02/14/17

Why the CIA Wants to Destroy Flynn

By: Cliff Kincaid | Accuracy in Media

The media have figured out they can’t bring down or impeach President Trump. So they are targeting his Cabinet officials and top advisers one by one. In the case of Michael T. Flynn, the media think they have hit pay dirt. The Washington Post has led the charge, using top-secret surveillance intercepts of communications between Flynn and the Russian Ambassador to the U.S. It’s more evidence that the CIA, and perhaps the National Security Agency (NSA), are out to destroy Trump’s national security adviser.

“The knives are out for Flynn,” said one administration official quoted in the paper. The knives are computer keyboards in the hands of scribblers for a paper whose owner, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, has a business relationship with the CIA. The Post is wielding the knives provided by anonymous intelligence officials.

Nobody knows this better than the Post’s Watergate reporter, Bob Woodward, who said on Fox News that the CIA was using unverified “garbage” allegations in a campaign to destroy Trump himself. Since Trump has survived, the campaign has taken a new form against Flynn, a close adviser to Trump on foreign policy who had campaigned with him and by his side.

At the heart of the story are secret surveillance intercepts of conversations whose disclosure is itself a violation of the law. In fact, these illegal disclosures to the press are far more serious than anything Flynn is accused of doing. But don’t think the media are going to investigate themselves for these illegalities. If they bring down Flynn, they will have wounded Trump. The sharks will smell blood in the water.

Remember that the FBI is said to have reviewed the intercepts and determined there was nothing illicit in what was discussed. That finding hasn’t stopped the CIA and the Post from continuing a campaign to sink Flynn. The so-called sensational news angle is that Flynn forgot what he told the Russian Ambassador and Vice President Mike Pence about the conversations.

The real explanation for the assault, as we have explained in several columns, is that Flynn, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and a retired Lieutenant General, doesn’t trust the CIA. And the CIA clearly doesn’t trust him.

Meanwhile, in a newsworthy development that went mostly unreported here in the United States, Trump’s new director of the CIA, former Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS), traveled to Saudi Arabia to give a top Saudi official a CIA award for “counter-terrorism” named after a discredited former CIA director. The Saudi official was given the “George Tenet Medal” in recognition of his “excellent intelligence performance, in the domain of counter-terrorism and his unbound contribution to realize world security and peace.” Tenet is known for his embarrassing and false “slam dunk” comments about finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before the U.S. invasion.

Pompeo’s tribute to the Saudi official, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, is astounding considering the evidence of the Saudi role in facilitating jihadist terrorism in Syria, a debacle that has helped to produce 500,000 dead and refugees streaming into Europe and the United States. Bin Nayef serves as Minister of Interior.

Rather than focus on Flynn, the media should be asking what Pompeo is doing paying tribute to a Saudi official whose regime is neck-deep in a conflict that has produced a major humanitarian catastrophe. And why is the CIA giving an award named after a director who failed in the intelligence mission of the agency he led?

Under these circumstances, if President Trump fires or forces the resignation of Flynn, it will be a huge victory for the CIA’s failed policies in the Middle East. These are policies Trump promised to reverse.

The assault on Flynn began on January 12, when Post columnist David Ignatius reported, “According to a senior U.S. government official, Flynn phoned Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak several times on Dec. 29, the day the Obama administration announced the expulsion of 35 Russian officials as well as other measures in retaliation for the hacking. What did Flynn say, and did it undercut the U.S. sanctions? The Logan Act (though never enforced) bars U.S. citizens from correspondence intending to influence a foreign government about ‘disputes’ with the United States. Was its spirit violated?”

With subsequent stories and various Trump administration comments, a “scandal” has been created, with Flynn’s fate hanging in the balance.

Despite the FBI clearing Flynn, the issue is now whether Flynn talked about sanctions and to whom. He apparently first denied this, and later acknowledged that the subject may have come up. With multiple Obama-created foreign policy problems on his plate, it may be the case that he gave some misleading information to Vice President Mike Pence.

