08/14/17

Sergey Shoigu Planned with Maduro to Stop NATO in Latin America

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

And Venezuela needs the money, too bad Maduro capitulated on oil rights for power.

Shoigu’s Successes

Sergey has many successes on his resume, all of which make him a possible candidate for President. Here are some:

– Russia’s military success in Crimea, East Ukraine, Syria, South Ossetia, Chechnya, and down the border of NATO countries, Sergey and Russia were viewed as force well protected that can show effectiveness and efficiency in military actions

– Shoigu was minister in the Ministry of emergency situations for almost 22 years. During that time, he efficiently used the advantages of Russian bureaucracy and legalism to gather power and popularity, all while not making a single enemy

– Sergey showed pragmatic approach in addressing former American defense secretary Chuck Hagel with his personal name, not with his surname, which was practice before

Militarization of Russia

Since 2013, Russia and Moscow were heavily criticized for spending large amounts of money on armed forces. Many Western leaders thought that Putin is the man pulling the strings, and that it was his idea to spend so much money, despite his weak economy that is too much oil-dependent. However, what few people outside of Russia knew until lately is that Sergey Shoigu, the Russian defense minister is the one responsible for the huge expansion. More here.

In April of this year, Maduro’s Defense Minister paid an interesting visit to Moscow. Vladimir Padrino Lopez the Defense Minister, would meet his Russian counterpart, Sergey Kuzhugetovich Shoygu, at a conference on international defense.

I have come (to Moscow) upon the orders of President Nicolás Maduro,” Padrino said in the video. He added: “I bring a very interesting, a very important point (to the conference), which is NATO’s projection in Latin America, its consequences and risks.”

Beyond the excuse of the conference, why is Maduro’s Defense Minister, the man who “pulls the strings of power behind the scenes” in Venezuela according to García Otero, visiting Moscow precisely when massive citizen protests are posing an existential threat to the Chavista regime? The answer may have to do with what is perhaps the least analyzed aspect of the Venezuelan crisis: the geostrategic implications of a failed state in Venezuela from the point of view of the world’s great powers.

There certainly has been a shift in Washington’s attitude toward the Venezuelan regime since Donald Trump arrived at the White House. As the PanAm Post explained in 2016, the Obama administration carried out a three-pronged strategy in Latin America, its aims being:

  1. Achieving the dangerous pact between Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos and the communist FARC guerrillas.
  2. Renewing diplomatic and commercial relations with the Castros’ Cuba after more than five decades since the Cuban embargo was put in place.
  3. Appeasing the Maduro regime in Venezuela in order to guarantee the success of the Santos-FARC pact while preventing the implosion of the Cuban economy, which depends on Venezuelan oil for its survival (Obama wanted to avoid a Mariel Boatlift-type humanitarian crisis on the coasts of Florida).

Yes, there is some indication that NATO may begin cultivating members nations in Latin America, Putin is on the move using Iran, Cuba and Venezuela. Now you know why Vice President Pence is on a tour in Latin America.

When President Trump mentioned just a few days ago about a military option in Venezuela, he had something in mind due to the above meetings and building Russian influence in the region. Beginning in Columbia, Pence discussions began this way:

Colombia is one of the United States’ closest allies in the Western Hemisphere, yet, as he stood next to Pence, Santos denounced Trump’s threat of military action, and told the visiting vice president that such a possibility “shouldn’t even be considered” and would be “unacceptable.”

“Every country in Latin America would not favor any form of military intervention, and that is why we are saying we are intent on looking into other measures, some of which are already underway and others to be implemented in the future,” Santos said.

The concerns build as Maduro’s Vice President, El Aissami, has deep ties to Hezbollah of Iran and he was responsible for those tens of thousands of passports illegally issued for Syrians. Of course Putin is running Assad of Syria with the aid of Iran. Weapons abound globally. Vladimir Padrino Lopez is the mastermind and driver of the region.

The ideology of Venezuela’s minister of defense, Vladimir Padrino López, is captured in a 2015 photo of him kneeling before Fidel Castro. But he is reputed to be even closer to the Kremlin. This January, Venezuela launched a series of civil-military exercises around the country, dubbed Plan Zamora, under the guidance of advisers from Iran, Russia and Cuba.

Russia supplies arms to Venezuela. In November the Kremlin sent new aviation and air-defense technology to Caracas. Reuters reported in May that Venezuela now has “5,000 Russian-made MANPADS surface-to-air weapons,” representing “the largest known stockpile in Latin America.” More here from the WSJ.

For a comprehensive timeline and names, go here… excellent work going back to 2015 investigating the Russian, Cuban, Iranian and Venezuelan operation.

08/13/17

Next, Russia to Annex Belarus Under Zapad 2017?

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

Ships set out from Northern Fleet headquarters in Severomorsk. Photo: mil.ru

Northern Fleet announces big-scale exercise

It will include about 50 vessels and is held as a preparatory phase to the upcoming «Zapad-2017» drills.

The Northern Fleet, the most powerful of Russia’s five fleets, is unfolding a special exercise which includes key parts of fleet capacities.

The drills will be headed directly by Russian Navy Head Commander Vladimir Korolyev and will last «for several days», the Northern Fleet informs.

Included are about 50 ships, submarines and support vessels. Also aircrafts, helicopters from the Air Force and Air Defense will be deployed, a Navy representative says to Interfax.

The drills are held as several of the most powerful Northern Fleet vessels are on their way home after participation in a Navy parade outside St.Petersburg.  Among them are battle cruiser «Pyotr Veliky» and typhoon-class submarine «Dmitry Donskoy».

It is likely that the returning vessels will take part in the exercise.

In the course of the training, antisubmarine and anti-sabotage activities will be conducted along with navigational, hydrographical, anti-mine and search and rescue operations.

According to the Navy representatives, the exercise is held as a preparatory phase to the large-scale joint Russian-Belarus drills «Zapad-2017» scheduled for the period 14-20 September.

***

Russia Plans to Annex Belarus in Military Drill, Says Georgia’s Ex-President

Russia’s leadership is angling to annex its closest western neighbor during upcoming military drills, according to the former leader of Georgia. Mikheil Saakashvili made the comments on the anniversary of his own country’s brief conflict with Moscow that resulted in Russian troops cordoning off Georgia’s two northern regions.

Referring to the much anticipated joint Russian-Belarusian drill in the Baltic region, the former president said: “What we are seeing in Belarus, I think that Russia is planning to take and annex Belarus.” Saakashvili, who is a longtime critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, spoke to told Baltic news agency BNS ahead of the drill, called Zapad and scheduled for September.

