By: Cliff Kincaid | America’s Survival
John Guandolo, founder of Understanding the Threat, examines the strange background and comments of Obama CIA director John Brennan. He says the agency is heavily infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood. But he is hopeful that the incoming Trump Administration understands the problem and will take corrective action. Watch this blockbuster interview and take action. Go to www.understandingthethreat.com.
By: Renee Nal | New Zeal
Trevor Loudon speaking of “The Enemies Within” on The Glazov Gang
From The Glazov Gang website:
This new special edition of the Glazov Gang was joined by Trevor Loudon, the writer and director of the new documentary, The Enemies Within – an expose on the growing communist and Muslim Brotherhood influence on our government.
Watch:
By: Cliff Kincaid | Accuracy in Media
We now have evidence of contacts between Saudi officials and some of the September 11 hijackers. An old classified document has been declassified. On an equally, if not more important and current matter, what about the evidence of contacts between the Obama White House and the pro-terrorist Muslim Brotherhood? When will we be given a declassified copy of Obama’s Presidential Study Directive-11, or PSD-11, regarding the secret White House backing of the Muslim Brotherhood?
Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) has proposed a bill to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. It’s called the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act (S.2230).
On another equally, if not more important and current matter, what about Obama White House contacts with the Black Lives Matter movement (BLM), a support apparatus for cop-killers?
It would appear that the Obama administration may be implicated for its support for terrorism at home and abroad. This comes on top of the evidence that Obama and his then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton supported jihadist groups in Libya that killed four Americans in Benghazi.
We know BLM supports Assata Shakur, a cop-killer on the FBI’s list of Most Wanted Terrorists who fled to Cuba and is being protected by the Communist regime there. Why didn’t Obama insist on her extradition to the U.S. in exchange for normal diplomatic relations? Why have Obama and White House official Valerie Jarrett met with members of Black Lives Matter?
While setting the record straight about a high-level cover-up of Saudi-backed terrorism on American soil, let’s get to the bottom of who’s behind terrorism on American soil right now.
The Obama administration and its far-left backers seem troubled that the Congress may hold hearings into White House links to the Black Lives Matter movement.
What we know so far is that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has been crippled in its ability to investigate the BLM.
The far-left recently went into a state of panic over the fact that the FBI’s New Orleans Field Office circulated an alert to local law enforcement on July 7 titled, “Violence Against Law Enforcement Officers and Riots Planned for 8-10 July 2016.” One left-wing group complained that the document “consisted of a few unsourced and inflammatory images that appear to be screen grabs from random social media postings.”
Judicial Watch had obtained the July 7 document, noting that the alert warns that “multiple groups are calling for or planning riots and/or violence against law enforcement in Baton Rouge and Shreveport…”
The document was accurate in warning about threats to police. Yet, it was painfully short on details. The document serves as evidence that the FBI needs more information about the plans of the black radicals targeting police.
But how can the FBI investigate terrorist support groups like Black Lives Matter when the connections reach right up into the White House itself?
If FBI Director James Comey won’t indict former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as a security risk, you can surmise that the FBI would shy away from investigating President Obama’s links to the Black Lives Matter movement.
Aware that his contacts with BLM are a proper area for investigation and hearings, Obama tried on Sunday to intimidate those who want the truth to come out. He said, “We don’t need inflammatory rhetoric. We don’t need careless accusations thrown around to score political points or to advance an agenda.”
The agenda is the truth, Mr. President.
Since the media have shown no interest in holding Obama accountable for encouraging racial polarization and even violence, it is up to Congress to do so.
It is simply incredible that, even after police officers are assassinated in Dallas and Baton Rouge, Obama is still supporting Black Lives Matter. We have evidence that the President consorts with known backers of a cop-killer.
Obama said, “I don’t think that you can hold well-meaning activists who are doing the right thing and peacefully protesting responsible for everything that is uttered at a protest site.” He went on to say that “…I think that the overwhelming majority of people who are involved in the Black Lives Matter movement—what they really want to see is a better relationship between the police and the community so they can feel that it’s serving them.”
If the group wants a “better relationship” between the community and the police, why does the BLM website honor a cop-killer?
Rather than hold Obama responsible for supporting this group, Shepard Smith of the “conservative” Fox News Channel chastised former Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal for using the phrase “All Lives Matter.” Smith, an out-of-the-closet liberal, said the term was “seen by many” as “derogatory” toward the BLM movement.
Over at CNN, it’s worse. The network hired Marc Lamont Hill, after he was fired by Fox. At one time, Hill was so devoted to Assata Shakur that the wallpaper of his Twitter page was plastered with police photos of her. To this day, Hill still has a “letter from Assata Shakur” on his blog, and he says, “Let us give thanks for her life and her sacrifice.”
Her sacrifice? Her victim, Trooper Werner Foerster, was a father who left behind a wife and two children.
On the anniversary of the FBI declaring her a terrorist, Black Lives Matter said its members should declare “why she is important to the current Black Lives Matter movement.”
Does Obama, too, regard this terrorist as a freedom fighter? It appears that way. If not, why doesn’t he condemn the movement for honoring a cop-killer?
In response to an online petition asking that Black Lives Matter be designated a terrorist organization, the White House said that it “plays no role in designating domestic terror organizations,” and that the U.S. government does not “generate a list of domestic terror organizations.”
Perhaps the Congress can fill the void. Where does your congressman stand?
Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at [email protected].View the complete archives from Cliff Kincaid.