The real issue, as Flynn has talked about publicly since he left the DIA in 2014, is the evidence of a U.S. role under Barack Obama and his CIA director John Brennan in facilitating an increase of radical Islam in the Middle East. He has cited the evidence contained in a DIA document, declassified and publicly released by Judicial Watch.

While Flynn has been critical of the agency for carrying out the Obama/Brennan policy of supporting Islamists in the Middle East, he writes in his book, The Field of Fight, about how the Russian intelligence services have also been involved in supporting radical Islam. This proxy war has damaged mostly Europe and the United States, and lies behind President Trump’s desire to curb immigration from Middle Eastern countries racked by Islamist violence.

Rather than clean house at the agency, Pompeo reportedly jumped on the bandwagon against Flynn, with the CIA or some other anonymous intelligence community insider leaking information that the agency had denied a security clearance for one of Flynn’s associates on the National Security Council. “One of the sources said the rejection was approved by Mike Pompeo, President Donald Trump’s CIA director, and that it infuriated Flynn and his allies,” Politico reported.

This is truly amazing since Obama’s CIA director himself should never have received a security clearance, and his policies were incompetent, if not anti-American. Brennan was a close friend and confidant to George Tenet and had served as CIA station chief in Saudi Arabia, where he reportedly converted to Islam. As CIA director, Brennan told a congressional forum that even voting communist, as he once did, was not a bar to employment at the agency. Brennan admitted voting communist when attending Catholic Fordham University in 1976. He was also involved in the cover-up of the Benghazi massacre of four Americans.

In his new book, iWar: War and Peace in the Information Age, Bill Gertz explains how the CIA has become “politicized,” dominated by a “liberal culture,” and resistant to probes of communist moles within.

Having had a pro-communist with Muslim sympathies once reach the top position of CIA director, it’s no wonder that the agency wants to get rid of Flynn. The CIA has a lot of baggage that needs to be exposed and swept away. The real mystery is why Pompeo decided to continue with the business-as-usual mentality and has not followed through on the President’s pledge to “drain the swamp.”

Cliff Kincaid

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.

05/19/16

Dopes, Doping, and the Russian-Iranian Nuclear Threat

By: Cliff Kincaid | Accuracy in Media

The Russians have been doping their athletes, but we are the dopes. In a scandal worse than failing to deal with ISIS, the Obama administration has been caught facilitating the nuclear buildups of Russia and Iran. The lives of millions of Americans and Israelis hang in the balance.

Playing a pivotal role over the years in America’s decline and the rapid rise of Russia and China stands Henry Kissinger, the former secretary of state who met for an hour with Donald J. Trump on Wednesday. Kissinger has also served as a “tutor” to Hillary Clinton in foreign affairs. “I was very flattered when Henry Kissinger said I ran the State Department better than anybody had run it in a long time,” Mrs. Clinton remarked during one of the Democratic debates.

What some conservatives have cynically called the “invisible government,” as represented by the Council on Foreign Relations and such figures as Kissinger, seems well-positioned to come out on top in November no matter who wins.

Continue reading →

01/14/16

A Russian Spy in the NSA: A True Story of Espionage

By: Cliff Kincaid
America’s Survival

Before Edward Snowden, there was Robert Lipka. He spied for the Russians at the NSA. Rather than flee to Moscow, Lipka moved to Pennsylvania and used the money he was paid by the Russians to bet on horse races. It took 32 years to bring Lipka to justice, and we may never know all of the state secrets he betrayed. Former FBI agent John Whiteside, discusses his book about the case, Fool’s Mate. He also addresses current security measures in the federal government and whether Barack Obama could pass an FBI background check.

11/20/15

Politico Exonerates, Blames Snowden for Paris

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Some of our media, including the publication Politico, seem totally confused about the role of NSA defector Edward Snowden in the crimes of the terrorists who murdered and maimed hundreds of people in the Paris attacks. The verdict is in: he has bloody hands.

In a November 16 story, “Blaming Snowden for Paris,” David Perera of Politico insisted that no evidence had surfaced that the “revelations” of NSA defector Edward Snowden had “made a difference” in the case of the Paris terrorist attacks, and there was no evidence the perpetrators had “used encrypted communications to conceal their activities.”