Lithuania, a NATO ally that borders with Russia, has expressed concern that the drill indicates a wider threat to the alliance, constituting a “simulated” attack. NATO has demanded that Russia allows for more transparency in the drill, nominally set to involve around 12,000 troops. However, Russia has previously sparked much bigger exercises to go in tandem with drills such as Zapad, upping the number of troops from the promised levels.

“During the drill, infrastructure will be brought in,” Saakashvili said. “In that sense the threat [from Russia] has not disappeared rather it only grows. It is just that until now Ukrainians have held it at its own borders [with Russia].”

Saakashvili was president of Georgia until 2013, when he lost the election and left the country for Ukraine. He was made a Ukrainian citizen and appointed as governor of Ukraine’s Odessa region in 2015 by Petro Poroshenko after the revolution that brought the pro-Europe, pro-West government to power.

His reputation as a hardline opponent of the Kremlin’s foreign policy and his imposing oratorical style made him popular quickly, and he was tipped to be the country’s next prime minister. But his often combative manner and vows to “clean up” corrupt Ukrainian institutions, put him at odds with established political figures. Ukraine stripped him of his citizenship in 2017 and he became a stateless person. He has dismissed it, and Georgia’s previous decision to strip him of citizenship, as political decisions by governments that have fallen out with him.

Despite enjoying Western support for his hawkish positions on Russia and for his campaigns against corruption, Saakashvili’s leadership of Georgia was not without its critics. The European Union criticized his decision-making during a 2008 political crisis that sparked a five day war with Russia. Under Saakashvili’s command, Georgian forces tried to restore control over two of its regions that have declared independence under Russian military sponsorship.

Belarus’s President Alexander Lukashenko has dismissed concerns that Zapad is anything but a routine defense drill. “We traditionally carry out these drills with Russia,” he said in July. Although strongly reliant on Russia in most regards, the Belarusian government has shown some signs of disagreement with its bigger partner in what the two countries symbolically call “the Union State.”

Despite a Kremlin push to deploy an airbase in Belarus, Minsk has resisted that initiative. The Union State relationship— a post-Soviet branding of Minsk and Moscow’s close relationship—looked in minor jeopardy earlier this year when Russia responded to Belarus’s looser visa-regime for Westerners by starting border checks between the two countries.

Jamestown has a more detailed summary, in part:

In the exercise scenario used for the Zapad series of exercises, there is undoubtedly a NATO dimension. This stems from Moscow’s response, opposition and complete rejection on political and legal grounds of the 1999 NATO bombing of Serbia. The events of 1999 loom large today in Russian strategic thinking and are also reflected in how the General Staff approaches the planning for a Zapad exercise. Consequently, while there is currently a Western preoccupation with the possibility of a Russian offensive operation against the Baltic States, in Moscow’s view the more likely scenario of conflict erupting on Russia’s periphery with NATO stems from an Allied intervention in Belarus. As a result, the Zapad 2017 exercise will place all operational and scenario activities under a defensive guise in response to foreign intervention, demanding a response to protect the Russia-Belarus Union State (Regnum, July 11).

Some Russian commentaries show awareness of the concern expressed by Alliance members about Zapad 2017 and its potentially aggressive rehearsal of operations against its members from Belarusian territory: these suggestions are, of course, the subject of much derision. However, there are indications of some features of the joint exercise that will come into play in September to which NATO must pay additional attention. The first is the extent to which Zapad 2017 will fine-tune joint operations carried out by the elite airborne and special forces units of Belarus and Russia. Such preparation occurred in early April, with these forces rehearsing joint operations in the Vitebsk Region in Belarus over an area of 12,000 square kilometers. The focus was on parachute landings, reconnaissance, and action to fix and locate enemy forces. During these tactical-level exercises, elite troops were also tasked with establishing the best areas to land the “main force” and coordinating air cover for these forces. On April 11–13, a parachute company from the 106th Airborne Division (Tula) relocated to Brest and, in close coordination with Belarusian counterparts as well as interior troops, worked on training tasks to block and defeat four groups of “illegal armed formations,” which had broken into strategically important facilities in the region (Nezavisimaya Voyennoye Obozreniye, June 16).

In a related preparation for Zapad 2017, in May, a one-week tactical exercise involved the electronic warfare (EW) forces of Belarus and Russia, using three training grounds in Brest and Vitebsk Regions. Whereas the elite and special forces tactical exercises had an alleged terrorist dimension, the joint EW exercises were clearly aimed against a conventionally armed opponent. They focused upon joint EW operations against a high-technology opponent operating in a “complex electronic environment.” The development of the joint force capabilities to protect the Union State is seen in Moscow as reflecting developments within modern local wars and armed conflicts. The EW component of Zapad 2017 will thus prove to be an integral part of the rehearsal of joint operations (Nezavisimaya Voyennoye Obozreniye, June 16).

08/11/17

The New York Channel to North Korea is in Play

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

His name is Joseph Yun, a U.S. diplomat at the United Nations, one that the North Korean regime has reached out to more than once. Most recently it was over the return of Otto Warmbier and his release.

Under the Obama administration, all talks were terminated during the time Sweden was the communications envoy of record. With the transfer of power and government to Donald Trump, Pyongyang opened up the back channel via the United Nations to Joseph Yun, who has long diplomatic experience in the region.

While preparations are in place according to President Trump should Kim launch his 4 missiles toward Guam, Pentagon Chief Mattis declares the United States and allies are ready. That still leaves North Korea with nuclear weapons, a condition every expert is omitting in talking points. Secretary of State Tillerson says his work is to get North Korea to stop with the missile program and that will not likely occur as it is a proxy operation of Iran.

The Kim regime is keeping his estimated 60 nuclear weapons for a bargaining tool and global legitimacy. That is the real problem. Many experts declare that North Korea always backs down in the end when they get food or sanctions relief, but we are dealing with a new Kim that is far more unpredictable than his father.

So, what can the U.S. and allies do going forward? Shall we continue to rely on China? They are anything but a friend or a cooperative partner stating in local Chinese news that China will remain neutral should Kim strike first. Further, China declared that if the United States went to a preemptive posture, China would stop us.

China has total ownership and power in the region and certainly when it comes to navigation, so any U.S. naval activity angers them.

The United States has other options and tools, where not one, but a combination of all, may also be deployed. That includes forcing a regime change, not always the best solution. Then there is the special forces deployment to covertly enter North Korea and work on a detonation of key command and control sites. Special operations has trained for this kind of operation for more than 20 years.

