01/12/15

The Root of The Problem: Russia – Part 1

Below is Part 1 of the report compiled by Glenn’s research team for Monday’s special “The Red Storm”. Part 2 will be posted Tuesday, followed by Part 3 on Wednesday.

George F. Kennan was a United States diplomat serving as deputy head of mission in Moscow in 1946. The war was over and the entire world was in the process of rebuilding and moving on. One very large obstacle was Stalin and the Soviet Union. The U.S. Treasury department’s International Monetary Fund and World Bank were gaining traction, but they couldn’t get the Russians to support it. The Treasury Department asked Kennan to explain what the deal was.

Kennan’s response would later be dubbed “The Long Telegram”. It was an 8,000 word communique that warned of Russia’s plans for the future of Europe.

“The main element of any United States policy toward the Soviet Union must be a long-term, patient but firm and vigilant containment of Russian expansive tendencies … Soviet pressure against the free institutions of the Western world is something that can be contained by the adroit and vigilant application of counterforce at a series of constantly shifting geographical and political points, corresponding to the shifts and maneuvers of Soviet policy, but which cannot be charmed or talked out of existence.”

Kennan’s solution was to take steps to block Russian expansion everywhere they could. The U.S. containment strategy was born. Kennan would later be called the “the father of containment”. Europe would be divided in two. A distinct line or “Iron Curtain” split the Russians in the East from American allies in the West.

Most people trace the Russian/Western conflict back to this moment. A competition born from the ashes of World War 2. In all actuality this fight is much much older. To get at the root of this problem we have to trace it back over a thousand years. To the split of the Roman Empire.

Charlemagne and Western Europe

In the late 700’s the Roman Empire was divided. The Christian Papacy was based out of Rome, but the government was now ran from Constantinople. The Byzantine Empire would be dubbed “the Eastern Roman Empire” and even “the second Rome”. The heavily Greek influenced Byzantines began to adopt Greek language and customs moving away from the latin language. Western Rome became more and more alienated maintaining their allegiance to the papacy. Rome became more of a protectorate to the Byzantines relying on troops from Constantinople to protect the Pope.

Rome and the papacy were on the verge of elimination. A barbarian tribe called the Lombards had invaded modern day Italy and set out to rule Rome. This time the Byzantines were unable to run to Rome’s rescue. Hordes from the Steppe were ravaging Eurasia and the Byzantine military was fully committed. In desperation the Pope reached out to Charlemagne the new King of the Franks. Besides the Pope, Charlemagne was the most famous Christian in Western Europe. Charlemagne rode to the Pope’s rescue and defeated the Lombards. Charlemagne became the Pope’s champion. Not only liberating Rome but Uniting all of Western Europe. On Christmas Day in the year 800 Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne Emperor. His empire would stretch all the way to the Slavic lands. If you laid a map of Charlemagne era Europe next to a map of Cold War era Europe the division is nearly identical.

After Charlemagne’s death his empire was split amongst his sons. The result of these divisions would lay the foundation for the modern day nation states of Germany and France. Carolingian Christianity would forever dominate Western Europe. They would look to Rome as their spiritual center.

Eastern Europe

While the Apostle Peter was headed towards Rome the Apostle Andrew headed north toward the Black Sea. Andrew converted Slavs in Crimea even traveling as far as present day Kiev. Standing in what would later be called Ukraine the Apostle Andrew declared that “a great Christian city” would one day be founded there. St. Andrew’s Cathedral now stands in Kiev at that exact same spot.

800 years after Andrew made his prophecy Prince Oleg of the Rus’ ruled in what is now Northwest Russia near the borders of Estonia and Finland. Prince Oleg was looking for a more strategic location to base his kingdom after getting attacked repeatedly by steppe hordes. He campaigned south eventually settling at the same location the Apostle Andrew made his prophesy. Kiev became the capital of what was called Kievan Rus’. At that time the “Russians” declared Kiev “the mother of all Rus’ cities”.

The Rus’ used their new capital of Kiev to strike back at the steppe invaders and defended trade routes from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea. With their power and pocket books building they began to challenge the Byzantine Empire. Even attacking Constantinople herself several times from the late 800’s to early 900’s.

The ever clever Byzantines decided to use their culture and their religion as the best weapon against the Rus’. A Byzantine monk named Cyril developed a written language based off the Slavic dialect from Greeks in Thessalonica. In this writing Cyril translated the bible and other Byzantine prayers and liturgical rite. The Christianization of the Slavs had begun. In 988 Vladimir the Great was baptised in Crimea and Kievan Rus’ became a Christian State.

The relationship between Kiev and Constantinople over the next couple of centuries would be complicated. As Rome had become the spiritual center to the Western Europeans Constantinople was the spiritual center to the Rus’. Kievan Rus’ continued to defend trade routes within the empire and the Byzantines continued to put their fingers in the damn as Steppe hordes and Turks from Anatolia continued to invade.

The Mongol invasion would eventually splinter Kievan Rus’. The Russians abandoned Kiev and did as they’ve always done when facing elimination. Taking advantage of their defense in depth they retreated Northeast up into the Russian forest.Through it all the Orthodox Church remained their center. The Russians moved the Kiev church to Moscow and they continued to look toward Constantinople as their home base.

Conclusion

Just 100 years after Western Europe was Christianized and centered on Rome, Eastern Europe would be Christianized and centered on Constantinople. The Pope in Rome tried to ban the use of Cyrillic but the Byzantines exported it like wildfire amongst the Slavs.

Eastern Orthodoxy would become fused into the DNA of every Russian. Places such as Kiev and the Crimea peninsula are considered their holy sites. The legitimacy of such traced all the way back to an apostle of Jesus. You could make the argument that just as Charlemagne saved Roman Catholicism in the West the Eastern Orthodox Church saved the Russians in the East and helped keep them together. When the Byzantine Empire effectively collapsed the Russians saw it as their holy succession to establish the “Third Rome”. The Russian Orthodox Church provided their divine legitimacy.

The medieval “Iron Curtain” line was drawn. It was further solidified in the 11th century during the Great Schism. The Roman Catholic Church officially split from the Eastern Orthodox Church. Western Europe continued to look to Charlemagne’s France as their protector and leader. Eastern Europe looked to Russia as their champion and preserver of Eastern Orthodox tradition. Russian nationalism was always centered on Orthodoxy. It wasn’t until the dawn of the 20th century that a certain leader tried to change the Russian struggle from cultural….to class. But the ROOT of this conflict began over a thousand years ago.

