has helped to win adherents on the alt-right, particularly among neo-pagans, occultists and Sufis. His supposed positive attitude toward traditional Christianity leads to the conclusion that he is consciously toying with dialectically opposite theologies and ideologies. Using conspiracy theory as a tool to advance his anti-U.S. agenda, Dugin also pretends to support President Donald Trump, making English language broadcasts praising Trump for stopping globalism and "the expansion of liberal ideology." Dugin also praises Alex Jones and Infowars. To watch Dugin's English language broadcasts, see – "The Mystic Shaping Russia's Future and Bringing Back the Dark Ages, https://godsandradicals.org/2017/03/28/the-mystic-shaping-russias-future-and-ending-the-modern-era/. See also, http://www.4pt.su/en/content/who-aleksandr-dugin and https://www.nationalreview.com/2014/06/dugins-evil-theology-robert-zubrin/.
14 http://katehon.com/article/tragic-loss-red-pasha
15 http://www.trevorloudon.com/2013/06/exclusive-part-2-former-kgb-colonel-victor-kalashnikov-on-the-dangers-of-putin-worship-russias-anti-western-alliance-with-islam-israel-syria-iran-and-the-kremlins-grand-strateg/
17 http://conservativeread.com/former-kgbs-victor-kalashnikov-dangers-of-putin-worship-russias-islamist-alliance-plans-to-destroy-nato/
18 http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/07/were-911-terror-attacks-false-flag.html
19 https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=27&v=F6vj0z_oZIs – at about 15 minutes into the interview.
21 http://adevarul.ro/international/europa/adevarul-live-generalul-degeratu-despre-criza-imigrantilor-rusia-cea-genereaza-criza-acestei-migratii-excesive-1_55e05dbdf5eaafab2c014a6e/index.html
24 From Żurawski's written reply to Dr. Cernea.
25 newsweek.com/vladimir-putin-meets-hungary-viktor-orban-agenda-gas-soviet-sanctions-551263
26 http://www.defence24.pl/geopolityka/wegry-sie-zbroja-orban-kupi-sprzet-w-rosji
27 http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/component/content/article?id=35796:from-russia-with-hate-the-kremlin-s-support-for-violent-extremism-in-central-europe
29 Bostan was minister from Nov. 2015 to July 2016.
30 Written response to inquiry of former Communications and Information Minister Marius Bostan to Dr. Cernea, dated 3 March 2018.
31 atlanticcouncil.org/component/content/article?id=35796:from-russia-with-hate-the-kremlin-s-support-for-violent-extremism-in-central-europe
32 http://epochtimes-romania.com/video/constantin-degeratu-criza-refugiatilor-a-fost-o-operatiune-organizata—1099
34 https://wpolityce.pl/swiat/260088-syryjski-general-oskarza-w-rosji-szkoleni-sa-fanatycy-ktorzy-potem-zasilaja-szeregi-panstwa-islamskiego
35 org/wycofujac-sie-iraku-bojowcy-isis-zgubili-swe-rosyjskie-paszporty/
37 See, especially,Yao Ming-le, The Conspiracy and Death of Lin Biao (1983). There it is explained how Gen. Lin Biao secretly prepared to wage a phony war with the Soviet Union in 1971.
38 See, especially, Bearden and Risen, The Main Enemy: The Inside Story of the CIA's Final Showdown with the KGB (New York: Random House, 2003), p. 233.
39 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Litvinenko#cite_note-69
40 Ronald Rychlak and Ion Mihai Pacepa, Disinformation: Former Spry Chief Reveals Secret Strategies for Undermining Freedom, Attacking Religion, and Promoting Terrorism (WND Books, 2013). See also, Pacepa, Red Horizons: The True Story of Nicolae and Eana Ceausescus' Crimes, Lifestyle, and Corruption (1990).