By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton
America has now boxed herself into a corner and doesn’t even realize it. If Hillary Clinton is elected, you will retain the Muslim Brotherhood in the White House. If Trump is elected, you will have the Russians and the Chinese in the White House. Trump’s advisers are very connected to Vladimir Putin and Russia. Trump himself has many ties as well and is friends with Putin. This is why Putin will try to sabotage Clinton with leaked emails etc. He’s got WikiLeaks and Assange doing his dirty work, with Edward Snowden as backup.
Trump has surrounded himself with people connected in one way or another to Russia and mobsters.
Carter Page
Donald Trump’s foreign policy adviser, Carter Page, has deep ties to Russia and the Kremlin’s Gazprom. Page is a globe-trotting investment banker who has built his creds on deals with Russia and its state-run gas company. It would do George Soros proud. Page’s business suffered a major hit when sanctions were imposed on Russia because of the Ukraine encroachment. When Trump selected him as a foreign policy adviser, he was inundated by his Russian contacts who were thrilled. That should be your first warning sign.
Trump has been putting forth the Russian idea to reduce NATO or do away with them altogether. He does not support the Ukraine either. He has called Putin a ‘strong leader’ and both have talk glowingly about each other. Flexible doesn’t quite cover it this time around. Page portrays US policymakers as stuck in an outdated Cold War mindset, which is really laughable as the Cold War never ended… it shifted.
Page is a self-serving business shark. He has no political experience, but he’s killer when it comes to negotiating a deal. Trump calls it “real world” experience. I call it corruption. Page has a lifelong fascination with Russia and Central Asia, and a determination to drum up business there even in the face of political headwinds. He has no loyalty to America or her constitution… his loyalty lies in business and profits. In that, Trump and Page share a common viewpoint. After all, even if it smacks of mob tactics, it’s just business.
Page traveled to Moscow last week and criticized the United States and other Western powers for their “hypocritical focus on ideas such as democratization, inequality, corruption and regime change” in other countries. He praised Russia and China for being ‘progressive’ and forward thinking, while nailing the US as interventionist and two-faced. Gee, he sounds more like Putin’s man than Trump’s. He praised Russia and China for embracing foreign policies built on “non-interference,” “tolerance” and “respect.” Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah! Barack Obama, John Kerry and Hillary Clinton.
From The Washington Free Beacon:
“The United States and other developed powers, including in the EU, have often criticized [China, Russia, and Central Asian nations] for continuing methods which were prevalent during the Cold War period,” Page said. “Yet ironically, Washington and other Western capitals have impeded potential progress through their often hypocritical focus on ideas such as democratization, inequality, corruption, and regime change.”
He also accused Western powers of approaching Russia and Central Asian nations with a “nearly universally critical tone” despite their “advancements.” This he said, may “understandably advance a certain level of insecurity.
The remarks, delivered at an event hosted by the New Economic School, were hardly out of character for Page, who has a history of criticizing US foreign policy and portraying Russia in a favorable light. In online writings, Page has defended Moscow’s involvement in the takeover of government buildings in Ukraine by pro-Russian forces in 2014 as “minor,” attributed the crisis in Ukraine to US policy, and accused NATO of “meddling in the affairs of Eastern Europe.”
Page has criticized NATO as “obsolete” and disparaged them for what he terms “illegal torture techniques.” He has long criticized US foreign policy.
He spent three years living in Moscow in the early 2000s, where he worked as an investment banker for Merrill Lynch and as an adviser on transactions for Gazprom and RAO UES, a Russian electric power company.
On Friday, Page also delivered remarks at the graduation for the New Economic School, whose board of directors includes Russian Deputy Prime Minister Arkady Dvorkovich and Economic Minister Alexei Ulyukayev. Page blamed the United States for “mistakes” that have damaged US-Russian relations during that speech.
Back in 2014, Page criticized Obama’s decision to deny a visa application to Hamid Aboutalebi, who is an Iranian diplomat and a UN ambassador. He was a translator for Iranian militants who seized the US Embassy in Tehran in 1979, where American hostages were held for over a year until Ronald Reagan came along. It was one of the few things that Obama has made the right call on. Ted Cruz even praised Obama over the move. Yet, Trump’s man was all for that visa. “Avoiding the punishment of a distinguished diplomat whose most heinous charge is previous service as a translator would be an excellent step toward not remaining trapped in the past,” Page wrote in a blog post.
Just one month after that, Carter Page vigorously defended Russia’s military encroachment in the Ukraine. He compared it to the United States’ support for the ouster of Ukraine’s Russian-backed President Viktor Yanukovych. “While US officials have protested the Russian government’s influence in current events, Moscow’s impact remains minor when compared to Washington’s fundamentally important encouragement at the national level which started the crisis in the first place,” Page asserted. He even went so far as accusing the US of instigating the crisis in the first place.
More from the Free Beacon:
In September 2014, during a NATO summit where the alliance agreed to increase its presence in Eastern Europe after Russia’s annexation of Crimea, Page accused Western powers of “meddling in the affairs of Eastern Europe” and characterized Russia’s actions as “defensive.” He suggested that NATO was “banging on Russia’s door” and, like Trump, characterized the alliance as unnecessary.
“As most vividly seen in Ukraine, recent results of the North Atlantic Alliance’s unsuccessful interventionist strategy may largely speak for themselves. But another benefit of reconsidering past precedents from the end of the first Cold War is that this historic context helps highlight the extent to which elements of the legacy NATO framework have become severely antiquated,” he wrote.