01/12/15

Putin Is Playing the Great Game of Civilizations While the West Chips Away At Russia’s Finances

By: Buck Sexton
TheBlaze

At first look, Russia seems to be in a bind. By the end of 2014, international sanctions had finally taken a toll. Moscow has suffered currency flight, inflation, and an economic slowdown that could quickly turn into a recession. Apple stopped selling its products in Russia, and lines for other consumer products stretched outside store entrances, deep into the street.

Now in 2015, it should be game, set, match, right? Hold that thought for a minute.

The consensus at this point (if such a thing really exists) is that President Valdimir Putin will soon cave in response to these financial pressures and moderate his extraterritorial ambitions. Russia’s newest strongman will see the light, cry “uncle,” and become a more docile, agreeable member of the international community. The Russian bear has been caged, so to speak.

Russian President Vladimir Putin listens during a meeting in Samara, Russia, Monday, July 21, 2014. Putin has lambasted those who use the downing of a passenger jet in eastern Ukraine for "mercenary objectives," the Kremlin said Monday. In a statement posted on the Kremlin website, Putin again lashed out at Ukraine for ongoing violence with pro-Russian rebels in the eastern part of the country. (AP Photo/RIA-Novosti, Alexei Nikolsky, Presidential Press Service) AP Photo/RIA-Novosti, Alexei Nikolsky, Presidential Press Service

Russian President Vladimir Putin listens during a meeting in Samara, Russia, Monday, July 21, 2014. AP Photo/RIA-Novosti, Alexei Nikolsky, Presidential Press Service

That’s one way of thinking, and let’s hope it’s correct. But it seems far too optimistic given recent Russian history.

Here’s a different outcome – one we can summarize as “nobody puts Putin in a corner.”

What if Putin doubles down? And take it a step further – what if this former KGB officer, who poses as a populist and acts as an authoritarian – is playing an entirely different game, with different rules, than those assumed by the international community?

There are really only two options on the table for Putin – give-in to his detractors, or double-down on trouble-making. And if he goes with the latter, it means more militarism, more land-grabs, and the sorts of destabilizations that can lead to disaster.

Indeed, Crimea could just be the appetizer; maybe the Baltics are on the menu. Maybe even more after that.

A quick look at the scoreboard, apart from Russian stock prices and the falling ruble, tells a disturbing tale.

Despite all the tough talk from the European Union and the Obama administration about repercussions for Putin’s action in Crimea and eastern Ukraine, Putin is winning in both of those arenas. Crimea is now a province of Russia, and the unrest in Ukraine has created a conception of “NovoRossiya,” or “new Russia.” Putin himself has used it to refer to those areas, in public, and it was definitely not a slip up.

Putin was conveying a message, and crazy as it seems, he is definitely thinking big picture. If you put aside for a moment the idea that Russia’s economic woes will dictate policy, the path forward for Putin becomes clear. He has above 80 percent support in recent polling, so clearly, the Russian people aren’t holding him responsible for their financial woes.

In fact, they blame the West. Putin’s propaganda, often laughed off in this country as silly and ham-fisted, is not meant for us. It is meant for the Russian people – and it has largely worked.

Big Vlad is now considered the defender of Russia’s heritage and history in the face of continued insults from America, Europe, and the rest of the wimpy bourgeois non-Russians out there. Russia is economically boxed in, but Putin remains Russia’s choice to break out of these internationalist constraints and restore Russia to its former glory.

That last part – about the reconstitution of the Soviet Empire – is really what we are talking about here. More and more analysts speak about it openly, and given Russian’s trajectory over the last few years – blocking the U.S. at every turn while aggressively pushing its own ambitions – is a line of analysis that must be taken very seriously.

A piece-by-piece restoration of Soviet glory makes perfect sense for an unabashed strongman like Putin. His moves are much more about geography, resources, and the great game of civilization vs. civilization than any concerns over economic hardship or angry United Nations resolutions.

And though he is often described as a “thug,” Putin’s long term plan may in fact be paying attention to basic geopolitics. Halford John Mackinder, one of the first and greatest analysts of modern geopolitics, wrote in 1919 in his “Geopolitical Pivot of History“:

“Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland;

who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island;

who rules the World-Island controls the world.”

Putin is pushing Russia’s influence outside its borders, pressing into Eastern Europe, and effectively seizing land on its immediate periphery. In fact, in Mackinder’s “Pivot of History” theory, Russia falls in the “pivot area” – the centerpiece to the struggle for world dominance. This is all based in geographic determinism. Putin certainly knows this, and so is willfully building up geopolitical capital as a tradeoff for financial capital.

He is not the first dictator to act in this fashion, and ride the waves of populism and nationalism in pursuit of some greater glory for his people. The questions that remain are, how far will he go, and will anyone stop him?

—

This piece was written to accompany the three-part series “The Root: Red Storm” on The Glenn Beck Program airing Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday night at 5 p.m. ET on TheBlaze TV.

01/12/15

Year of The Black Tea Party

01/12/15

‘WE NEED TO KILL THEM!’ – JUDGE JEANINE ON HOW TO DEAL WITH MUSLIM EXTREMISM

Hat Tip: BB

Palin: ‘Good God, Mr. President’

‘It doesn’t matter what you’re willing to WALK for, but what you’re willing TO FIGHT FOR’ – Col. Peters

As y’ll know, I don’t have a problem calling out CAIR.

You MuhamMAD, bro?

Multicultural Suicide

Emerson with Judge Pirro: No-Go Islamic Zones and Western Self-Denial

NY Daily News To Obama Regime On Missing #Paris March: “You Let The World Down!”

Our flag was not there: Obama and America shamefully skip Paris march against terror

State Dept. Spox lashes out at reporters over questions about France march

Ed Henry GRILLS White House on why Netanyahu could go to ‘Unity March’ but Obama couldn’t

Why didn’t President Obama unite with other world leaders in France?

Walid Phares: Obama didn’t go to France because the rally was AGAINST radical Islam

No Longer the Leader of the Free World

DRAWING DEFIANCE: Charlie Hebdo’s next issue WILL mock the Prophet Mohammed again

White House Faces Backlash for Absence at Anti-Terrorism Rally

Thousands March In Washington, Millions In France To Support Charlie Hebdo Victims; U.S. Officials Absent

Barry Shaw: “Kristallnacht for French Jews”

Designated Terrorist Group CAIR demands FOX News fire its ‘Islamophobic’ commentators

“Should the U.S. rethink its policies on immigration from Muslim nations?”