Once again, the publication had gotten ahead of the facts in this story, prejudging the case in order to get Snowden off the hook for facilitating the activities of the Islamic State, or ISIS.

Politico is the same publication that alleged that GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson had admitted fabricating an offer of a West Point scholarship, only to reverse course and drop the claim in a rewritten version of the same story.

Only 24 hours later, after exonerating Snowden, the publication again reversed itself, running an interview with Michael Morell, the former acting head of the CIA, who said the Snowden revelations not only helped the Islamic State but probably contributed to the Paris attacks.

Morell stated, “First, ISIS went to school on how we were collecting intelligence on terrorist organizations by using telecommunications technologies. And when they learned that from the Snowden disclosures, they were able to adapt to it and essentially go silent…And so, part of their rise was understanding what our capabilities were, adjusting to them so we couldn’t see them. No doubt in my mind. And the people who say otherwise are just trying to defend Edward Snowden.”

As embarrassing as this was, the original Politico story had referred to “journalist Glenn Greenwald” as “a Snowden ally” who was arguing “that U.S. officials had complained of difficulty tracking terrorist communications long before the NSA whistleblower emerged.”

It’s true that the terrorists had been evading the NSA before Snowden went to Russia, but that was beside the point. What Morell and others were pointing out is that Snowden had made it easier for the terrorists to plot to kill Europeans and Americans.

Rather than being a “journalist,” Greenwald is a political extremist who speaks before Islamist, Marxist and libertarian groups. He has, for example, been afeatured speaker at conferences sponsored by the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Cato Institute and the International Socialist Organization. At one of these conferences he declared that al Qaeda’s 9/11 terrorist attacks on America were “very minimal in scope compared to the level of deaths that the United States has been bringing to the world for decades—from Vietnam to illegal wars in Central America…”

He is more than a “Snowden ally.” He is a mouthpiece for Snowden’s illegal disclosures and an accomplice in his alleged espionage activities.

A former gay pornography executive, Greenwald was the recipient of the first annual I.F. Stone Award, named in honor of the left-wing journalist identified as an agent of influence for Soviet intelligence. At the awards ceremony, Greenwald said that Soviet agent Stone “pioneered what modern journalism ought to be.”

Snowden is supposedly a “whistleblower,” but that is a false designation considering that he illegally leaked classified information and fled to Russia rather than face up to the authorities and take his punishment. He is specifically charged with espionage.

Despite the claim about encrypted communications not playing a role in the attacks, Politico had itself reported on November 16 in a separate article that “Terrorists linked to the so-called Islamic State are employing encrypted Internet services—including a new generation of mobile messaging apps—that the authorities do not have the technological capability to break, according to intelligence sources, public comments by senior officials, and evidence disclosed in recent criminal trials.”

By November 18, Cory Bennett of The Hill newspaper had identified and cited a 34-page ISIS manual on how to conceal communications from the NSA and other intelligence agencies. Bennett noted that the Arabic document was translated and released by analysts at the Combating Terrorism Center, an independent research group at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.

“It includes warnings to avoid Instagram because it is owned by Facebook, and Dropbox because former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sits on its board of investors. Famous government leaker Edward Snowden has also criticized Dropbox over its privacy, the document notes,” added Bennett.

In other words, the Islamic State is taking Snowden’s advice and openly citing the NSA defector’s expertise on planning terrorism against the West. The reference to Snowden is clear in the translation.

This means that no honest journalist can claim that Snowden’s activities have not helped the terrorists who want to kill us.

Bennett wrote a separate story noting evidence first developed by NBC News that ISIS had set up a 24-hour “help desk” to advise terrorists about encrypting their communications in order to evade authorities.

In the NBC News story, Josh Meyer quoted counterterrorism analysts affiliated with the U.S. Army as saying that the ISIS help desk is “manned by a half-dozen senior operatives around the clock” for the specific purpose of “helping would-be jihadists use encryption and other secure communications in order to evade detection by law enforcement and intelligence authorities.”