In February 2015, Page likened Western nations to “football team bullies” for their “condescending mistreatment” of Russia, Iran, China, and other emerging nations. He also compared their actions to slave owners’ treatment of slaves. Page asserted that Western policies had spurred “economic disaster” in Russia and Ukraine.
“From US policies toward Russia to Iran to China, sanctimonious expressions of moral superiority stand at the root of many problems seen worldwide today,” Page wrote.
Does that sound like someone who has our national security at heart? Does it even sound like someone who believes in American exceptionalism?
Page is infuriated over sanctions imposed and views it as the US bullying Russia. Not as a consequence of aggressiveness by the Russians and their land-grabbing, country seizing tactics. He has compared US policy to American slavery and high-profile police shootings.
Not even kidding here:
He has also compared US policy towards Russia to high-profile police killings of unarmed black men. “The deaths triggered by US government officials in both the former Soviet Union and the streets of America in 2014 share a range of close similarities,” he wrote.
“While the loss of Michael Brown and Eric Garner has received intense media coverage and perfunctory federal government investigations, the economic injustice unleashed upon the millions of people residing in Russia, Ukraine, and the former Soviet Union by misguided Western policies has met limited recognition.”
Page also has a soft spot for the communist Chinese. He favorably quoted a propaganda arm of the People’s Republic of China, which wrote “After examining America’s staggering racial disparity, one cannot help wondering whether the US accusation of the Chinese government this time was another political tactic of shunning criticism at itself.”
Bluntly put… Carter Page is a Russian agent in my viewpoint:
Page’s appointment drew fire from experts who said his work sounded more like Internet conspiracy theories or foreign government propaganda than the counsel one would expect of a US president’s top aides.
“The very fact that a senior adviser to the leading Republican candidate for president seems to truly believe that a few individuals in the US government are responsible for certain international events puts him firmly in the realm of conspiracy theorists,” said Hannah Thoburn, a Russia policy expert with the Hudson Institute.
“Many of [Page’s] public remarks on Russia and Ukraine seem as though they have been lifted directly from the broadcast scripts of Russia Today,” the Kremlin’s US propaganda arm, Thoburn said in an email.
Page has also been highly supportive of international climate talks in Paris this last year, despite Republican concerns about international agreements that they say could hike energy prices and force American taxpayers to foot the bill for fossil fuel restrictions abroad.
“The political gathering has substantially raised attention to climate, environmental and future energy issues while leveraging the growing levels of concern amongst societies worldwide,” Page wrote. “But for both citizens and leaders alike, real action in the future will be a far more essential driver to the future direction of progress in comparison to the many words which will be spoken and to a lesser extent heard over the coming weeks.”
He wants the US to more fully collaborate with Russia… sharing more technology and capital market access. His speeches given this last week are being used as propaganda on Russian media. Russia Today loves him… just as they love those such as Alex Jones, Edward Snowden and others who are less than stellar in the credibility department.
Page’s remarks come at a time of heightened tension between the United States and Russia. NATO members agreed on Friday to send four multinational battalions to the Baltic states and Poland on a rotational basis in the face of increased Russian provocations. As American diplomats are being beaten in Russia, in front of our embassy no less, and America is expelling Russian diplomats in return… Carter Page has nothing but praise for the Russkies and condemnation for his own country. I’m sure Trump will fix all that – he’s even more flexible than Barack Obama. FSB/KGB tactics/attacks on a US diplomat were employed – they broke his shoulder. They have also broke into homes of embassy staff, rearranged furniture and even killed a family pet. Is this Russian aggression that Page approves of? Where is Trump on this? Crickets, that’s where.
Paul Manafort
Trump’s top adviser, Paul Manafort, has spent much of his recent career working for pro-Russian forces in the Ukraine and has negotiated complex deals for an oligarch with close ties to Putin. And while one senator has already charged Trump is not responsible enough to receive secret information, Manafort’s deep relationships with top pro-Russian figures raise special concerns.
Manafort managed the 2010 campaign of Viktor Yanukovych… you know, the Ukrainian politician who was ousted as president when Putin proceeded to invade the Ukraine. He has, according to court documents, managed tens of millions of dollars for Oleg Deripaska, an oligarch denied entry to the US reportedly for ties to organized crime, but so close to Vladimir Putin that top Russian officials fought (unsuccessfully) to get him a visa. Don’t you just love Russian mob ties?
None of these people with Trump have been subjected to background checks. And after Trump’s selection of advisers and cronies, it’s obvious he should be subjected to one as well. One former Republican national security official put it bluntly: “He’s an intelligence classification vetting nightmare scenario.”
I find it beyond convenient that Manafort has tied himself to Trump considering who his clients are. Once again, I would say that Manafort is a Russian agent. Sometimes, the simplest explanation is the correct one.
“We joke in Ukraine that it is a bad sign for Trump that he hired Manafort. Because his client Yanukovych was ousted and fled to Russia, to the city of Rostov. So Trump could also end up in Rostov. It is almost like an anecdote.” — Ukrainian political expert Oleg Kravchenko
Manafort was hired more than a decade ago by the Ukraine’s wealthiest businessman, Rinat Akhmetov. He’s a steel and iron ore magnate and is worth an estimated $2.8 billion, according to Forbes. Manafort was a protege of Oleg Deripaska, a Russian businessman with an estimated net worth of $3.5 billion.
Experts say Manafort was unofficially invited to consult on Yanukovych’s first presidential campaign in December 2004, in the days of the Orange Revolution in Ukraine. Yanukovych was competing with pro-Western opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko, who was poisoned by dioxin during the campaign. Manafort was asked to save Yanukovych’s campaign.