Pope Denounces Jihad as ‘Deviant Forms of Religion’

‘ISIS is already here, we are in your PCs’: @CENTCOM apparently hacked during Obama cybersecurity speech

‘Too damn late’: John Kerry announces Paris visit to ‘pay respects to French people’

U.S. Marine Corps Veteran says: “Stop appeasing Muslims and exterminate this scum that is plaguing the planet”

Oliver North on Why Obama was not at the Paris March: “Because it was Only for World LEADERS” – Video 1/11/15

“We don’t want Muslims in Germany,” say tens of thousands of anti-Islamization protestors in tonight’s weekly PEGIDA rally in Dresden

Erdogan attacks Netanyahu: How does head of terror state dare attend Paris march?

Minnesota Muslim: ‘Be Assured We (Muslims) Believe in Freedom of Beheading’

Obama and the vacuum of power

France Declares War on Radical Islam, Eric Holder Refuses

‘We are Charlie’: Across France, nearly 4 million march to honor victims of terrorist attacks

Is the Obama White House Crazy or Cowardly?

WHUP ASS: Watch Trump Destroy Obama For Snubbing Paris Anti-Terror March

French Prime Minister: If Jews Flee, the Republic Will Be a Failure

Stop Pretending Terrorism Has Nothing To Do With Islam

Stop Lying: Media Are Censoring Charlie Hebdo Out Of Fear Of Islam

Watch VIDEO: French Muslim Children Cheer/Mock Gun-Firing Gestures/Thumbs up Outside Kosher Supermarket During Jihad Siege

Record ‘anti-Islamisation’ march expected in Germany in wake of Paris attacks

John Bolton: U.S. ground forces to stop ISIS ‘inevitable’

01/12/15

The Dismantling of Federalism

By: Nancy Salvato

It wouldn’t be surprising, if polled, that many United States citizens would feel disenfranchised when it comes to politics. Though the right to vote and petition the government is supposed to make sure the people’s interests are considered, we the people are not given standing to question the constitutionality of laws, i.e. The Affordable Care Act. Political parties are no longer able to moderate the positions of the most extreme members of our society, who feel compelled to take law into their own hands, i.e. exhibiting anarchy against the rule of law in response to the Grand Jury’s decision not to indict in the events surrounding Ferguson. Extremism, lack of understanding, apathy, an agenda driven 4^th Estate, all work against the citizenry in exercising their rights and responsibilities with fidelity in today’s society. How did it come to this?

One of the earliest Supreme Court cases to set precedent (A decided case which is cited or used as an example to justify a judgment in a subsequent case—ninja words) for our rule of law was Marbury v Madison. What happened is this. Before leaving office at the end of his term, 2^nd President John Adams appointed a slew of judges to the federal courts to maintain an ongoing Federalist Party influence during upcoming Democratic-Republican President Thomas Jefferson’s tenure in office. John Marshall was unable to deliver all the commissions before our 3^rd President began his term of office and Jefferson refused to have the remainder of the commissions delivered. William Marbury, who was to receive a commission, was not pleased with this turn of events and applied to the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus, to force delivery of the commissions.

Angered by the appointment of the “midnight judges” Jefferson and the Democratic-Republican Party controlled congress attacked the Federalist controlled courts, removing many of the appointees by repealing the Judiciary Act of 1801, under which authority many of the appointments were made. To prevent an appeal on the subject, they determined the Supreme Court would not reconvene until 1803. By doing so, the executive and legislative branches appeared to be cementing their authority over the judicial branch.

The newly appointed Chief Justice John Marshall was in a bind. He did not want to further anger the Democratic-Republicans, fearing the administration would go as far as to simply ignore any decision made by the Supreme Court, if it appeared to further a Federalist agenda. Yet, he truly believed that Marbury’s commission was legally binding and should have been delivered. He resolved this conundrum, at the same time elevating the judiciary branch as co-equal to the other branches, by determining that the power to issue a writ of mandamus –given to the Supreme Court as part of the Judiciary Act of 1789, was actually “unconstitutional.” Therefore, he could not issue a mandate regarding the commission, satisfying Jefferson. At the same time, Marshall established the power of judicial review, ensuring the other branches abide by the Constitution, as interpreted by the Judicial Branch. In doing so, this elevated the status of the Judicial Branch, giving it the sole power to determine the constitutionality of law – a power for which it was never intended, but is now associated with this branch.

Influenced by Baron de Montesquieu, the Framers intended to prevent tyranny by dividing the powers delegated to the federal government into three branches of government, which could check and balance each other. In addition, according to the 10^th Amendment, powers not delegated to the federal government were to remain with the states and the people. If the constitutionality of a law is in question, this determination is presumably up to the states and the people to decide. The precedent for this is called nullification.

“If the feds pass a law that a state deems to be outside the boundaries of its proper constitutional authority, the state will simply ignore the law and refuse to comply with it.” – The New American

This idea, that the states could declare a federal law null and void because it violates the compact between the states and the federal government, eventually leads to the secession of the southern states from the union.

Because most people associate the Civil War with making good on a promissory note to those who were not treated equally under the law, the precedent for nullification is lost on the majority of citizens. This is problematic because citizens have no standing to bring questions of constitutionality before the Supreme Court and states have lost the main check and balance intended to ensure their interests were defined and respected by the federal government with passage of the 17^th Amendment—which eliminated the choosing of senators by the state legislatures and having them directly elected by the people. There is currently a movement to remove the last check and balance of the states with the elimination of the Electoral College.

There are currently a number of issues against which the states and people seem to be rendered powerless.

1) Immigration: By not enforcing the laws that Congress has passed on securing the border and immigration, the Executive Branch is marginalizing the Legislative Branch.

2) Obamacare: By unilaterally changing the text of the Affordable Care Act without seeking the changes legislatively, the Executive Branch is manipulating written law by decree, marginalizing the Legislative Branch.

3) Gitmo: Mr. Obama is “transferring” enemy combatant prisoners from Guantanamo Bay in an effort to empty the prison, in effect forcing a “closing” of the facility, something that Congress has passed legislation to prevent.

4) EPA: Using Executive Branch decreed regulations instead of seeking legislation from Congress, Mr. Obama is effectively legislating by regulating, and affecting many pieces of legislation Congress has passed to affect pro-economic growth.