Now that it has been definitively proven that Snowden’s disclosures have aided ISIS in planning acts of terror, it is time for the media to start examining the Snowden network that AIM has been exposing for several years now. All of his apologists, including such figures as Fox News contributor Andrew Napolitano, should apologize to the world for rushing to the defense of this despicable character, who now clearly has blood on his hands.

It was Napolitano who had declared, “I would describe this man [Snowden] an American hero, as a person willing to risk life, limb and liberty in order to expose to the American people one of the most extraordinary violations of the American principles, value judgments and the Constitution itself in all of our history.”

The evil genius of Snowden’s collaborators was to frame his defection in terms of alleging that he was a “whistleblower.”

He didn’t risk his life or limb but has given up his liberty in return for KGB protection in Moscow.

Citizens of France and possibly the United States, however, will be giving up their lives and limbs so that Snowden can be honored as a hero by Napolitano and his ilk.

11/12/15

Obama’s “Dangerous Hands” and the Security Breakdown

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Even when “60 Minutes” does a very worthwhile show, it still has to bow at the altar of political correctness. Hence, the program, “Into Dangerous Hands,” about flaws in the security clearance process, was itself flawed in a very strange way. Correspondent Scott Pelley danced around the issue of illegal leaker and former Army analyst Bradley/Chelsea Manning being a sexual pervert.

Pelley focused on three people who had security clearances and either stole and leaked classified documents or committed mass murder. They were Manning, Edward Snowden, and Aaron Alexis. Before getting into some dramatic new information about all three of them, Pelley said, “Some believe Snowden and Manning were right to expose what they saw as government abuses —like the NSA’s domestic surveillance program.”

These “some” are those who condone illegal behavior that benefits America’s enemies, such as Russia and China.

CBS interviewed a number of people who discussed terrible problems in the process of granting security clearances. One of the most significant was former Army specialist Jihrleah Showman, who supervised Bradley/Chelsea Manning in Iraq. Showman “was tasked with controlling security clearances for her unit and keeping secure facilities safe,” CBS noted. She said she had reason to doubt Manning’s loyalty to America and told her superiors she thought he was a spy. She told Pelley that even before the unit deployed to Iraq, she had grave concerns about Manning.

This is from the CBS account: “His behavior was erratic, she says, and he told her he had ‘no allegiance’ to America. But when she tried to alert her superiors, she says, she was told they couldn’t afford to lose someone with a valuable top-secret clearance.”

CBS added, “In Iraq, Manning was prone to fits of rage, Showman says, even punching her at one point. She says she also saw him bring CDs and a camera into a high-security intelligence vault, where classified material was kept. Over eight months, Manning used the CDs to record hundreds of thousands of secrets, delivering them to the website WikiLeaks. In 2013, Manning was convicted of espionage and other charges, and sentenced to 35 years in prison.”

CBS forgot to mention one thing: he was an active homosexual at the time he was in the Army.

Viewers may have gotten a hint of that, since Manning has changed his name from male to female. Pelley noted that he now considered himself a “transgender woman.” But the fact that he was an active homosexual at the time of his treachery is a big part of the story. At the time he was out of the closet and advertising his perversion, a law was still in place banning displays of open homosexuality in the Armed Forces.

Manning had been an active participant in the homosexual subculture, under the noses of his military superiors, and even went to gay bars. He advertised his homosexuality on Facebook.

However, it was known that the Obama administration was moving toward the acceptance of homosexuals in the military at that time.

We noted that Manning was a pervert who should have been booted out of the Army and should never have received a security clearance. We added, “The key question—not pursued by the media—is why Manning was allowed to remain in the Army when he was acting in violation of the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ policy.”

In 2010, we asked, “Who in the Obama administration—and the Department of Defense—was aware of his conduct and looked the other way? Was Manning given a pass because his ‘lifestyle’ was considered to be in favor and acceptable under the Obama administration?”

Manning had claimed connections inside the Pentagon and the White House. But our media never followed up.