He was kept around to help improve Yanukovych’s image and get him close to Obama. Manafort described his role in Ukraine as helping align Yanukovych and his administration with Western interests. “The role that I played in that administration was to help bring Ukraine into Europe, and we did,” Manafort said. “We succeeded.” Manafort worked in Ukraine under the umbrella of his lobbying firm, Davis Manafort & Freeman, Inc. He worked with a group of American political advisers in Ukraine, including expat Philip Griffin, top John McCain adviser Richard H. Davis, and former Ronald Reagan advance man Rick Ahearn. “I am not here just for the election,” Manafort said in 2007 in Ukraine. “I am trying to play a constructive role in developing a democracy. I am helping to build a political party.”
Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn
Now we come to Trump’s latest favorite, retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn. Rumors were swirling that he would be the VP pick, but that looks unlikely now. People started digging into his background and that didn’t go well.
First off, he’s a Democrat. On the good side, he was fired because he spoke out against radical Islam. But other than that, this guy is bad news.
Flynn, who is a former Defense Intelligence Agency chief, also favors Russia heavily and is advising Trump on foreign policy. Can I just ask, is there anyone that Trump has selected that isn’t pro-Russian? He’s not a supporter of Israel… he’s leaning pro-abortion and for same-sex marriage as well. Last time I looked, these were not conservative stances.
From FoundersCode.com:
Flynn raised eyebrows among some US foreign policy veterans when he was pictured sitting at the head table with Putin at a banquet in Moscow late last year celebrating Russia Today, an international broadcasting network funded by the Russian government. Flynn told Russia Today in an interview published on Dec. 10 that the United States and Russia should work together to resolve the Syrian civil war and defeat Islamic State.
The Obama administration has protested Russia’s military intervention on behalf of Syrian President Bashir al-Assad, accusing Moscow of hitting opposition forces rather than ISIS.
Flynn has been advising Trump on foreign policy issues since at least February and has previously hinted that he’d be open to taking the No. 2 job. And an early July Politico piece described him as “Trump’s favorite general.”
Flynn has an odd affection for Russia and its authoritarian government. He has spent much of his time since retirement cozying up to the Putin regime and he’s a frequent guest on its English-language propaganda channel, RT.
Flynn’s argument supporting Russia takes their claim that it is fighting “terrorists” in Syria at face value, when in reality Russia’s intervention is aimed at propping up dictator Bashar al-Assad’s regime. Russian bombs have actually targeted US-aligned Syrian rebels and have directed a relatively small percentage of munitions toward ISIS.
From RT:
Americans must understand that Russia also has a foreign policy and a national security strategy, and that Moscow launched the campaign against ISIS in Syria after its “unstated red lines were crossed,” retired US Lieutenant General Michael Flynn told RT.
Russia and the US have to work together in their fight against Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL), and an international coalition needs to be brought together to facilitate this, said Flynn, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).
In reality, what is going on here is that Russia is using ISIS to do its dirty work and the US is being used and played for a fool.
From Cliff Kincaid:
The term “military intelligence” is mostly a reference to the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), whose former director, Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, has come under fire for his close relationship with the Russia Today (RT) propaganda channel.
AIM was the first to report that Flynn, after stepping down from DIA, went to Moscow to participate in the 10th anniversary celebration of the Moscow-funded and English-language channel known to its critics as KGB-TV. He sat at a dinner table with Putin and RT editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan.
In a major embarrassment for Flynn, a recent article in Politico by Michael Crowley cited Flynn’s relationship with RT as “the most intriguing example of how the Russians have gone about recruiting disaffected members” of the Washington, D.C. foreign policy establishment.
The term “recruiting” suggests using Flynn for anti-American propaganda purposes.
Crowley, senior foreign policy writer at Politico, said that Flynn’s attendance at the RT gala, which also included remarks on world affairs, “appeared to inaugurate a relationship with the network—presumably a paid one, though neither Flynn nor RT answered queries on the subject. Flynn now makes semi-regular appearances on RT as an analyst, in which he often argues that the U.S. and Russia should be working more closely together on issues like fighting ISIL and ending Syria’s civil war.”
In addition to his relationship with RT, Flynn has described himself as an informal adviser to Trump, who already has several pro-Russian aides and advisers.
“We weren’t focused on Russia when I came in three years ago because we were still trying to cast a paradigm that brought Russia into the fold of Western values,” said Breedlove, in an attempt to explain why the Pentagon was caught off-guard by Russia. He said, “Russia chose a different path or they were on that path and we didn’t recognize it.”
What he is describing is a massive intelligence failure that could stem from the work of agents of influence for Russia, or actual Russian spies.
Trump, however, continues to preach cooperation with Russia.
The scope of the intelligence failure regarding Russia was addressed recently by the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), who admitted to CNN’s Jake Tapper on April 12 that the U.S. government has badly “misjudged” the intentions of Putin “for many, many years.” He declared, “The biggest intelligence failure that we have had since 9/11 has been the inability to predict the leadership plans and intentions of the Putin regime in Russia.”
After the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008, Rep. Nunes noted, the U.S. continued to engage diplomatically with the Russians, and “we continued to talk to the Russians, and then they invaded Eastern Ukraine.” “We missed that,” he said. “And then we completely missed entirely when they put a new base, a new base with aircraft into the Mediterranean, into Syria. We just missed it. We were blind.”