Now that the new Congress has been seated, the President Obama has promised to veto any legislation that doesn’t further his agenda. It would seem that more than ever, the states and the people must reassert the powers which were never given to the federal government in order to prevent the tyrannical practices taking place at the federal level.

James Madison, in Federalist 51, writes,

“In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.”

It seems that the failsafe measures which were put in place to oblige the government to control itself have been breached. It is up to the states and the people to restore the natural order once again.

Nancy Salvato is the Director of Education and the Constitutional Literacy Program for Basics Project, a non-profit, non-partisan research and educational project whose mission is to re-introduce the American public to the basic elements of our constitutional heritage while providing non-partisan, fact-based information on relevant socio-political issues important to our country. She is a graduate of the National Endowment for the Humanities’ National Academy for Civics and Government. She is the author of “Keeping a Republic: An Argument for Sovereignty.” She also serves as a Senior Editor for NewMediaJourna.usl and a contributing writer to BigGovernment.com and FamilySecurityMatters.org.

01/12/15

Sexy wartime pinups are back in style – this time in Ukraine

The People’s Cube

Red Square

Sexy American pinups of the ’40s and ’50s take a special place in the hearts of post-Soviet artists. When pinups were on the rise in the States, the Soviet government had decisively excluded such “bourgeois decadence” from the culture of the builders of communism. Instead, Soviet men were encouraged to rest their eyes on the portraits of exemplary workers and collective farmers who happened to be women, painted in the tradition of socialist realism.

Today, feeling nostalgic for that which never was, artists in different parts of the former USSR are trying to reconstruct the missing link in their cultural evolution – either by drawing a series of clever mashups, mixing vintage American pinup girls with Soviet propaganda posters, or by visualizing scantily clad retro-babes in classic pin-up poses but with Soviet enthusiastic fire in their eyes, who can only exist in an imaginary alternative timeline, in which the Soviet government hadn’t been so zealous in suppressing the sexuality of its citizens.

And today, Ukrainian graphic artist Sviatoslav Pashchuk is bringing back military-styled pinups – after all, it was during World War II that the pinup culture was born originally, satisfying the need of American GIs to gaze at creatures of beauty in the midst of cruel wartime brutality.

Now that a brutal war is raging in the east of Ukraine, the new series is quickly becoming a hot item among Ukrainian soldiers and volunteers, who are defending their country against the Russian aggression. The guys are grateful to the artist for the diversion. They get the reference, admitting that this patriotic erotica is even sweeter to their eyes than it was to the American GIs during WWII. These pinups are also a reminder of the bigger world they had left behind and to which they hope to return after the war is over. Alas, not all of them will.

Each pinup is dedicated to a different branch of armed service or a volunteer battalion, accompanied by humorous and often rhymed patriotic slogans, with a warning at the bottom in fine print: “separatism is dangerous to your health.”

The artist is offering them for sale with the understanding that part of the proceeds will go to support the Ukrainian military. Since this is not a real commercial operation, the only way to order them for now is by sending him an email at [email protected].

UPDATE:

Last night I contacted this Ukrainian artist via Facebook, sending him a link to the Cube and some additional questions. When I woke up I already had his responses (the time difference is seven hours). Here’s what he wrote:

Sviatoslav Pashchuk: Good day to you! We are already sending our posters to American buyers and soon we will also have a special website, it’s almost done now. I’m also going to make English-language versions for the American market.

You are correct – all money from the sales will go to help our soldiers. Most of the proceeds will be used to buy sniper equipment and ammunition for volunteer fighters. Thank you very much for the promotion.

I’m going to continue with this series, making as many as 12 posters. The site will have a link to the blog where I’ll keep the readers updated on my coming creations.

* * *

See the seven existing posters below:

Donbas Volunteer Battalion: Goodies For The Bullies

~
Special Forces: Fatal Dating

Artillery: The Final Lullaby
(The stenciled acronym on the howitzer stands for “F-U Putin”)

Air Force: A Hot Nosedive

Border Patrol: The Hunter Instinct

Aydar Volunteer Battalion: Our Kind of Happy

Ukrainian National Guard: Gentle Ukrainization

01/12/15

One paragraph from this CIA agent’s overlooked 1999 congressional testimony tells you everything you need to know about Putin’s Russia

By: Benjamin Weingarten
TheBlaze

In light of Glenn Beck’s forthcoming series on Russia, we thought it worthy to share something profoundly insightful but also bone-chilling that TheBlaze Books discovered in reviewing Prof. Karen Dawisha’s penetrating and terrifying new book, “Putin’s Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia?.”

Dawisha builds the case that Russian President Vladimir Putin has built a criminal, Mafia-like regime, reliant on corruption, violence, terror, subversion, and ultimately loyalty in order to survive. But even prior to his first election to president in 2000, a system anathema to and likely inconceivable in the minds of even the most sober Westerners was forming.

Russian President Vladimir Putin meets with Federation Council members in the Novo-Ogaryovo residence outside Moscow, Thursday, March 27, 2014. (AP Photo/RIA-Novosti, Alexei Nikolsky, Presidential Press Service) AP Photo/RIA-Novosti, Alexei Nikolsky, Presidential Press Service

This is perhaps best illustrated in a paragraph that Dawisha cites from the September 21, 1999 testimony of former CIA agent Richard Palmer, delivered to the House Committee on Banking and Financial Services during a hearing on infiltration of the Western financial system by elements of Russian organized crime.

Palmer, a specialist in Russian organized crime, who had spent 20 years as a member of the CIA during the height of the Cold War, largely overseas — including his final three as Chief of Station in the Former Soviet Union (FSU) from 1992-1994 — followed by several years as an FSU business and security consultant, stated:

For the US to be like Russia is today, it would be necessary to have massive corruption by the majority of the members at Congress as well as by the Departments of Justice and Treasury, and agents of the FBI, CIA, DIA, IRS, Marshal Service, Border Patrol, state and local police officers, the Federal Reserve Bank, Supreme Court justices, U.S. District court judges, support of the varied Organized Crime families, the leadership of the Fortune 500 companies, at least half of the banks in the US, and the New York Stock Exchange. This cabal would then have to seize the gold at Fort Knox and the federal assets deposited in the entire banking system. It would have to take control of the key industries such as oil, natural gas, mining, precious and semi-precious metals, forestry, cotton, construction, insurance, and banking industries – and then claim these items to be their private property. The legal system would have to nullify most of the key provisions against corruption, conflict of interest, criminal conspiracy, money laundering, economic fraud and weaken tax evasion laws. This unholy alliance would then have to spend about 50% of its billions in profits to bribe officials that remained in government and be the primary supporters of all of the political candidates. Then, most of the stolen funds, excess profits and bribes would have to be sent to off-shore banks for safekeeping. Finally, while claiming that the country was literally bankrupt and needed vast infusions of foreign aid to survive, this conspiratorial group would invest billions in spreading illegal activities to developed foreign countries which provided them with foreign. In the best case of this comparison, the U.S. President would not only be aware of all of these activities but would also support them – including the involvement of his own daughters and all of his close political and financial supporters. Further, he would direct a campaign to smear and remove the Attorney General for investigating the office of the President.