“60 Minutes” got into some of this, but still ignores the big issue—promotion of homosexuality by the Obama administration. The Department of Defense had a liberal policy about gays in the military, in deference to the wishes of the Commander-in-Chief.

Our conclusion at the time is still valid: the buck stops with President Obama, whose announced desire to overturn the homosexual exclusion policy was undoubtedly a factor in Army officials looking the other way on Manning.

Yet, in reviewing the problems in the security clearance process, Pelley never once put any blame on the President of the United States.

In addition, Pelley never mentioned another critical fact: President Obama, the person ultimately in charge of the security clearance process, did not go through any kind of security clearance background investigation at all.

The title of the piece came from Pelley’s observation that there were “shortcuts” in the security clearance process that had put American security “into dangerous hands.” One of the biggest shortcuts, or loopholes, is the failure to make sure that federal elected officials are loyal to the United States.

Former FBI agent Max Noel told me the Bureau used to investigate candidates for federal employment by analyzing Character, Associates, Reputation, and Loyalty to the United States. The first letters in those words make up the acronym CARL. Noel told me that Obama could not have been elected president if he had been subjected to the CARL test.

One reason for this has been cited by Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson, who has questioned the scrutiny he’s been given over issues in his background that occurred 40 or 50 years ago. “I do not remember this level of scrutiny for one President Barack Obama, when he was running,” Carson said. “In fact, I remember just the opposite, I remember people just said: Oh, we won’t really talk about that. We won’t talk about that relationship; well, Frank Marshall Davis, oh, we don’t want to talk about that. Bernardine Dohrn, Bill Ayers—yeah, well, he didn’t really know him. You know, all the things that Jeremiah Wright was saying—ehh, not a big problem. Goes to Occidental college, doesn’t do all that well, and somehow ends up at Columbia University. Well, I dunno. His records are sealed. Why are his records sealed? Why are you guys not interested in why his records are sealed? Why are you not interested in that? Let me ask that: Can somebody tell me why, please?”

Technically, Obama’s records haven’t been “sealed;” he has just refused to release them.

But Carson’s reference to the media being derelict in regard to investigating Obama’s communist connections, such as his mentor Frank Marshall Davis, is backed up by the evidence.

Our media don’t want to come to grips with this part of Obama’s background for several different reasons, including that it is a factor that would have prevented Obama from getting a security clearance in the government he now heads.

Into dangerous hands? Yes, indeed.

11/5/15

The Sword of Revolution and the Communist Apocalypse – A Book Review

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Purchase at Amazon.com

I have read and admired the writings of Cliff Kincaid for years now. He is simply one of the most gifted researchers out there and he is a fantastic author. His latest book: The Sword Of Revolution And The Communist Apocalypse does not disappoint. It is the best book I have read in a long time. Right now, my husband is reading it and our children will also read the book. If you buy one book this year, it needs to be this one.

Communism is now pervasive throughout America. Because of political correctness and outright treason, we have allowed Marxists and Islamists to infiltrate our political and societal power structures. There are those in America who obviously don’t recall what true communism entailed. They don’t remember the Soviet Union as the massive threat as it was in the past and as it should be viewed now. Instead, a certain sector of America views Vladimir Putin as a hero, riding to the rescue to protect Christians and save the world. He is anything but. Look behind most of the evil in the world today and you will find Russia there somewhere. As I have long contended, the Cold War never ended… it shifted.

Here is a summary of Cliff’s new book from Amazon:

“International communism is not dead but more powerful and insidious than ever before.” That’s the message of this new book by veteran journalist and media critic Cliff Kincaid. The subject is the Marxist dialectic and communism’s worldwide advance. Chinese Red Army Commander Lin Biao called Marxist dialectics, the communist ideology of struggle and deception, a “spiritual atom bomb,” far superior to the real thing. Lenin called it the “living soul” of Marxism. The Sword of Revolution and the Communist Apocalypse explains this dangerous and sinister ideology. For the first time, a former U.S. intelligence agency official explains how the Sino-Soviet “split” deceived U.S. policymakers and weakened the Free World. America’s Survival, Inc. was the first American organization that warned about Barack Obama’s Marxist background and outlook when he ran for president in 2008. This book explains how Marxists have carried out the “fundamental transformation” of the United States, as Obama called it, and how Pope Francis has become the leading proponent of a world government based on Marxist principles.