There is a cyber option, a tool that several experts declare has already been used so that Kim’s missiles miss targets or fail on re-entry.

Dealing with China to control North Korea is a fool’s errand as Russia and Iran are part of the total equation. There could still be wider consequences when the United States and allies prevail over North Korea on the missile side, again the nuclear inventory remains and is traded to other rogue nations such as Iran or Syria.

There are other allies included in the variables regarding North Korea. They include Australia, Japan and Britain, where Canada, Germany and France remain silent. Japan has just deployed a missile defense system in a defensive mode.

The media continues to declare that any military conflict will lead to millions dying. That is only true if North Korea is successful on a land based conflict hitting Seoul. The U.S. uses only precision guided munitions where collateral damage would not affect other regions of North Korea, hence millions would not escape across the Yalu river into China. China has a standing army at that border preventing such an event.

China and North Korea want the peninsula to be unified and under Chinese control which is much the case concerning the waterways in dispute along with the contested islands. China fears that the United States is working to unify the peninsula under S. Korean control, which has not been an objective.

In summary, while fear for days has been the media headlines, it cannot be fully dismissed that a near term conflict will likely be resolved, leaving North Korea with a viable nuclear weapons and missile program. The coordination between Iran and North Korea will continue in that same realm and Trump is left with the same festering issue of previous presidents.

Will there be a Chinese naval blockade if the United State and allies go for a preemptive strike? Perhaps that New York Channel to Pyongyang has the burden of finding out. Has someone sent an envoy to Tehran yet with these discussions? Nah… Russia meanwhile is keeping a keen eye on all of it.

08/10/17

Regime Change in North Korea or a Communist Apocalypse?

By: Cliff Kincaid | America’s Survival

Our objective should be regime change in North Korea, China, and Russia. These are our main enemies. Let’s start with North Korea.

If President Trump accepts another “deal” with the North Korean regime, he will have made a serious and fatal error. Deterrence hasn’t worked. Right now we can take out the North Korean land-based nuclear threat. If we wait, they will have submarine-based nuclear weapons. And there’s no way to take them out in advance.

The U.N. Security Council unanimously imposed new sanctions on North Korea on August  5. So what? It’s just one in another series of ineffective resolutions on North Korea. The U.N. is a communist front.

Secretary of State Tillerson is telling North Koreans, “we are not your enemy.” Of course they are. This is a brainwashed nation whose communist leaders must be obliterated. “We do not seek a regime change,” Tillerson says. “We do not seek the collapse of the regime.”

The Communists engineered regime change in South Vietnam, and 58,000 Americans died in vain.

They can seek regime change in non-communist countries, but we can’t seek regime change in communist countries? This is a recipe for communist domination of the world.

We have to be prepared to launch a preemptive nuclear strike on North Korea. Yes, millions may die on the Korean peninsula. But would you rather wait until North Korean nuclear weapons hit the United States and tens of millions of Americans die?

North Korean nukes could strike much of the U.S. Thanks to Comrade Obama. And thanks, too, to his comrades in Russia and China. North Korea’s communist sponsors won’t hold North Korea back from such a strike on the U.S. mainland. They will watch and smile as America is destroyed in a communist apocalypse.

Read the North Korean-Russian treaty here. There is also a Chinese-North Korean Mutual Aid and Cooperation Friendship Treaty that was signed on July 11, 1961

Did you know there was a North Korean-South Korean treaty on the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula? Under this Joint Declaration, “the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and the Republic of Korea (ROK) agree not to test, manufacture, produce, receive, possess, store, deploy, or use nuclear weapons; to use nuclear energy solely for peaceful purposes; and not to possess facilities for nuclear reprocessing and uranium enrichment.”

How did that work out?

Our policy has to be regime change – and as soon as possible.

If we don’t act now, Iran gets the message that they can develop nuclear weapons and no one will stop them. A scientific-cooperation pact between North Korea and Iran was reached in 2012 and advanced the nuclear and missile programs of both countries.

It’s reported Trump is meeting with his intelligence “experts.” Bill Gertz of the Washington Times has listed several of the intelligence failures regarding North Korea:

…the failures included judgments that cast doubt about whether North Korea’s nuclear program posed an immediate threat, whether North Korea could produce a militarily useful nuclear bomb, whether North Korea was capable of conducting an underground nuclear test and whether Pyongyang was bluffing by claiming it could carry one out.

How many “mistakes” will be made before we come to the conclusion that we are being deliberately deceived by the enemies within and set up for the kill?

President Trump says, “North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with the fire and the fury like the world has never seen.”

Start by cleaning out the traitors in the intelligence community who have consistently made these “mistakes.” Then, take out the North Korean regime. There is no alternative.

*Cliff Kincaid is President of America’s Survival, Inc. and the editor of the new book, Comrade Obama Unmasked.

08/10/17

Judge Rules to Re-Open Hillary Benghazi Email Case

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

Primer:

The following facts are among the many new revelations in Part I:

  • Despite President Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s clear orders to deploy military assets, nothing was sent to Benghazi, and nothing was en route to Libya at the time the last two Americans were killed almost 8 hours after the attacks began. [pg. 141]
  • With Ambassador Stevens missing, the White House convened a roughly two-hour meeting at 7:30 PM, which resulted in action items focused on a YouTube video, and others containing the phrases “[i]f any deployment is made,” and “Libya must agree to any deployment,” and “[w]ill not deploy until order comes to go to either Tripoli or Benghazi.” [pg. 115]
  • The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff typically would have participated in the White House meeting, but did not attend because he went home to host a dinner party for foreign dignitaries. [pg. 107]
  • A Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team (FAST) sat on a plane in Rota, Spain, for three hours, and changed in and out of their uniforms four times. [pg. 154]
  • None of the relevant military forces met their required deployment timelines. [pg. 150]
  • The Libyan forces that evacuated Americans from the CIA Annex to the Benghazi airport was not affiliated with any of the militias the CIA or State Department had developed a relationship with during the prior 18 months. Instead, it was comprised of former Qadhafi loyalists who the U.S. had helped remove from power during the Libyan revolution. [pg. 144]

The following facts are among the many new revelations in Part II:

  • Five of the 10 action items from the 7:30 PM White House meeting referenced the video, but no direct link or solid evidence existed connecting the attacks in Benghazi and the video at the time the meeting took place. The State Department senior officials at the meeting had access to eyewitness accounts to the attack in real time. The Diplomatic Security Command Center was in direct contact with the Diplomatic Security Agents on the ground in Benghazi and sent out multiple updates about the situation, including a “Terrorism Event Notification.” The State Department Watch Center had also notified Jake Sullivan and Cheryl Mills that it had set up a direct telephone line to Tripoli. There was no mention of the video from the agents on the ground. Greg Hicks—one of the last people to talk to Chris Stevens before he died—said there was virtually no discussion about the video in Libya leading up to the attacks. [pg. 28]
  • The morning after the attacks, the National Security Council’s Deputy Spokesperson sent an email to nearly two dozen people from the White House, Defense Department, State Department, and intelligence community, stating: “Both the President and Secretary Clinton released statements this morning. … Please refer to those for any comments for the time being. To ensure we are all in sync on messaging for the rest of the day, Ben Rhodes will host a conference call for USG communicators on this chain at 9:15 ET today.” [pg. 39]
  • Minutes before the President delivered his speech in the Rose Garden, Jake Sullivan wrote in an email to Ben Rhodes and others: “There was not really much violence in Egypt. And we are not saying that the violence in Libya erupted ‘over inflammatory videos.’” [pg. 44]
  • According to Susan Rice, both Ben Rhodes and David Plouffe prepared her for her appearances on the Sunday morning talk shows following the attacks. Nobody from the FBI, Department of Defense, or CIA participated in her prep call. While Rhodes testified Plouffe would “normally” appear on the Sunday show prep calls, Rice testified she did not recall Plouffe being on prior calls and did not understand why he was on the call in this instance. [pg.98]
  • On the Sunday shows, Susan Rice stated the FBI had “already begun looking at all sorts of evidence” and “FBI has a lead in this investigation.” But on Monday, the Deputy Director, Office of Maghreb Affairs sent an email stating: “McDonough apparently told the SVTS [Secure Video Teleconference] group today that everyone was required to ‘shut their pieholes’ about the Benghazi attack in light of the FBI investigation, due to start tomorrow.” [pg. 135]
  • After Susan Rice’s Sunday show appearances, Jake Sullivan assured the Secretary of the State that Rice “wasn’t asked about whether we had any intel. But she did make clear our view that this started spontaneously and then evolved.” [pg. 128]
  • Susan Rice’s comments on the Sunday talk shows were met with shock and disbelief by State Department employees in Washington. The Senior Libya Desk Officer, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, wrote: “I think Rice was off the reservation on this one.” The Deputy Director, Office of Press and Public Diplomacy, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, responded: “Off the reservation on five networks!” The Senior Advisor for Strategic Communications, Bureau of Near East Affairs, State Department, wrote: “WH [White House] very worried about the politics. This was all their doing.” [pg. 132]
  • The CIA’s September 13, 2012, intelligence assessment was rife with errors. On the first page, there is a single mention of “the early stages of the protest” buried in one of the bullet points. The article cited to support the mention of a protest in this instance was actually from September 4. In other words, the analysts used an article from a full week before the attacks to support the premise that a protest had occurred just prior to the attack on September 11. [pg. 47]
  • A headline on the following page of the CIA’s September 13 intelligence assessment stated “Extremists Capitalized on Benghazi Protests,” but nothing in the actual text box supports that title. As it turns out, the title of the text box was supposed to be “Extremists Capitalized on Cairo Protests.” That small but vital difference—from Cairo to Benghazi—had major implications in how people in the administration were able to message the attacks. [pg. 52]

Read the full report here as published by the Select Committee on Benghazi.

Judge orders new searches for Clinton Benghazi emails

Politico: Nine months after the presidential election was decided, a federal judge is ordering the State Department to try again to find emails Hillary Clinton wrote about the Benghazi attack.

U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta ruled that the State Department had not done enough to try to track down messages Clinton may have sent about the assault on the U.S. diplomatic compound on Sept. 11, 2012 — an attack that killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya.

In response to Freedom of Information Act requests, State searched the roughly 30,000 messages Clinton turned over to her former agency at its request in December 2014 after officials searching for Benghazi-related records realized she had used a personal email account during her four-year tenure as secretary.

State later searched tens of thousands of emails handed over to the agency by three former top aides to Clinton: Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills and Jake Sullivan. Finally, State searched a collection of emails the FBI assembled when it was investigating Clinton’s use of the private account and server.

In all, State found 348 Benghazi-related messages or documents that were sent to or from Clinton in a period of nearly five months after the attack.

However, the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch argued that the search wasn’t good enough because State never tried to search its own systems for relevant messages in the official email accounts of Clinton’s top aides.

In a 10-page ruling issued Tuesday, Mehta — an Obama appointee — agreed.

“To date, State has searched only data compilations originating from outside sources — Secretary Clinton, her former aides, and the FBI. … It has not, however, searched 8 the one records system over which it has always had control and that is almost certain to contain some responsive records: the state.gov e-mail server,” Mehta wrote.

“If Secretary Clinton sent an e-mail about Benghazi to Abedin, Mills, or Sullivan at his or her state.gov e-mail address, or if one of them sent an e-mail to Secretary Clinton using his or her state.gov account, then State’s server presumably would have captured and stored such an e-mail. Therefore, State has an obligation to search its own server for responsive records.”

Justice Department lawyers representing State argued that making them search other employees’ accounts for Clinton’s emails would set a bad precedent that would belabor other FOIA searches.

But Mehta said the circumstances surrounding Clinton’s email represented “a specific fact pattern unlikely to arise in the future.”

A central premise of Mehta’s ruling is that the State Department’s servers archived emails from Clinton’s top aides. However, it’s not clear that happened regularly or reliably.

State Department officials have said there was no routine, automated archiving of official email during Clinton’s tenure. Some officials did copy their mailboxes from time to time and put archived message folders on desktop computers or servers, so State may still have some messages from the aides, but the FBI may already have acquired some of those messages during its inquiry.

A State Department spokesperson declined to comment on the judge’s decision. A Justice Department spokesman said: “We are reviewing the judge’s opinion and order.”

08/9/17

Obama Blew All Opportunities with China and N. Korea

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

Obama along with Hillary Clinton and John Kerry gave us trade deals and climate change stuff….Obama did not understand Thucydides Trap and chose to ignore it. Steve Bannon and H.R. McMaster, along with General Mattis, are experts on it and President Trump is confused. Trump tells President Xi, he will honor the one China policy.

Obama launched an Asia Pivot, remember that? Others called it a ‘re-balance’. Well…

The “rebalance” policy not only aims to protect the region from unwanted security threats, but also to secure commercial sea lanes for American imports and exports flowing in and out of the region.