For more on how Putin took up this mantle to build his kleptocratic regime, be sure to check out our full interview with Prof. Karen Dawisha below. You can find the cliff-notes here.

Note: The link to the book in this post will give you an option to elect to donate a percentage of the proceeds from the sale to a charity of your choice. Mercury One, the charity founded by TheBlaze’s Glenn Beck, is one of the options. Donations to Mercury One go towards efforts such as disaster relief, support for education, support for Israel and support for veterans and our military. You can read more about Amazon Smile and Mercury One here.

–

Follow Ben Weingarten (@bhweingarten) and TheBlazeBooks on Twitter and Facebook.

You can find all of our Blaze Books interviews on Soundcloud and Stitcher, and subscribe to our podcast automatically via iTunes.

01/12/15

Weekly Featured Profile – KeyWiki – Karen Kubby

KeyWiki

Karen Kubby

Karen Kubby has been a prominent Iowa City, Iowa activist since the 1970s. She has been a three term Iowa City Councillor and Executive Director of the Emma Goldman Clinic for Women, an abortion clinic named after famous anarchist Emma Goldman.

Kubby has been heavily involved in activism including standing on “picket lines with local labor unions and advocating for environmental protection, affordable housing, supporting the public library and a variety of other human rights issues.”

Kubby has served on the Socialist Party USA National Committee since 1980. In 2001, David McReynolds‘ 2000 campaign team organized a “Draft Kubby” effort for the 2004 campaign for presidency of the Socialist Party USA. However, Kubby declined to run for the presidency of the Party, stating that she did not want to do anything that would interfere with the plans of her then husband, prominent Iowa State Senator Joe Bolkcom ‘s plans to eventually run for Congress on the Democrat ticket.

Kubby is also very close to America’s largest Marxist group, Democratic Socialists of America. Iowa City Democratic Socialists of America leader, Jeff Cox, was Treasurer for Kubby for Council in 1988. She has also contributed to the group’s magazine, The Prairie Progressive.

Democratic Socialists of America is also supporting their member, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, in a bid for the U.S. Presidency in 2016.

During the summer and fall of 2006, Democratic Socialists of America Political Action Committee helped DSA activists around the country, “from San Diego up to Maine” to host house parties to raise funds that helped Bernie Sanders become the sole open socialist in the U.S. Senate.

On October 8, Jeff Cox of DSA and Karen Kubby of the Socialist Party USA teamed up to hold a house party in Iowa City for Sanders’ campaign.

In 2016, an Iowa group says it wants Senator Sanders to run for President as a Democrat in the 2016 Iowa caucuses.

The steering committee members include Karen Kubby and DSAer Jeff Cox.

(more…)

01/12/15

Forum: What Should The Western Response Be To The Attacks In France, If Any?

The Watcher’s Council

Every week on Monday morning, the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher’s Forum with short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture or daily living. This week’s question: What Should Western Response Be To The Attacks In France, If Any?

Simply Jews: I shall use as a starting point a precise example of what the Western response should not be. It was helpfully provided by one of the more moronic representatives of the Guardianistas, one Simon Jenkins, concerned most of all about possible damage to Western democracy as a result of new laws, new controls, new additions to the agenda of illiberalism.

There is no need for new laws/controls/etc. The West has enough legal, law enforcement, intelligence and military tools in its disposal, the only problem the West has is with the will and the readiness to use them. First of all, the West should pound into the ground the many heads of the militant Islamism – Al Qaeda, Taliban, ISIL (IS), Hezbollah, Bokko Haram, Hamas and all its other guises.

As long as all or even part of the above continue to exist, providing rich and fertile grounds for the so-called “lone wolf” growth, there wouldn’t be a chance to destroy the domestic terrorism.

And then will come the second stage: integration. The choice that must be offered to the adherents of the militant Islam in Europe and US should be simple: accept the laws of the land or move to a place where the law of the land suits you. Which is elsewhere.

The Noisy Room: My answer to ‘What should the Western response be to the attack in France, if any?’ is a mixture of responses from Allen West and from Ralph Peters.

1. Accept that we are in a war with Islamist terrorists.
2. Name the enemy – Islamist terrorists/Jihadists.
3. Know that we cannot continue to make our culture and values subservient to others.
4. We have to reconsider who we allow into the US and who can stay here. We also need to profile.
5. Get the lawyers out of the way and off the battlefield.
6. Accept that there will be collateral damage and don’t apologize for it.
7. No nation building or rebuilding.
8. Do not just ‘try’ to hold ground.
9. Go wherever the terrorists are and kill them. Try to exterminate them with prejudice.
10. When you leave a war theater, actually leave.
11. Leave behind smoking ruins and grieving widows. War means killing and breaking things. Accept it.
12. If in 5 or 10 years, the enemy even thinks of raising his head, go back and do it all over again. Finish it.
13. Never send American troops into a war that you do not intend to win.
14. We win, they lose and no soldier is left behind.
15. We don’t make deals with the enemy, no matter the immediate cost. The long term cost will be far worse.

If we do these things, France and the rest of Europe, will benefit and will finally have an example they can follow.

I think that about covers it. Any questions?

The Independent Sentinel: Curtail any Muslim immigration from terrorist countries. Stop using GITMO as the terrorist farm team.

Tighten surveillance on radical Muslims and Mosques. Move to arrest any Muslims returning from fighting with ISIS or al-Qaeda or from any known terrorist hotbed. Put the words “jihad” and “radical Islam” back into the FBI and Army manuals and use the words in speeches.

Change the rules of engagement and start capturing some of these terrorists for the purposes of interrogation. I’d immediately announce that I was leaving a residual force of 10,000 in Afghanistan. Stop aid to Yemen and other terrorist countries like Gaza until they come up with a plan to fight terrorism. Meet with al-Sisi of Egypt and re-establish that relationship after I met with Netanyahu and re-established that relationship.