While Trump’s speech was given to an audience of foreign policy experts, including Russia’s ambassador to Washington, Sergey Kislyak — who was sitting in the front row — the former DIA director’s pro-Moscow actions and statements are also generating controversy. The Politico article on Flynn’s visit to Moscow said, “At a moment of semi-hostility between the U.S. and Russia, the presence of such an important figure at Putin’s table startled current and former members of the Obama administration. “
Politico’s Michael Crowley quoted a former Pentagon official as saying about Flynn, “It was extremely odd that he showed up in a tuxedo to the Russian government propaganda arm’s party.”
Flynn is a strongman that Trump would use for law and order, not only abroad, but here at home. Not good.
Conclusion
In closing, I will just ask Americans this… do you really think someone so deeply tied to Russia, a stone-cold enemy, should be president? For eight years we have been led by an enemy within. With the choices we have from both parties currently, we are poised to elect an even greater enemy from within… and many so-called conservatives are cheering it.
All you have to do is connect the dots. Look at Trump’s connections. Putin is not our friend. He wants to bring us down. If he can do it from within the US, that would be his ideal scene. If he has to weaken us to the point of invasion, he’ll go for that as well. Trump’s Russian connections are beyond alarming… they are existential in nature. The failures in the intelligence community regarding Russia and the alleged penetration of the Washington, D.C. foreign policy establishment by Russian agents seem like topics that need to be addressed by the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. They certainly should be addressed when selecting a candidate for the highest office in the land. Unless of course, you relish learning Russian or Chinese.
By: Cliff Kincaid | Accuracy in Media
Why is the FBI missing the extremists in our midst? Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the organization consulted by the Department of Justice for information on extremists is in bed with them.
Evelyn Schlatter, the deputy director of research of the Intelligence Project at the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), was listed as a participant in the recent Left Forum conference, which featured an assortment of communists, 9/11 truthers, pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel activists, and other extremists. Schlatter was described as an expert on “right-wing political and social movements, gender, and sexuality.”
Schlatter should have some knowledge of left-wing political movements, especially since she rubbed elbows with some of their followers at the conference. Indeed, these far-left extremists are allies of the SPLC, which works directly with and advises the Obama Justice Department on hate groups and extremism. The FBI is under the jurisdiction of the Justice Department.
In the case of the Orlando terrorist attack on a gay nightclub, the SPLC has been careful to avoid discussing in any significant detail the killer’s devotion to radical Islam, including his regular attendance at a Mosque and the presence of a Koran, a Palestinian book, and other Islamic paraphernalia in his apartment. Instead, an article on the SPLC website described Omar Mateen as simply “a 29-year-old American citizen who worked as a security guard and had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State before the attack.” The article focused on the reactions of a few members of the “racist right” to homosexuals being targeted in the attack.
Fred Fleitz, senior vice president for policy and programs with the Center for Security Policy, says his organization was named by the SPLC as a “hate group” precisely because of “our work highlighting the threat from radical Islam.”
Denouncing the SPLC’s use of despicable tactics against leading conservatives, Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin (ret.) has said that the SPLC is “probably next to the Muslim Brotherhood the most evil group in America.” The Muslim Brotherhood functions as a front for terrorist organizations but is treated as a friendly Muslim group by the Obama administration. Indeed, national security reporter Bill Gertz reports that Obama has issued Presidential Study Directive-11, backing the Muslim Brotherhood.
As if the Justice Department needed more evidence of how the SPLC can’t be trusted to report on “extremists” in America, the SPLC’s Schlatter was joined at the Left Forum by pro-terrorist lawyer Lynne Stewart. Stewart participated in a panel titled, “Free Our Political Prisoners,” a reference to terrorists in prison. Stewart knows something about terrorism. As noted by former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy, she was convicted for helping the Blind Sheikh run his Egyptian terrorist organization, al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya or “the Islamic Group,” from his high-security U.S. prison confinement. However, Stewart was freed from prison by the Obama administration on medical grounds.
The chairman of the panel featuring Stewart was Jennifer Meeropol of the Rosenberg Fund for Children, an organization named for the Soviet spies Ethel and Julius Rosenberg.
An advertisement in the conference program guide proclaimed, “Time to Take Down the Wall between the Left and the Truth Movement. No Justice or Peace without Truth.” This was an attempt to get more left-wingers on board the 9/11 truth movement, which claims U.S. government agents—not Muslim terrorists—were behind the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. A panel associated with this view argued that Islamophobia was responsible for blaming Muslims for the terrorist attacks.
Among the organizations joining with the Southern Poverty Law Center at the recent Left Forum in New York City were:
The opening plenary was titled, “Capitalism and Militarism—at Humanity’s Peril,” and was predictably covered by Russia Today (RT) in a story headlined, “‘Democracy in the US is a fraud’ Left Forum debates next steps for Sanders movement.” Speakers were:
Titles of panels at the conference included:
Fleitz notes that the SPLC has become “a far left group with one purpose: manufacturing material to slander conservatives for use by the news media and on the Internet.” This is indeed why The Washington Post and other news organizations use the group in the first place. But the media carefully avoid any discussion of the extremists in bed with the SPLC, proving the essential dishonesty of what passes for coverage of extremism in American society.
Until this approach changes, on the part of the government and the press, Islamists will continue to escape scrutiny and kill Americans.
By: Merrill McCarthy
We have a troubling story over here in Dearborn Heights, Michigan about a young man who planned to wage violent jihad against a church close to his work in Detroit.