It is increasingly important for the U.S. to maintain freedom for navigation from the Arabian Sea to the Pacific Ocean. The economic aspects of the “rebalance” under the Obama Administration have been largely shaped by U.S. participation in the TPP talks aimed at institutionalizing regional free trade practices. The vision of the U.S. Trade Representative for the TPP is an FTA for the twelve negotiating parties –Australia, Brunei, Chile, Canada, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the U.S., and Vietnam – which will form the basis for a broader agreement that eventually could eventually include all the economies of the Asia -Pacific region, including China.

If successful, the TPP could provide the US with a number of benefits. It would include U.S. access to growing markets in Asia, help stimulate the growth in U.S. exports, generate export – related jobs, and foster an economic recovery, while enhancing measures to protect U.S. intellectual property rights, and ensuring that business competition occurs in a fair regional market.

The third major component of the U.S. “rebalance” policy falls in the “dignity basket” that seeks to uphold democratic and human rights and the rule of law. The Obama Administration’s emphasis on universal rights targets the credibility of the Chinese government in the midst of its rapid growth and intends to apply pressure on Beijing to adhere to right practices as a responsible stakeholder. In this way, China’s rise would be perceived as less of a threat to regional and global powers and more as a constructive member of the international community. The Administration’s “rebalance” to the Asia- Pacific region is in essence a hedging strategy towards China, one that combines engagement with Beijing with the creation of a network of bilateral military partnerships and alliances in the Asia-Pacific as a potential counterweight against the rise of China.

The U.S. “rebalance” has endowed smaller nations who are claimants of the South China Sea territories with more political capital without becoming directly involved in such territorial disputes.

As a result, Chinese and western analysts are concerned about the “rebalance” being an actual policy of containment against China. Obama Administration officials, in response, repeatedly make clear that “rebalance” to Asia is not a containment strategy, but a policy aimed at strategically placing the U.S. in a favorable position as the Asia-Pacific becomes one of the major centers of global activity. More here.

*** So, with all that early on, the Obama administration got a TPP agreement…okay swell…what came next…

Well, after all the Obama administration personnel changes and additional changes in region leaders including Japan, China and S. Korea….and the rise of the Islamic State, the best then Obama and John Kerry could do was a Paris Agreement.

The United States and China announced Saturday that they are formally joining the Paris Agreement to combat climate change, significantly increasing the likelihood that the accord will take effect this year.

The announcement, made by U.S. President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping before the start of the G20 summit in Hangzhou, China, adds momentum to ongoing international discussions surrounding climate change. The accord requires 55 countries to join, representing 55% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, before it enters into force. Together the U.S. and China represent nearly 39% of the world’s emissions. They join 24 other countries that have already signed on to the agreement, according to a count from the World Resources Institute.

The announcement is the latest in an unlikely partnership on climate change between the two countries. Chinese opposition to strong global warming measures, at least in part, prevented efforts to reach a strong climate deal in Copenhagen in 2009. But climate became an area of cooperation when Xi took office in 2013. The alignment between Obama and Xi has been credited with building support from other countries in advance of the Paris conference in 2015 that yielded the world’s strongest agreement on climate change. More here.

Where the hell were those consequences Obama talked about in September of 2016?

In part from ABC: North Korea confirmed its fifth nuclear test explosion early Friday, its largest yet. The provocation brought instant condemnation from the country’s neighbors and a call from President Obama for “serious consequences.”

Pyongyang also said it has made strides that could bring it closer to mounting a warhead on one of its ballistic missiles and launching a long-distance nuclear strike.

“We successfully conducted a nuclear explosion test to determine the power of [the] nuclear warhead,” a female anchor announced on North Korea’s state television. “We will continue to strengthen our nuclear capabilities to protect our sovereignty. We have now standardized and minimized nuclear warheads … We can now produce small nuclear warheads any time we desire.”

“Today’s nuclear test by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, if confirmed, is its second this year and the fifth since 2006,” said International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Yukiya Amano. “This is in clear violation of numerous UN Security Council resolutions and in complete disregard of the repeated demands of the international community. It is a deeply troubling and regrettable act.”

North Korea previously conducted nuclear tests in 2006, 2009, 2013, and most recently in January 2016.

South Korean President Park Geun-hye called the explosion an act of “fanatic recklessness.”

The White House said National Security Adviser Susan Rice briefed Obama on the incident.

“The president also consulted with President Park of the Republic of Korea and Prime Minister Abe of Japan in separate phone calls,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest told ABC News. “The president reiterated the unbreakable U.S. commitment to the security of our allies in Asia and around the world. The president indicated he would continue to consult our allies and partners in the days ahead to ensure provocative actions from North Korea are met with serious consequences.”

The U.S. State Department also told ABC News it was aware of the explosion.

“We are aware of seismic activity on the Korean Peninsula in the vicinity of a known North Korean nuclear test site,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said. “We are monitoring and continuing to assess the situation in close coordination with our regional partners. The Secretary has been briefed on this incident.”

China’s foreign ministry condemned North Korea’s nuclear test and said it will lodge a diplomatic protest with Pyongyang’s ambassador in Beijing. The foreign ministry issued a statement saying it “resolutely opposes” the test and “intensely urges” Pyongyang to abide by its non-proliferation promises.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said the test explosion “could not be tolerated.”

So, now Guam is a target of North Korea due to fear of Thucydides Trap, there are 60 nuclear weapons in play, there are 10 hour trilateral air missions daily and the U.S. nuclear triad is in active deployment.

For a list of what the United States has at the ready, go here. It all sounds good and comforting until someone asks what is on the menu of strategies going forward….the time for talk is over or is it?

08/8/17

NoKo Crossed the Nuclear Power Threshold, 60?

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

The best defense is to take them out before they are fired…..we can and we know where they are.

We Know the Locations of N Korea Nuclear Sites

Primer: North Korean delegation wraps up Iran visit

Trip included opening of new embassy and meetings with foreign representatives

North Korea’s newly built embassy in Tehran opened Wednesday, according to the North’s state-run KCNA news agency. It said the new embassy was “built to boost exchanges, contacts and cooperation between the two countries for world peace and security and international justice.”

After the second ICBM test last month, defense experts said it appeared North Korea’s long-range ballistic missile had the range to reach half, if not most, of the continental United States. Iran could have an ICBM capability similar to North Korea within a few years, as just last week it successfully launched a satellite-carrying rocket that some see as a precursor to long-range ballistic missile weapon capability.