Send weapons to the Peshmerga and tell the Iraqi government to pound salt. Iran’s Revolutionary Guards wouldn’t be my boots on the ground and I’d end those talks immediately. Instead, I’d meet with Congress about adding new sanctions. Talk about the need to stop the genocide in the Middle East and try to actually form a real coalition with allies, not with other terrorists.

I’d declare war on radical Islam, sit down with my generals and develop a comprehensive plan to defund them to start and all options would be on the table.

The Razor: It’s difficult to consider what the western response to the attacks in France that killed 18 innocents, considering we’re still waiting for the response to the downing of Malaysian Airlines flight 17 over Ukraine that killed 298. It does pose a bit of a dilemma since it’s impossible to convert to Islam AND Russian Orthodox at the same time, though if anybody could do it the Europeans can.

The Glittering Eye: As I wrote in a post earlier today.

I have been asked what I think the West should do in response to the incidents. In preface I should mention that I object to the framing. I do not believe there is a “West” in any meaningful sense. Whom does it include? Western Europe, the British Commonwealth, Canada, the U.S., Japan, and Israel? More? Less? I think that the term was originally coined to distinguish between Greece on the one hand and the Persian Empire on the other and was resurrected at the turn of the last century to unite the United States with the older, presumably more sophisticated United Kingdom and Continental Western Europe. After World War I, it received new currency to tie the United States to Western Europe against Russia and its satellites. I think that distinction has largely lost its meaning and is no longer helpful to the United States.

However, I’ll divide my response into two questions. What should we (the United States) do? What should the countries of Europe do?

I don’t think we should do anything. France has its own distinct issues, quite different from ours. France is quite capable of dealing with its own problems and its citizens need to decide what response if any is appropriate.

What should the countries of Europe do? They really have only three alternatives. They can push their Muslim populations farther away possibly alienating and radicalizing them in the process, they can do nothing and determine that occasional mass murders by radical members of that population are an acceptable risk, or they can take affirmative steps to integrate their Muslim populations more closely into their societies.

I think it is up to the citizens of those countries to decide what kind of countries they wish to be. My preference would be that they accept their Muslim populations whether citizen or resident, not relegating them to second class status as is too frequently the case but that’s not a decision for me, an American, to make. They should do as they think best in the full knowledge that whatever they decide will have implications.

Ask Marion: The Western nations, minus the US, made a big stride forward in standing up to Islamic terrorism on Sunday in Paris as their leaders walked arm in arm in unity. And the French Prime Minister declared war on radical Islam.

And I’m with Judge Jeanine Pirro… The US (And the Rest of the Western World) Must Arm Muslims Fighting Extremists ‘To the Teeth.’

Americans should be more than concerned; they should be frightened at the weak kneed reaction of our president to this latest terror attack as the rest of the world is finally waking up. Americans need do their homework. Why isn’t our president in Paris today? He certainly had plenty of time to fly to and vacation in Hawaii for the holidays. Are we still paying money to the Muslim Brotherhood? Hillary Clinton said back in 2011 that we were reaching out to the Brotherhood and just recently she said we needed t0 be more tolerant of our enemies; reason alone that she should be out of the 2016 presidential race. And let’s not forget Hillary’s aide with close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda.

America is now suffering from electing a president they didn’t vet and instead chose to ignore all the warning signs. Hopefully we will not be that foolish again, for the battle against radical Islam is a battle that the West must win and our leadership doesn’t even see interested in participating!

The Right Planet: I don’t honestly know what sort of coherent and decisive response can be delivered by the Western World if they steadfastly refuse to acknowledge they have a problem with Islamic terrorism. The stance many Western leaders assume is to bury their collective heads in the sand when it comes to the subject of Muhammadanism, i.e., Islam. The refusal by many Western leaders, especially President Barack Obama, to admit Jihad is codified into Islamic law, and that the works of Muhammad contained in the Hadith, Siri and Koran greatly influence the actions and plans of Islamic terrorists, is an exercise in either lethal incompetence or villainous treason. I’m just not going to mince words here.

I have seen video after video of Islamic terrorist groups of both Shia and Sunni extraction shouting, “Allah U’ Ahkbar!,” as they commit their murderous rampages. Yet I hear my own leaders telling me it has nothing to do with Islam. Please, do not insult my intelligence. To me, the point is not to condemn everyone who may call themselves a “Muslim.” The point is to understand how Islamic ideology inspires so many who do call themselves “Muslim” to commit barbarous acts against anyone who does not submit to the severity and ruthlessness of Muhammadanism.

Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason: Following this past week’s attacks, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls declared that France is at war with radical Islam. Heads of state from many nations across Europe and the Middle East came together in unity against the attacks, joined by millions of people carrying signs says Je Suis Charlie – We are Charlie. The Obama Administration was pathetically absent from Sunday’s show of solidarity against these attacks. Attorney General Eric Holder went to Paris but did not participate in the march of unity with the other nations. Instead he appeared on the many Sunday talk shows. When asked if we are at war with radical Islam, he could not bring himself to state what has become obvious to the rest of the civilized world. Utilizing the Obama administration’s tired narrative, he declared we are at war with terrorists who commit heinous acts and who use a corrupted version of Islam to justify their actions.

In the aftermath of the massacres, we are discovering the Kouachi brothers were known to United States, British, Yemeni, and French intelligence. The younger brother served 18 months in prison in France after being convicted on charges of terrorism in 2008. Both brothers were on the no fly list. We knew one and possibly both brothers received training in Yemen in 2011 with Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). There they met Anwar al-Awlaki, the American Muslim preacher killed in a drone strike ordered by President Obama in 2011. Let’s not forget, Al-Awlaki was also behind the Ft. Hood shootings committed by U. S. Army Major and “Soldier of Allah” Nidal Hasan. It makes me wonder why there was no international outpouring of concern or unity then. It appears the French lost interest in their surveillance of the Kouachi brothers in spite of their history of terrorist connections.

The Obama Administration is attempting to frame this incident as an attack on free speech. This was not an attack on free speech, it was an attack on those who chose to blaspheme the prophet Mohammed, and as President Obama has told us, “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” We must not let them redirect our focus from the threat of radical Islamic terrorism. We must not try to understand why they are committing these acts of terror, or empathize with them, as former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said. We need to understand that sometimes evil just is, and it must be annihilated.