He thought the church would be a good choice because it was a gun-free zone and target-rich with capacity for 6,000 congregants. The would-be-shooter’s plot was not carried out because his father found and confiscated the jihad kit in his car consisting of a gun, ammo and a mask. Thwarted in his initial plan to terrorize the citizens of Michigan and the world, he told an FBI undercover agent about wanting to use a knife or a sword to achieve his “dream of beheading someone”.
For months, twenty-one-year-old Khalil Abu-Rayyan, self-proclaimed Palestinian Muslim, has been peppering social media with violent and hateful speech, threatening jihad. The FBI tuned in and an undercover agent learned of the violence contemplated by this young man who wanted to go “Sahwat” hunting, a term for an Iraqi who opposes ISIL. An arrest was made before he was able to put his plans into action and he is currently in detention.
An audio clip of the arraignment reveals a well-spoken young man with no trace of a foreign accent. He was probably born here or has lived here most of his life. And yet, it appears his allegiance is not with the USA, but with an Islamist terrorist organization based in the Middle East.
Think about the lack of assimilation and what it means. This young man of fighting age could not make it overseas to wage jihad so he settled for doing it here:
He settled for a proxy target; a church having no ties to his enemies in the Middle East.
While we have many unanswered questions, the two that seem to be at the forefront are:
1) Why would someone who has lived in the USA for a lifetime, like the San Bernardino shooter, or this young man take up arms against innocent countrymen who have no ties to ISIL?
2) Why would the parents of an obviously dangerous young man fail to turn him over to the authorities when they had first-hand knowledge of intended criminal acts, much like the blind eyes turned to the bomb factory in San Bernardino?
Maybe there is something about the culture of these enclaved communities that do not resemble the America we know.
Places like Dearborn could be picked up and set down in the Middle East without skipping a beat. The signs on the stores are in Arabic, the food is Arabic and the language is Arabic. The ideology on-the-street is largely Sharia. (51% of US Muslims want the option of living here under Sharia)
A few months ago a man having a business breakfast in Dearborn overheard a quartet of retiree age men at a nearby table discussing world affairs. Since this man speaks Arabic, he understood the whole conversation and it was not pro-American. In fact, one of the men at the table went as far as saying that he wished he had the courage to strap on a suicide vest himself, and that perhaps if he were ever given a terminal cancer diagnosis he might just do it. Incredible! These are suicidal and murderous ideations. If a psychiatrist had heard them he would have been required to notify authorities about the outward threat and then would have to admit the man to a residential treatment hospital for protection because of suicidal thoughts.
And yet, this is coffee shop conversation in an enclaved city where Sharia Law is observed in many ways and Christians are stoned for sharing the gospel on a public sidewalk.
In Dearborn, a father can find a gun, ammo and a mask in his son’s car and think that taking the items away from him will solve the problem, or a family in San Bernardino can overlook a bomb-making operation in their son’s kitchen and a neighbor can decide reporting very suspicious behavior would be riskier that having people possibly injured as a result of that suspicious behavior.
These “lone wolf” attackers, inspired by social media seem to be on the rise. Pretty soon we will run out of enough FBI agents to monitor what is going on. More attacks will not be a surprise. We might as well expect them. We need to have better ways to identify and defuse them. Thanks to the FBI, we have dodged bullets on this one, but maybe the next time we will not be so lucky.
We need more help from the families and the communities of these young jihadi “wannabes” because the signs are always there. It is not enough to take away the weapons when you find them. The authorities must be notified and if not, the culpable families may need to assume civil and criminal responsibility for looking the other way when tragedy could have been prevented.
The community needs to step up as well. These “lone wolf” attackers are always presented as a shock to their neighbors, although that message is changing. In the San Bernardino shooting, as well as this one that was nipped in the bud, the initial public statements have been made by the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Trial, the biggest terrorism financing prosecution in American history. CAIR has been identified as a front group for the Muslim Brotherhood which has been condemned as a terrorist organization by the UK and several Middle Eastern countries.
So far, the message from CAIR on this case is that “we should not rush to judgment,” but actually their early appearance on the scene is a dog whistle to anyone else who may be contacted for a quote to defer to the CAIR spokesperson who will have the official spin – beware of Islamophobia.
Dawud Walid – Executive Director, CAIR Michigan
CAIR is not interested in the truth. If an imam is radicalizing young men in Dearborn or elsewhere, we will not hear about it from CAIR. What we will hear is CAIR on the offense with claims of Islamophobia if people start asking too many questions or veer off the politically correct pathway. CAIR will not assist in getting to the truth and in the past have urged people to not cooperate with the FBI unless absolutely necessary.
The greater question here is about our flawed immigration policy, especially the Refugee Resettlement program. Why continue to bring people here who do not want to assimilate and are instead bringing the Middle East conflict here to be fought on our soil? The church full of worshippers Abu-Rayyan wanted to shoot-up was not his enemy, just an unfortunate casualty of his misguided ideological world view and the policy of flooding America with people who hate us.
It is correct for us to be concerned about bringing in unvettable Syrians or others who may be terrorists with fake passports. But we must also start finding ways to vet people who we have already brought in to our country. We must understand the ideology that guides their actions and recognize that they may be no more than economic migrants who have no allegiance to the USA at all, or worse, Islamists pursuing a world without non-Muslims.
We must be more realistic about projecting our patriotic values. We cannot assume we all share the same world view. Every day we learn more to prove we don’t.