‘Extensive’ missile cooperation

“There’s been fairly extensive cooperation on missiles,” said Bunn. “And in fact, early generations of Iranian missiles were thought to be basically modestly adapted North Korean missiles.” More here.

North Korea now making missile-ready nuclear weapons, U.S. analysts say

North Korea has successfully produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead that can fit inside its missiles, crossing a key threshold on the path to becoming a full-fledged nuclear power, U.S. intelligence officials have concluded in a confidential assessment.

The new analysis completed last month by the Defense Intelligence Agency comes on the heels of another intelligence assessment that sharply raises the official estimate for the total number of bombs in the communist country’s atomic arsenal. The U.S. calculated last month that up to 60 nuclear weapons are now controlled by North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Some independent experts believe the number of bombs is much smaller.

The findings are likely to deepen concerns about an evolving North Korean military threat that appears to be advancing far more rapidly than many experts had predicted. U.S. officials last month concluded that Pyongyang is also outpacing expectations in its effort to build an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of striking cities on the American mainland.

While more than a decade has passed since North Korea’s first nuclear detonation, many analysts believed it would be years before the country’s weapons scientists could design a compact warhead that could be delivered by missile to distant targets. But the new assessment, a summary document dated July 28, concludes that this critical milestone has already been reached.

“The IC [intelligence community] assesses North Korea has produced nuclear weapons for ballistic missile delivery, to include delivery by ICBM-class missiles,” the assessment states, in an excerpt read to The Washington Post. The assessment’s broad conclusions were verified by two U.S. officials familiar with the document. It is not yet known whether the reclusive regime has successfully tested the smaller design, although North Korean officially last year claimed to have done so.

The DIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment.

An assessment this week by the Japanese Ministry of Defense also concludes there is evidence to suggest that North Korea has achieved miniaturization.

Kim Jong Un is becoming increasingly confident in the reliability of his nuclear arsenal, analysts have concluded, explaining perhaps the dictator’s willingness to engage in defiant behavior, including missile tests that have drawn criticism even from North Korea’s closest ally, China. On Saturday, both China and Russia joined other members of the U.N. Security Council in approving punishing new economic sanctions, including a ban on exports that supply up to a third of North Korea’s annual $3 billion earnings.

The nuclear progress further raises the stakes for President Trump, who has vowed that North Korea will never be allowed to threaten the United States with nuclear weapons. In an interview broadcast Saturday on MSNBC’s Hugh Hewitt Show, national security adviser H.R. McMaster said the prospect of a North Korea armed with nuclear-tipped ICBMs would be “intolerable, from the president’s perspective.”

“We have to provide all options . . . and that includes a military option,” he said. But McMaster said the administration would do everything short of war to “pressure Kim Jong Un and those around him, such that they conclude it is in their interest to denuclearize.” The options said to be under discussion ranged from new multilateral negotiations to reintroducing U.S. battlefield nuclear weapons to the Korean Peninsula, officials familiar with internal discussions said.

Determining the precise makeup of North Korea’s nuclear arsenal has long been a difficult challenge for intelligence professionals because of the regime’s culture of extreme secrecy and insularity. The country’s weapons scientists have conducted five nuclear tests since 2006, the latest being a 20- to 30-kiloton detonation on Sept. 9, 2016, that produced a blast estimated to be up to twice that of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, in 1945.

But producing a compact nuclear warhead that can fit inside a missile is a technically demanding feat, one that many analysts believed was still beyond North Korea’s grasp. Last year, state-run media in Pyongyang displayed a spherical device that government spokesmen described as a miniaturized nuclear warhead, but whether it was a real bomb remained unclear. North Korean officials described the September detonation as a successful test of a small warhead designed to fit on a missile, though many experts were skeptical of the claim.

Kim has repeatedly proclaimed his intention to field a fleet of nuclear-tipped ICBMs as a guarantor of his regime’s survival. His regime took a major step toward that goal last month with the first successful tests of a missile with intercontinental range. Video analysis of the latest test revealed that the missile caught fire and apparently disintegrated as it plunged back toward Earth’s surface, suggesting North Korea’s engineers are not yet capable of building a reentry vehicle that can carry the warhead safely through the upper atmosphere. But U.S. analysts and many independent experts believe that this hurdle will be overcome by late next year.

“What initially looked like a slow-motion Cuban missile crisis is now looking more like the Manhattan Project, just barreling along,” said Robert Litwak, a nonproliferation expert at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and author of “Preventing North Korea’s Nuclear Breakout,” published by the center this year. “There’s a sense of urgency behind the program that is new to the Kim Jong Un era.”

While few discount North Korea’s progress, some prominent U.S. experts warned against the danger of overestimating the threat. Siegfried Hecker, director emeritus of the Los Alamos National Laboratory and the last known U.S. official to personally inspect North Korea’s nuclear facilities, has calculated the size of North Korea’s arsenal at no more than 20 to 25 bombs. Hecker warned of potential risks that can come from making Kim into a bigger menace than he actually is.

“Overselling is particularly dangerous,” said Hecker, who visited North Korea seven times between 2004 and 2010 and met with key leaders of the country’s weapons programs. “Some like to depict Kim as being crazy – a madman – and that makes the public believe that the guy is undeterrable. He’s not crazy and he’s not suicidal. And he’s not even unpredictable.”

“The real threat,” Hecker said, “is we’re going to stumble into a nuclear war on the Korean Peninsula.”

In the past, U.S. intelligence agencies have occasionally overestimated the North Korean threat. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush administration assessed that Pyongyang was close to developing an ICBM that could strike the U.S. mainland – a prediction that missed the mark by more than a decade. More recently, however, analysts and policymakers have been taken repeatedly by surprise as North Korea achieved key milestones months or years ahead of schedule, noted Jeffrey Lewis, director of the Center for Nonproliferation Studies’ East Asia Nonproliferation Program. There was similar skepticism about China’s capabilities in the early 1960s, said Lewis, who has studied that country’s pathway to a successful nuclear test in 1964.

“There is no reason to think that the North Koreans aren’t making the same progress after so many successful nuclear explosions,” Lewis said. “The big question is why do we hold the North Koreans to a different standard than we held [Joseph] Stalin’s Soviet Union or Mao Zedong’s China? North Korea is testing underground, so we’re always going to lack a lot of details. But it seems to me a lot of people are insisting on impossible levels of proof because they simply don’t want to accept what should be pretty obvious.”