It appears we had the intelligence. It appears we shared the intelligence. And yet, we continue to see these attacks being committed at an alarmingly increasing number with better planning and organization. The Western response should be focused on increased surveillance, more intelligence gathering by capturing and questioning those found to be involved with al Qaeda, ISIS, ISIL or any other variant of these radical Islamic groups, and being proactive instead of reactive in the fight against radical Islam. We must declare CAIR a terrorist organization and prohibit them from having access to and directing how we train our national security agency personnel in their investigations of terrorist threats.

Here in the South we have these nasty insects called fire ants. They live in colonies built upon mounds of sand. If you happen to step in one unaware they will climb up your body by the hundreds without you feeling a thing. Then some silent signal is given and all of them will bite in unison, causing incredible pain. My biggest fear is these radical Islamists are planning some nationwide or even worldwide terror event, and like the fire ants, are coordinating to synchronize these events to happen simultaneously.

Well, there you have it!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum and every Tuesday morning, when we reveal the week’s nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it… or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?

01/12/15

Rep. Kathy Castor: The Castro Brothers’ Best Friend in Florida

By: Trevor Loudon
New Zeal

No Florida Congress member can take more credit in laying the groundwork for President Barack Obama’s “normalizing” of diplomatic relations with Communist Cuba than Tampa area Democratic Party Representative, Kathy Castor.

Despite a very strong Cuban-exile, anti-Castro lobby in her home state, Rep. Castor has been relentless in her quest to make life easier for the terrorist-sponsoring, revolution exporting Castro brothers.

Using commercial opportunities and trade as bait, Rep. Castor has helped build a powerful lobby in her own state, which has set the stage for President Obama’s unilateral decision.

Rep. Castor is not a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus or similar pro-communist alliances.
She emphasizes commercial advantage over ideology in her campaign. Castor will also criticize Cuba’s abominable human rights record when convenient.

However, I believe she is just as ideologically committed to the Castro cause as is President Obama himself.

Interestingly, a report to the Communist Party USA was supportive of several Democratic candidates in the 2004 election cycle, including “Barak” Obama and Kathy Castor’s mother, Betty Castor, in her race for the US Senate from Florida:

It would be helpful for each district to single out House seats that can be swung from Republican to Democrat to develop our list of key races, which includes progressive Frank Barbaro in New York and Cynthia McKinney in Georgia.

A number of exciting candidates are emerging in the Senate, in the first place Barak Obama in Illinois, and also several progressive women including Betty Castor seeking to retain retiring Bob Graham’s seat as Democrat…

Incidentally, Betty Castor was appointed by President Obama in September of 2011, to the J. William Fulbright Scholarship Board, which oversees the worldwide Fulbright Program. On November 13, 2014, the Board elected her as Chair to begin a one-year term on January 1, 2015.

If the Communist Party liked Betty Castor, they should just love her daughter.

Much of Kathy Castor’s pro-Cuba activism has been in conjunction with the Washington, DC based Center for Democracy in the Americas, a spinoff of the far left Center for International Policy, and the notoriously pro-Castro Institute for Policy Studies.

In April 2013, the Center for International Policy partnered with the Alliance for Responsible Cuba Policy Foundation to host “Rapprochement With Cuba: Good for Tampa, Good for Florida, Good for America.” Rep. Castor provided the opening remarks at the Friday evening cocktail event in Tampa, FL and welcomed the panelists. The following day, the panelists discussed the Obama Administration’s Cuba policy, the State Department’s list of terrorist states, the Cuban-American vote, the US Congress’ Cuba policy, doing business in Cuba, deep water oil drilling in Cuba’s territorial waters and travel to Cuba at the Historic Cuban Club.

The highlight of the evening was hearing Representative Kathy Castor (D-FL) express her specific interest in normalizing relations with Cuba. According to Representative Castor, “Congress needs to change its policy towards Cuba, but Congress doesn’t have to act for the U.S. to begin to engage.”

“I am confident that change is on the horizon,”Castor began. “Think about what can happen at the Port of Tampa, ports all across the Southeast. All across America. These are values that we share as Americans — trade, travel and the ability to have a productive dialogue. There’s no reason any longer that it should not move forward.”

Among those cheering Castor that evening was panelist and The Nation magazine contributor, Peter Kornbluh, of the DC-based National Security Archive (another Institute for Policy Studies spin-off). He called Castor a “trailblazer for a new, modern, post-Cold War policy towards Cuba,” and said that the four-term congresswoman can be the catalyst to redefine the Florida-Cuba relationship, which until now has generally been controlled “by Castro-hating exiles who live in Miami.”

Kornbluh has a history of cheerleading for communism.

When a $14 million aid package for the anti-communist Nicaraguan “Contras” came up in the spring of 1985, Congress initially voted it down. Just forty-eight hours before the vote, Sens. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) traveled to Nicaragua. Their “celebrated meetings with the Marxist-Leninist Sandinista junta leaders, which captured the headlines and helped sway Congress, were arranged by Peter Kornbluh, then a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies. Within a week, the Sandinista president, Daniel Ortega, flew to Moscow and secured $200 million in Soviet aid.” “Shocked and embarrassed, Congress reversed gears” and granted $27 million in aid to the “Contras.”

The Institute for Policy Studies’ 33rd Annual Letelier-Moffitt Human Rights Awards were granted, Thursday, October 15, 2009. One of those the Award was named for was Cuban intelligence officer and Institute for Policy Studies staffer Orlando Letelier, killed by a Chilean government ordered car bomb in Washington, DC, September 21, 1976. Kornbluh was on the Award selection panel.

Rep. Kathy Castor also attended the Center for Democracy in the Americas’ 7th Anniversary Event, July 11, 2013.

Kathy Castor, left

Kathy Castor traveled to Cuba in early April of 2013, with members of her staff and representatives of the Center for Democracy in the Americas.

As she told the May 19, Tampa Bay Times on her return:

Cuba is changing, however, as I learned on my recent fact-finding visit. Cuba has embarked on meaningful economic reforms, which deserve encouragement by the United States, not continued isolation. President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have a window of opportunity to engage and encourage reform in Cuba and should act now…

Reforming Cuba policy will improve our diplomatic standing in the region and, at a critical moment, strengthen the credibility of our policy against terrorism. The Summit of the Americas concluded in 2012 with a warning from our allies that if Cuba is not allowed to attend the 2015 Summit of the Americas in Panama, they will boycott this important regional conference. The Obama administration should use the next two years to put U.S.-Cuban relations on a constructive path.