41 See also Antero Leitzinger's article in the The Eurasian Politician – Issue 5 (April-September 2002), "The Roots of Islamic Terrorism," http://users.jyu.fi/~aphamala/pe/issue5/roots.htm
42 In this matter Leitzinger offers citations from the following sources: Livingston & Halevy, Inside the PLO (USA, 1990), p. 153-154; and Kuzichkin, Inside the KGB – Myth and Reality (Frome, 1990), p. 302.
43 eitzinger referenced Finnish researcher Anssi Kullberg's master's thesis on Russian geopolitics focusing on the Islamic Renaissance Party founded in Astrakhan in June 1990, "under KGB surveillance." Kullberg
44 Deriabin and Bagley, KGB: Masters of the Soviet Union (New York, 1990), p. 252.
45 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35706238
46 http://time.com/4607481/europe-terrorism-timeline-berlin-paris-nice-brussels/
47 Konstantin Preobrazhensky: "How the Russian Communists Run Islam." https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Preobrazhensky+Konstantin+How+the+Russian+Communists+r un+Islamic+Terrorism+https%3a%2f%2fwww.youtube.com%2fwatch%3fv%3d0AqMCLqTRFo&PC=ACTS &refig=ebf0ef63163f4c948bcf96c60aeb434a&ru=%2fsearch%3fq%3dPreobrazhensky%2bKonstantin%2 bHow%2bthe%2bRussian%2bCommunists%2brun%2bIslamic%2bTerrorism%2bhttps%253A%252F%252 Fwww.youtube.com%252Fwatch%253Fv%253D0AqMCLqTRFo%26FORM%3dEDGNCT%26PC%3dACTS% 26refig%3debf0ef63163f4c948bcf96c60aeb434a&view=detail&mmscn=vwrc&mid=19EC1DC31D497F37 378719EC1DC31D497F373787&FORM=WRVORC
48 http://niezalezna.pl/77702-jak-putin-i-asad-produkuja-uchodzcow-rosjanie-stosuja-taktyke-z-wojny-czeczenskiej
49 http://niezalezna.pl/73114-diabelska-gra-putina-rosja-eksportuje-islamskich-imigrantow-do-europy
50 http://www.uawire.org/news/czech-minister-of-defense-it-is-possible-that-russia-is-financing-the-influx-of-refugees-to-europe
51 http://www.uawire.org/news/estonian-politician-russia-uses-the-migration-crisis-as-part-of-its-hybrid-war#
52 http://zw.lt/litwa/landsbergis-o-kryzysie-z-uchodzcami-winna-jest-rosja/
54 https://newsone.ua/news/politics/gerashhenko-krizis-migrantov-dlya-evropy-pridumal-putin.html
Center for Security Policy HOMEPAGE
About CSP
The Center for Security Policy was founded in July 1988 by 30 national security policy practitioners united by an overarching goal – to perpetuate the time-tested policy Ronald Reagan used to such transformative effect during his presidency: "Peace through Strength." Led by Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan Defense Department official and aide to Senators Henry "Scoop" Jackson and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Tower, they founded a non-partisan, educational public policy organization with a single, overarching mission: secure freedom.
"What an exemplary organization you are — devoting yourselves to the pursuit of peace and national security. I can think of no loftier purpose or goal." — 1995 letter from President Ronald Reagan to the Center for Security Policy
The Center has diligently advanced that goal ever since through a combination of: cutting-edge public policy research; the skillful and evolving use of multi-media platforms for outreach to – and impact with – the nation's leadership and people; and, most uniquely, the creation and direction of coalitions to undertake effective advocacy.
In its early days, the Center for Security Policy became famous for … READ THE REST
Author oneway2dayPosted on June 5, 2018 June 5, 2018 Categories Conservative, Counterjihad, Foreign Policy, GWOT, History, Immigration, Left WingTags Assad Alliance, CSP, Destabilize Europe, Dualistic Strategy, Iran, ISIS Alliance, Islamic Terrorism, Muslim Refugees, National Security, NATO, Russian Goal, Trojan Destruction, USALeave a comment on Russian Strategy and Europe's Refugee Crisis