08/5/17

Texas Republican Congressman Will Hurd – Russia Is Our Enemy

By: Trevor Loudon | New Zeal

Texas Republican Congressman Will Hurd is a former CIA officer, and serves on the House Intelligence Committee, investigating Russian interference in the last elections. I don’t agree with him everything he says, but he’s got Russia nailed.

From a CNN interview with Mark Preston

Hurd: Russia is our adversary. They are not our ally. The Russians, Vladimir Putin is very clear, he has one goal and that’s to re-establish the territorial integrity of the USSR. And he can’t do it militarily, he can’t do it economically, he has to use asymmetrical warfare and that means eroding the trust in democratic institutions. That’s the US That’s the EU. That’s NATO. And one of the issues, one of the ways that they do this is with disinformation or … covert influence operations. Which means we, the United States, have to have a counter-covert influence strategy, which we don’t have.

Preston: So you brought up Russia … I trust, as you have said, in these folks in the intelligence community [who say Russia tried to interfere in the US elections]. Is it frustrating when you don’t hear the White House really give a full-throated response behind that?

Hurd: I stand behind the intelligence community assessment of this as well. The Russians were trying to manipulate our elections. Now, did they impact the vote tallying machines? No. So, President Trump won the election fair and square, but that doesn’t change the fact that there was attempts of manipulation. The Russians have been doing this for decades in Europe, they’re doing it now and they are going to continue to do that. … I think it is frustrating when we allow the Russians to continue to win, and what do I mean by that? The Russians’ goal in their activity was to sow, was to drive a wedge, whether real or perceived, between the President, the intelligence community, and the American people. And by the discord that continues, that allows those goals to continue to be achieved.

In defending President Trump we must take care not to defend Putin or Russia. We should support the hardest possible line against the Putin regime.

Russia is America’s and President Trump’s number one enemy.

Go here for proof.

08/5/17

Weekly Featured Profile – Juyeon Rhee

KeyWiki.org

Juyeon Rhee is one of most militant North Korea supporters in the United States. An immigrant from South Korea, Rhee served as the Program Coordinator of Education and Exposure Programs at New York based Nodutdol and has helped to organize annual delegations of US subversives to both North and South Korea since 2002.

Juyeon Rhee “was blocked from boarding a plane at LaGuardia Airport in New York City on the morning of June 22 2017” as she was on her way to protest the U.S. THAAD missile defense system from South Korea.

“Delegation coordinator Juyeon Rhee of the Task Force to Stop THAAD in Korea and End Militarism in Asia and the Pacific was blocked from boarding a plane at LaGuardia Airport in New York City on the morning of June 22 [2017]. A protest campaign to demand that her travel ban be lifted is currently underway, with hundreds of organizations and individuals sending letters of protest to Moon Jae-In and the Blue House, including prominent peace activists like Nobel Peace Laureate, Mairead Maguire; Academy Award-winning director, Oliver Stone; and American author and Pulitzer Prize winner, Alice Walker.

Rhee was also forbidden to enter her home country in 2016, when the South Korean government blocked the entry of Juyeon Rhee and Hyun Lee, into South Korea. The two were representatives of the U.S.-based Solidarity Committee for Democracy and Peace in Korea. They had traveled to South Korea to participate in the annual Jeju Peace March as well as join protests against the recent U.S.-South Korean decision to deploy the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense system in South Korea.

After being detained by immigration officers at Incheon International Airport, Rhee and Lee were deported pursuant to Articles 11 and 12 of the Korea Immigration Control Act, which prohibits the entry of foreigners who, among other things, are “deemed likely to commit any act detrimental to national interests of the Republic of Korea or public safety.”

According to a sympathetic press release;

Rhee and Lee had traveled to South Korea numerous times in the past and encountered no barrier to entry. They have never broken any laws in South Korea, much less been deported in the past.”
The denial of their entry can only be seen as an attempt by the Park Geun-hye administration to block peace activists from internationalizing the growing opposition in South Korea against THAAD deployment. Since announcing its decision to collaborate with the U.S. military to deploy the missile system in Seongju, North Gyeongsang Province, the government has waged an aggressive campaign to crack down on all those who oppose the government’s decision. President Park recently referred to those voicing opposition, many of whom are ordinary Seongju residents, as “subversive forces” and declared, “It’s important to block subversive forces from all affairs, and we must be thorough in weeding them out.”

In March 2013, Juyeon Rhee spoke to a New York gathering of the pro-North Korea Workers World Party on the “DPRK Crisis.”

As of March, 2013, Juyeon Rhee served as a board member of the Los Angeles based Korea Policy Institute, the most influential pro-North Korea front organization in the country.

(Juyeon Rhee|more…)

08/4/17

Standing up to Cultural Marxism

New Zeal

D Day on the Normandy Beaches June 6, 1944

Cross-Posted from Bear Witness Central

President Donald Trump deserves a tremendous amount of gratitude and support for his newly instated trans-gender policy in the military! It is about time someone stood up to confront the Cultural Marxists who have been terrorizing American institutions for decades. They have been doing so through militant means, threats, subversion and by shoving political correctness down the throats of several generations of Americans and its institutions, with the sole purpose of silencing the moral majority. By silencing that majority, it opened up the stage for Marxists to promote moral decay without it being challenged. The previous policy’s purpose was to foster moral decay in the military. Moral decay is key for the collapse of any culture, which inevitably leads to the collapse of a nation. Marxists understand this and it seems apparent President Trump does too!

For Marxists, as David Horowitz puts it, “the issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution”. [1] Their revolution is for the overthrow of America. America is a Christian nation. The Biblical values by which our nation was founded upon had always been reflected in all institutions of influence for almost two centuries. But over decades, the Cultural Marxists have erased them, and continually work to finish off the remaining institutional remnants which still have some sense of morality reflected.

Since the 1920s, Cultural Marxists have worked tirelessly to not only indoctrinate the youth with Marxian thought and anti-Christian propaganda, they have also deliberately and systematically assaulted and captured the power centers of society in order to alter the moral fabric of this nation.

It is the will of Marxists to make America a “barbaric” nation. Donald Trump wishes to make America great again, and protecting the moral foundation is key! Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Communist from the early turn of the 20th Century gave a blueprint on how to destroy Western nations. He wrote in his series of essays entitled “Prison Notebooks” that, “The civilized world has been thoroughly saturated with Christianity for 2,000 years. Any country grounded in Judeo-Christian values cannot be overthrown until those roots are cut. But to cut the roots- to change culture – a long march through the institutions is necessary. Only then will the power fall into our laps like a ripened fruit.” The institutions he was referring to were the media, music industry, education, movie industry, the arts, political parties, etc., which influence culture from the top-down. The Frankfurt School, a Marxist social research think tank concluded, back in the early part of the 20th century as well, that in order to bring Bolshevism to the west, two things needed to happen: “the total ‘annihilation’ of western culture, particularly the Judeo-Christian culture was necessary, and, a new cultural form needed to be created to increase the alienation of the population… a ‘new barbarism’ was needed.” It was Wilhelm “Willi” Münzenberg, a German Marxist and an early member of the Frankfurt School who said “We will make the west so corrupt that it stinks”.