Castor said Fidel Castro is no longer in power and described his brother, President Raul Castro, as “a much more practical ruler.”

“They are still a hard-core communist nation, but they are embarking on market reforms in their economy that deserve encouragement,” said Castor.

Castor said she plans to ask President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry “to open talks to lead to greater trade and travel opportunities.”

In December of 2013, the Center for Democracy in the Americas convened “Cubans in the New Economy: Their Reflections and the U.S. Response,” C.D.A. co-hosted at George Washington University and featured Cuban guests, plus Alex Lee, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere Affairs, Rep. Kathy Castor and several other mainly leftist “experts.”

The Center for Democracy in the Americas connection is problematic from another angle.

Until recent times, the Center listed as one of its key Advisory Board members as the infamous Julia Sweig.

Also listed among “former fellows, project co-ordinators and staff” of the Institute for Policy Studies, Julia E. Sweig is the Nelson and David Rockefeller Senior Fellow for Latin America Studies and Director for Latin America Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

In October of 2008, in Miami, Christopher S. Simmons, one of America’s foremost authorities on Cuban Intelligence, a Lieutenant Colonel in the US Army and a career counterintelligence officer, identified several Cuban spies and their operations in the US. He later added several other names.

Speaking of Sweig, Simmons noted:

She may be one of two very unique categories of agents – an Agent of Influence or a “Persona de Confianza,” – another DI intelligence category. She has directed numerous Council-sponsored Task Forces on Latin America, currently serves on the Board of Directors for Foreign Affairs en Español; consultant on Latin American affairs, Congressional Program, The Aspen Institute (1999-present); Project Director, Center for Preventive Action Commission, Andes 2020: A New Strategy for the Challenges of Colombia and the Region (2004); Director, Independent Task Force, U.S.-Cuban Relations in the 21st Century, A Follow-On Chairman’s Report (2001). Wrote OPED pieces re Elian scenario and “Cuban terrorists” in the U.S.

In 2002, Sweig published her book, Inside the Cuban Revolution: Fidel Castro and the Urban Underground. Among those she thanks in her acknowledgements are six Cuban Intelligence Officers: Jose Antonmio Arbesu, Ramon Sanchez Parodi, Fernando Garcia Bielsa, Hugo Yedra, Jose Gomez Abad and Josefina Vidal. Not surprisingly, Sweig does not acknowledge that the six are career Intelligence Officers. The six Cuban spies she thanks are:

Ramon Sanchez Parodi Montoto: Became the first Chief of the Cuban Interest Section in Washington, DC on September 1, 1977, when the US and Cuba re-established diplomatic missions. This career spy served in Washington until 1989… Experts remain undecided as to whether he is DGI or from the infamous America Department (DA). In testimony before the US Senate, Dr. Daniel James charged Sanchez-Parodi with targeting the Congressional Black Caucus to foment opposition to existing US policies toward Cuba.
Jose Antonio Arbesu Fraga: Director of the America Area (formerly the DA) of the International Department of the Cuban Communist Party (PCC/ID). Following the 1992 resignation of legendary Cuban Intelligence officer Manuel Pineiro, Jose Antonio Arbesu Fraga, one of the DA’s Vice Directors, was selected as his replacement. In May 2004, Mexico forbade future visits by Cuban officials Arbesú and Pedro Miguel Lobaina-Jimenez de Castro.
Fernando Miguel Garcia Bielsa: As a 1st Secretary at the Cuban Interests Section, he was one 14 spy-diplomats expelled in May 2003. Earlier this year, Garcia Bielsa served as the Political Counselor in Santiago. Normally, Garcia’s extensive DA service, long-term ties to US terrorist groups (i.e., Puerto Rican extremists) and past service in the US would make his Santiago posting an anomaly. However, Santiago is likely a relatively benign operational area for a “burned” spy to continue to work with leftists groups and American agents.
Josefina de la C. Vidal Ferreiro: First Secretary at the Cuban Interests Section. One of 14 expelled in May 2003.
Hugo Ernesto Yedra Diaz: Yedra attracted considerable attention on November 22, 1977 when his briefcase exploded in the lobby of an Upper East Side apartment building. Yedra had set the case down to call for an elevator and apparently failed to activate the safety device on the case’s self-destruct device. Yedra lived in the building, but gathered his documents and fled the scene before police could arrive to investigate.
Jose Gomez Abad: A central figure in an attempted terrorist effort known as the “Black Friday Attack” on November 17, 1962, just weeks after the Cuban Missile Crisis. The FBI detained three Cuban Diplomats from its UN Mission and seized a cache of explosive and incendiary devices. Washington detained the Cubans on espionage-related charges and stockpiling munitions for use against US installations. Cuba’s targets included the Statue of Liberty; retail giants Macy’s, Gimbels and Bloomingdale’s; the main bus terminal on 42nd Street; Manhattan’s busiest subway stations – including Grand Central Station and several oil refineries along the New Jersey riverbank. Twelve detonators, several incendiary devices, grenades and 500 kilos of TNT were to be used on Black Friday – the busiest shopping day in the US.

Many of us forget the murderous intent shown by Castro’s agents in the United States.

Rep. Castor is knowingly, or unknowingly, serving the interests of an enemy nation with a long history of spying, subversion and aiding and planning terrorist attacks on US soil.

She has also allied herself with some of America’s worst homegrown subversives.

Should Kathy Castor and her associates be investigated by the incoming Republican controlled Congress?

For more information on Rep. Castor and more than 70 other US representatives and Senators, read Trevor Loudon’s 2015-2017 Edition of “The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the US Congress.”

The book is timed for release on April 11, 2015, but you may order your personally signed copy, or copies here:

“Trevor Loudon does the job that few in the media ever attempt” – Glenn Beck

New Zealander Trevor Loudon has addressed more than 400 events, in the United States of America.

He is an internationally known blogger and researcher, noted among other things for exposing the communist background of Obama “Green Jobs Czar” Van Jones, which led to his eventual resignation from his White House position. Loudon was also the first to publicize Barack Obama’s ties to Hawaiian Communist Party member, Frank Marshall Davis.

Loudon’s research has been cited by Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, in many articles, blog posts and in books by well known authors Paul Kengor, Aaron Klein and Jerome Corsi. He has given hundreds of radio interviews and addressed audiences in more than 40 states in several tours of the United States.