Communism is indeed spreading and it is using Islam as a weapon to help clear the way. They lie and deceive without compunction. If it furthers their political agenda, then it is justified. The communists are in this for the long haul. They have planned what they are doing and it has always baffled me how our military and leaders could not see what was transpiring right before their very eyes. Cliff Kincaid has that vision. That vision should scare the holy crap out of America, but instead we elected Barack Obama – not once, but twice… a Marxist and an Islamist. Kincaid was one of the first to research Barack Obama and break stories on him and Frank Marshall Davis. He has worked with his fellow researcher, Trevor Loudon, tirelessly for years to expose the enemies within our now transformed government. Cliff has also written extensively on Pope Francis and his Marxist leanings. Pope Francis is working with the UN to lead the globe into a one world government and religion that adheres to Marxism.

In a time when our young people wouldn’t know a communist if they were trout smacked with one across the face, this book shows just how widespread the problem is. They fawn over Marxists such as Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton and have no idea that they are basically advocating slavery and the demise of America. Marxism is a deadly poison to our Republic.

I want to share with you the release on Cliff’s book, which will give you a clearer picture of what is contained within:

For almost seven years, President Barack Obama has carried out his mission to “fundamentally transform” the United States. The explanation for why he has been so successful is contained in the new book, The Sword of Revolution and the Communist Apocalypse (available at Amazon.com), by veteran journalist and media critic Cliff Kincaid. Obama, Kincaid argues, is a Marxist who practices and preaches the theory of Marxism through social change, also know as dialectics. “Very few people, except for the communists themselves, understand the approach to national and world events,” Kincaid argues. Republicans, he says, have been reluctant to identify Obama as the Marxist he is.

The Attraction of Marxism

At a time when anti-American socialist Jeremy Corbyn is expected to become the next head of the Labor Party in Britain, and socialist Bernie Sanders is striking a major chord with Democratic Party voters in the United States, no one can seriously argue that Marxism is dead in the West, Kincaid notes. “International communism is not dead but more powerful and insidious than ever before,” the book proclaims. The book lists dozens of Communist Parties active around the world and examines how Marxists operate inside the U.S. and through the Democratic Party. As detailed in one chapter of the book, Kincaid cites evidence that Marxists and New Agers are going to battle over whether Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders will win the Democratic presidential nomination. It is this struggle, Kincaid maintains, that has so many Democratic insiders worried about the 2016 election, leading some of them to seek an alternative candidate, such as Vice President Joe Biden. In a chapter titled “Obama’s Role in World Revolution,” Kincaid examines how Obama has used a Marxist approach that undermines traditional values and pits the races against each other, a form of dialectical or revolutionary change that exploits racial, sexual, and other differences for the purpose of destabilizing society. Historically, Kincaid demonstrates, Obama sees his role as bringing the U.S. from capitalism into socialism.

Former Intelligence Official Talks About Dialectics

Kincaid’s book looks at communist advances not only in the United States but in Latin America, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Kincaid notes that Obama has recognized both Cuba (diplomatically) and Iran (with the nuclear deal), decisions which benefit America’s enemies, while failing to help Ukraine resist Russian aggression. A former intelligence official, who wrote three chapters of the book, explains the Marxists dialectical approach to history and argues that the Sino-Soviet “split” was a deception that has weakened the Free World, and that both China and Russia are still communist countries. The “collapse” of the Soviet Union, which occurred as a result of what has been called the “perestroika deception,” has resulted in a resurgent Russia that relies on the remnants of – and improvements to – Soviet military power, especially nuclear arms. “Russia and China have taken different socialist paths, based on the Marxist dialectic of historical progress, on the way to world communism,” the book maintains. But changes in the image they present to the West has meant that China and Russia have benefited from Western aid, financial assistance, and technology. The result: they have formed what many now increasingly recognize as a growing alliance against the United States. This proves, in the words of the author of Perestroika, Mikhail Gorbachev, that they are still on the road to world communism. The West has been fooled and our survival is at stake, Kincaid says.