Military institutions can be included in Gramsci’s model because the culture in American Armed Forces is God and country. The military has the delegated responsibility to defend We the People from enemies foreign and domestic. We the People ordained and established the U.S. Constitution, which is based on the principles of the Declaration of Independence. These principles are that all men are created equal and are endowed by our Creator with God-given rights, and such rights are protected by that Constitution.

Paul Kengor in his article “War on Religion” from museumoncommunism.org wrote that, “Communists quibbled over the details of how to implement Marx’s vision, but they were unanimous in one thing: religion was the enemy, a rival to Marxist mind control, and it had to be vanquished regardless of costs and difficulties.”

A perfect relevant example of one aspect of the assault of Cultural Marxism is reflected in an article written by Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D. which reads, “Writing for The Guardian, self-identified ‘Christian dissident’ Keith Mascord claims that ‘homophobic opposition to same-sex marriage’ has its roots in adherence to the Bible, and only by leaving the biblical text aside will Christians learn to support ‘marriage equality.'” He continues, “The Guardian’s essay is reminiscent of a 2015 op-ed in the New York Times, where food critic and gay activist Frank Bruni argued that Christians should be coerced into embracing the gay lifestyle.” Mr. Williams also points out that, “Like Mascord, Bruni wrote that Christians who hold on to ‘ossified,’ biblically based beliefs regarding sexual morality have no place in modern society and should be reeducated, forcibly if necessary.” [2] From the 1963 Congressional Record, it is found that there were 45 Current Communist Goals that were actively being pursued in America at the time (and are still being pursued today). Communist Goal #26 reads, “Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as normal, natural, healthy.” [3] As Curtis Bowers points out in his documentary, “Agenda, Grinding America Down”, by making homosexuality normal in society, that strategy becomes a tool of subversion to “extinguish” moral values in the society.

So it’s clear that all of these gender social issues, including the gender neutral bathrooms, are nothing more than a deliberate effort to “subvert” America and bring about an agenda. It is a great evil and it must be rejected. It has nothing to do with granting gender rights or validating victimized groups. It has everything to do with the deliberate Marxist/Globalist strategy to destroy America by destroying the culture first. History tells us that when there is gross immorality in any society, it collapses. Barbarism and immorality provide the excuse for tyrants, tyrants such as the United Nations and the king-makers of the world, to step in to suppress the inevitable chaos it brings, thus crushing Liberty. We have to remember the the revolutionaries are not in control. They are puppets of “puppet-masters”, the “invisible government” as Edward Bernays put it … who are in control. Revolution is necessary, so revolutionaries are needed in order for the invisible governors to further agendas. These invisible governors deliberately create problems and provide solutions to the very problems they themselves create! Furthermore, this trans-gender policy that the President nixed was implemented into the military as part of the United Nations’ effort to complete its Gender Equality Sustainable Development Goal #5 which is for all nations to, “Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls”. This is to be completed by the year 2030. The first part of Sustainable Development Goal #5 is aligned with Communist Goal #26. Both are tied for the sole purpose of intentionally undermining the culture, to bring about World Governance, a goal of the invisible government.

Only a moral people can govern themselves as our Founding Fathers clearly pointed out and if a society loses its moral compass, it is destined to collapse. The Marxists know this which is why they push immorality at “all” levels including education since immorality is embedded in 21st Century education through Common Core.

President Trump’s new policy is a big step towards stopping the deliberate effort by Collectivists in government to subvert our military. He is keeping his promise to protect Americans from enemies foreign and “domestic” [EM]. If America has a military that is burdened with political correctness, it becomes a military that is incapable of providing for the common defense, which is one aspect of disarmament which Marxists want. As David Horowitz puts it with regards to the strategy of Leftists, “Like termites, they set about to eat away at the foundations of the building in expectation that one day they could cause it to collapse.”[4] So thank you President Trump for standing for what is right in protecting the American People.

There is still a moral majority in America and it is up to that moral majority to take a stand against the evil of Cultural Marxism. We must support the decision President Trump made and thank him. The president’s decision was a major blow to the Communism and Globalism that is running rampant in American institutions today.

A big praise to Missouri GOP Representative Vicky Hartzler as well who reportedly applauded the president’s decision! However, Arizona Senator John McCain, Utah Senator Orrin Hatch, Colorado Senator Cory Gardner and Iowa Senator Joni Ernst are reportedly opposed to President Trump’s decision. [5] These opposing Senators should be ashamed of themselves. Their disdain reflects more support for Communism than Liberty. Whose side are they on? Certainly not America’s.

Bear Witness supports President Trump 100%.

By Armando Escalante – North Florida Director Bear Witness Central
For Mr. Escalante speaking engagements, please contact Bear Witness Central at: http://bwcentral.org/contact-us

[1] (source: Barack Obama’s Rules for Revolution The Alinski Model – by David Horowitz, pp. 10)
[2] Article – The Guardian: Bible Is the Cause of Christian ‘Homophobia’ by Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D. (source:http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/23/the-guardian-bible-is-the-cause-of-christian-homophobia/ )
[3] (source Communist Goals (1963) Congressional Record – Appendix, pp. A34-A35 – January 10, 1963)
[4] (source: Barack Obama’s Rules for Revolution The Alinski Model – by David Horowitz, pp. 29)
[5] (http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/26/john-mccain-backs-transgender-ideology-slams-

_________________________

Armando Escalante currently serves as North Florida Director for Bear Witness Central, an organization dedicated to bringing awareness of the dangers of totalitarian ideologies to leaders and the public. He is active in research and public speaking, teaching on America’s founding principles, early American history, as well as Totalitarianism and their strategies.

As a Christian and lead Bible teacher for over 20 years, he brings awareness of past and current subversive ideologies and how much of an impact they have had (and continue to have) on American Culture. He is also active in bringing awareness of the strategies used by totalitarians to assault Christianity.

He has been a guest on liberty radio shows with guest appearances on Sons of Liberty Radio Show, Glenn Pav Radio Show, American Freedom Watch Radio and others.