By: Roger Aronoff
Accuracy in Media
The mainstream media never tire of attacking those who warn that the Muslim Brotherhood has established deep ties to the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton. That might just be because the media have forged their own intimate ties to the Muslim Brotherhood group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Preeminent figures who dare to contradict the narrative of the liberal media, arguing that the greater concern is terrorism or shariah law, not Islamophobia, are regularly cast as conspiracy theorists, and worse, outright racists.
The head of the Center for Security Policy (CSP), Frank Gaffney, has been repeatedly attacked by the media for his message that Americans cannot be forced to yield to shariah. On December 8th he said on CNN that CAIR has “been established in court to be a Muslim Brotherhood front organization” that associates with the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas.
“The fact that nobody, including your guest recognizes that reality and suggests it’s a conspiracy theory or something to sort of try to obscure it is a scandal,” he told CNN’s Don Lemon. The other guest, Michael Weiss, a senior editor at The Daily Beast, declared that Gaffney’s words were “deranged hysteria masquerading as national security policy,” and likened his rhetoric to McCarthyism.
Each and every presidential candidate should be asked their opinion of the Muslim Brotherhood and its influence on the American government, we urgedback in September. “Should the Muslim Brotherhood be viewed as some benign, moderate organization?” we asked, “Or instead as the organization that spawned Al Qaeda and other significant terrorist organizations?”
“The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) has provided a detailed analysis of several members of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) who are official advisors to the White House or various agencies within the Executive branch,” we reported. “The question…is whether or not we should care about the influence of the MB on this and other administrations.”
CNN’s Don Lemon falsely maintained that there wasn’t a connection between CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood. Instead, he broadcast a statement by CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad.
“Shortly after CAIR’s founding in 1994, Nihad Awad, CAIR’s executive director, was videotaped publicly declaring support for Hamas,” wrote Kyle Shideler for Townhall.
Shideler, the Director of the Threat Information Office (TIO) at Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy, argues that this was a “televised ambush” of Gaffney. You can watch the complete segment at the Breitbart website and decide for yourself.
As Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi (CCB) member and head of the IPT, Steven Emerson, recently pointed out, “CAIR’s connections are not really matters of interpretation” because the FBI has “internal documents” demonstrating its strong ties to terror.
“The FBI read those documents and promptly cut off communication with CAIR ‘until we can resolve whether there continues to be a connection between CAIR or its executives and HAMAS, the FBI does not view CAIR as an appropriate liaison partner,’” writes Emerson. Yet, he observes, The New York Times continues to peddle CAIR’s “garbage.”
The Washington Post also peddles its own garbage about the threat of Islamophobia. Dana Milbank’s December 15 column in The Washington Post focused in part on how “Respectable conservatives long ago abandoned Gaffney, but Trump Made Gaffney Safe Again.” Watch out, conservatives, a “far-right provocateur” such as Gaffney may be influencing the presidential campaigns of Republicans Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Rick Santorum and Ted Cruz.
“The killers who plotted and executed the massacre in San Bernardino are no different than Islamic supremacists the world over,” writes Gaffney for the CSP on December 14. “For them, terror is one of the tools used to advance an agenda aimed at imposing worldwide the repressive politico-legal-military code they call shariah and establishing a global Caliphate,” he continues. “Other techniques employed by the granddaddy of all modern jihadist groups, the Muslim Brotherhood, involve more stealthy efforts to penetrate and subvert from within our civil society and governing institutions.”
As we have repeatedly noted, Mr. Milbank is the type of columnist who has built his career upon identifying conservatives that he believes he can belittle at a distance. He emphasizes others’ missteps or alleged hyperbole and conspiracy theories while ignoring his own biases. He makes no effort to challenge Gaffney’s claims about the Muslim Brotherhood, but instead relies on snarky, personal attacks. This plays into the mainstream media’s overall playbook, where the so-called mistakes made by conservative figures are unforgiveable and unforgettable. In Milbank’s world, President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and other liberals, of course, rarely err, but when they do, it is not a reflection on their character.
Neither, apparently, does Milbank err; he links to one of his prior columns that Accuracy in Media has thoroughly debunked.
“In other actions, this friend of GOP presidential candidates [Gaffney] has made allegations about Clinton aide Huma Abedin’s ‘deep personal’ ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and said Abedin (also a Trump target) may have advocated for laws against ‘sharia blasphemy,’” asserts Milbank, linking to his assessment of an “ugly” Heritage Foundation panel on Benghazi.
As we reported last year, Muslim advocate Saba Ahmed attended the Heritage Benghazi panel, after which Milbank accused the panelists of “ugly taunting” following Ahmed’s question. We later exposed Ahmed’s, and Milbank’s, false victimization story.
Mr. Milbank’s article also failed to note at the time that Ahmed ran her own lobbying firm, was a Democratic Party activist, and was close to the Portland, Oregon convicted Christmas tree bomber. Instead, Milbank described her as an American University student, which was also true. More recently she has re-invented herself as the head of something called the Republican Muslim Coalition, which appears to be little more than a website void of any substance. Yet she has made it onto the Fox News Channel’s “Kelly Files” with Megyn Kelly on at least two recent occasions.
Despite the continued misreporting, members of the CCB continue to sound the alarm about the Muslim Brotherhood’s inordinate influence under the leadership of President Obama.
“The Obama administration has already demonstrated its proclivity to side with the wrong party—al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood—in Libya and Egypt,”write CCB Members Pete Hoekstra and Clare Lopez. “We should not allow ourselves to become drawn into such mistakes again, especially when the ability of the West, Russia and Iran to fully destroy ISIS—or its jihadist ideology—is not entirely clear right now.” Hoekstra is the former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
Both CCB members Retired Admiral James “Ace” Lyons and Clare Lopez are with Gaffney’s CSP while simultaneously serving on the Commission. You can watch Admiral Lyons address the issue of the Muslim Brotherhood, after being introduced by Gaffney, at a CSP event. This video has been viewed more than 400,000 times.