The Communist Apocalypse

Today, Russia alone has the means to physically destroy the American homeland and survive any anticipated counter-strike. Russia is what top U.S. Generals have recently called an “existential” threat to the U.S. The Marxist dialectic, Kincaid warns, justifies the complete extinction of the U.S. by any means necessary. The U.S. faces nothing less than planned annihilation at the hands of the Russian state, Kincaid says, a development based on the Marxist dialectic of how global capitalism will meet its fate at the end of human history when world communism is predicted to triumph. This is the meaning of the term “communist apocalypse” in the title of the book. “There is no reason to think Vladimir Putin, who was trained in dialectics by the KGB, is not determined to wipe the United States from the face of the earth,” he says.

Russia and Global Islam

In another maneuver that has confused Western policy makers, the book cites evidence that Russia is behind much of global Islamic terrorism, including the Islamic State. Kincaid, author of a book on NSA defector Edward Snowden, argues that the former CIA and NSA contract employee has greatly undermined the U.S. ability to monitor its adversaries and enemies, making the potential threats from Russia, China, and global Islam even more serious.

The Marxist Pope

Kincaid, the author of several books, including two on the United Nations, says global conflict or Marxist “struggle” is building and that the head of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Francis, has joined the side of the anti-American forces determined to ultimately bury America and the global capitalist system. He says the evidence is clear that the Vatican’s promotion of the U.N.’s “sustainable development” or “green” agenda represents the manipulation of the Pope by New Age and Marxist influences. He says the Pope, who backs a so-called “world political authority,” favors nothing less than world government along the lines advocated by communists as one of the final stages along the road to world communism.

Reagan’s Dialectical Reversal Strategy

Looking for solutions to the current predicament, Kincaid urges conservatives to revisit the wit and wisdom of anti-communist Ronald Reagan, who launched a strategy of “dialectical reversal” against the forces of communism, a rhetorical strategy that even included joking about how Marxism was destined to fail because of its incompatibility with human nature and man’s yearning to be free. What is lacking in the current context, from Republican candidates for president, is a pro-freedom strategy based on the Reagan approach that bolsters our national defenses, including strengthening intelligence agencies such as the NSA. Kincaid notes the evidence of Reagan’s support for this critical agency, whose capabilities have been subverted by Snowden, working with the Russians and Chinese. The book urges Congress to reestablish committees on internal security to examine the damage that has been done to America’s constitutional system, in order to restore the checks and balances that were supposed to guard against the Marxist takeover of the executive branch of government that has in fact occurred. Despite major setbacks for U.S. influence in the world, Kincaid emphasizes in the book that the forces of freedom are still alive, as we have seen Marxism and radical Islam on the defensive in such countries as Ukraine, Egypt, Colombia, Venezuela, and Brazil.

ASI Exposed Obama’s Communist Mentor

America’s Survival, Inc. (ASI) was the first American organization to warn of Obama’s Marxist background and outlook in 2008. The Sword of Revolution and the Communist Apocalypse examines how ASI has developed this story over the years, using alternative media and bypassing Fox News with an international streaming Roku television channel now seen by viewers in 110 countries. One of ASI’s Roku/YouTube videos on Obama’s relationship with Communist Frank Marshall Davis has already been seen nearly 400,000 times.

I really don’t need to add anything to that. The book sells itself. If you want to know more about communism and how it is destroying our nation and all we love and believe in, you need to get this book. I can tell you that there are few people I admire and respect more than Cliff Kincaid. He is a pioneer in the field of political research and his book is a fascinating read. Pick up several copies at Amazon.com today.