Far from a conspiracy theory, the influence of CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood upon this and future administrations must be confronted head on, whether members of the mainstream media choose to look the other way, or peddle CAIR’s lies.
By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media
On November 13, the same day as the terrorist attacks in Paris, USA Today ran a full-page ad from billionaire Tom Steyer’s group NextGen Climate highlighting the alleged global threat from climate change. As hundreds of people were being injured or killed in Paris, the ad featured these quotes about the “climate crisis:”
In a new development, we have just learned from Judicial Watch that Hillary Clinton was characterized by her Muslim-connected aide, Huma Abedin, as being “very confused” about the world leaders she was supposed to be communicating with as secretary of state. The confusion may also be reflected in Mrs. Clinton’s bizarre utterance that so-called climate change is an “existential threat” that is somehow comparable to Russian nuclear weapons, which could reduce America to a burned-out cinder.
Mrs. Clinton is not alone, however. All of the Democrats running for president, plus former Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore, want to treat changes in the weather as something to be addressed through new treaties, international agreements and global tax schemes. This campaign has taken precedence over defeating international terrorism.
At the Democratic Party debate this past weekend, Sanders claimed that “Climate change is directly related to the growth of terrorism and if we do not get our act together and listen to what the scientists say, you’re going to see countries all over the world—this is what the CIA says—they’re going to be struggling over limited amounts of water, limited amounts of land to grow their crops and you’re going to see all kinds of international conflict…”
So from one disputed claim about people causing climate change, they have reached another disputed claim that climate change is causing people to commit terrorism.
On the same day as the Paris attacks, former Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore was staging his 24-hour climate change telethon from the foot of the Eiffel Tower to focus attention on this month’s United Nations climate summit in Paris. The attacks forced him to pull the plug on the event after five hours.
In advance of his ill-fated climate change telethon, People magazine asked Gore which Democrat he was endorsing for president. “It’s still too early, in my opinion, to endorse a candidate or pick a candidate,” he said.
But why is his endorsement worth anything? Al Gore has become a very rich man, a one percenter. He and his partners sold Current TV (Gore personally netted an estimated $100 million of the $500 million sale price) to the terrorist-supporting Middle Eastern oil and gas dictatorship of Qatar.
A member of Apple, Inc.’s board of directors, Gore is today worth as much as $170 million. Even the New York Times has wondered if his climate change campaign is designed to make himself rich, while preserving his lifestyle as an elite member of the one percent.
His telethon carried the official title of “Live Earth: 24 Hours of Reality.” The reality of terrorism got in the way of the broadcast, featuring various rock stars and co-sponsored by Arianna Huffington’s television channel, HuffPost Live.
Gore and his partners sold Current TV to Qatar so another Al Jazeera spin-off could be piped into American homes. The Al Jazeera America channel was the result, and it is now publishing nonsense like the piece by Rami G. Khourientitled, “Military responses alone will not defeat ISIL.”
Khouri acknowledges that “Religion is critical for shaping the theological concept of the Islamic State and the wider Caliphate…” But, he says, “it may not be the most important reason why individuals go there to live, work and do battle.” He lists “eight reasons why people across Islamic societies join or support ISIL.”
But none of the “reasons” for the rise of the Islamic State, in his analysis, consists of the hate-filled passages from the Koran which guide their beliefs and actions.
Instead, we are told, in reason number four, that their motivations include “To live among like-minded people in a society defined by camaraderie, peace, justice and wholesome family life.” Reason number six is “To find meaning, direction and purpose to one’s personal life, or to escape family or personal problems, loneliness or alienation.”
We are supposed to believe this may be why terrorists opened fire on people in Paris. This is why the Islamic State beheads people or burns them alive?
It is easy to forget that the website publishing this material is financed by a Middle Eastern dictatorship that promotes Islamic terrorism. Like the notion of the “existential threat” allegedly posed by climate change, Al Jazeera America constitutes a diversion from what really threatens America, our way of life, and our people. Perhaps that was the intention all along.
As serious as this is, the problem of foreign propaganda in the U.S. media market could get far worse. Television producer Jerry Kenney notes that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is planning to remove the barriers to broadcast station ownership by foreigners, a move that would enable American broadcasters to sell out to foreign interests, just like Gore did. The FCC could allow the sale of local broadcast stations and other media properties to the Chinese, Russian and Mexican governments, or to the Muslim Brotherhood.
The public must respond to what the FCC is planning to do by December 21.
By: Trevor Loudon
New Zeal
Trevor Loudon with Director Judd Saul (YouTube screenshot courtesy Judd Saul)
A political documentary that will expose key anti-American forces in the highest levels of the US government is nearing completion.
We need your help to film some remaining hard-hitting interviews and to complete final editing.
OUR GOAL IS TO RAISE $55,000 by November 29, 2015.
We are going to answer these questions and many more.
The Enemies Within will give you information about leading senators and congress members you have never seen before. It will shock you.
Help Trevor and Judd fund this movie HERE!
Watch Trevor with Director Judd Saul here:
Find the Enemies Within movie on Facebook and check out the website here.
In Memoriam
|
|
|
Get your
2nd Amendment
Shirts
over at
Libertas |
|
|
Available at Amazon.com on Kindle and in Paperback.