10/13/15

The Cyberweapons Club: Easy, Cheap & Available… Spurs New Arms Race

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

The Wall Street Journal has a great article out on cyber warfare and the weapons it entails. In recent years, countries across the globe have spent billions on facilities that house the means to wage war electronically. You can be a major player on the geopolitical scene even without nuclear weapons. Joining the cyberweapons club is easy, cheap and open to anyone with a computer and money.

Digital warfare was brought to life when numerous countries carried out successful computer raids… the US was one of those countries. Now, a digital arms race is in full swing with countries all over the globe amassing huge troves of malicious code and nasty methods of breaching networks. You’ve got everything from the simplest of programs that use emails that have a single word misspelled, that ask for a password or for you to open an attachment, to more advanced code that utilizes Twitter handles.

In what I consider to be a faux agreement that means about as much as the Iranian deal, the US and China just signed a limited agreement to not conduct various forms of cyber attacks against each other. These have to do with corporate raids and domestic companies. But government espionage is still on the table and fair game. What a joke.

We’ve already seen a great deal of movement in this arena. Take Pakistan and India for example. They are nuclear rivals and hack each other all the time. Estonia and Belarus fear Russia and are working feverishly to build some kind of defense against the Russians. Good luck with that. Denmark, the Netherlands, Argentina and France are all developing offensive computer weapons. Everyone is getting ready for a new frontier on the battlefield.

There are now over 29 nations who have units dedicated to hacking other countries. 50 countries or so have actually purchased canned hacking software that they use for domestic or international surveillance. The US is said to have one of the most advanced operations out there. I’m not so sure of that. I believe that Russia, China, Iran and North Korea all have us beat hands down. As do the Israelis.

Invasive digital attacks are used to mine data and steal information. Computers can be erased at will. Whole networks can be disabled. In one instance, nuclear centrifuges were destroyed. These techniques are used for good and bad reasons. But it’s like Pandora’s box… now that it is out there and growing, nations must not only be defensive, they have to be offensive on this front.

More worrisome attacks are coming our way. Cyberweapons that take down electrical grids, disable domestic airline networks, jam Internet connectivity, erase money from bank accounts and confuse radar systems are being developed. Instances of probing in these areas have already occurred in the US and it is only a matter of time before a major attack comes in these areas. Many of our enemies already have their software on systems throughout the US, quietly lurking until they are triggered for whatever reason. It’s a ticking time bomb.

Our military strategies and tactics will have to change with these new developments if we are to survive. Attacks like these are almost impossible to entirely stop or to trace. To face off against these new threats, we will have to have highly trained units that fight this battle 24 hours a day. Many are already in place and working the issue. I’m just not convinced they will be fast or good enough.

Dozens of countries are now armed to the teeth with cyberweapons. Some Defense Department officials compare the current moment to the lull between the World Wars when militaries realized the potential of armed planes. I believe we are already in World War III and just don’t seem to grasp it yet.

Speaking of war, Syrian hackers have been at it already in that country, looking into the doings of the rebel militias, stealing tactical information and then using that intelligence to attack them. It’s been effective and efficient. With the aid and advice of the Russians, the Syrian government is using high tech as well as on the ground military maneuvers to annihilate their enemies.

As for the US, we know what some countries are up to, but as for many of them, we have no clue. I would say we are in the dark as to a great deal that our enemies have accomplished in the cyber arena. That’s a deadly mistake. In fact, I don’t think anyone, other than the new Axis of Evil (Iran, Russia and China) know exactly how skilled our enemies are in cyber espionage and warfare. You would think that the NSA, CIA and FBI would have a better grasp on all of this, but they don’t.

The new battlefields out there will be comprised of hard military assets, intelligence services and cyber armies. You already see this in the big boys out there: the US, China, Russia, Iran, North Korea and Israel.

The Chinese are masters at hacking. They are infamous for low-tech phishing schemes that trick people into granting them access to their networks. That’s probably how they hacked the Office of Personnel Management. A contractor fell for an innocuous looking email and presto! The Chinese cracked the network and gained access to more than 21 million people’s information. China of course lied. That’s one thing about all these spying nation states… they all lie.

The Chinese army has whole divisions that are devoted to cyber warfare. They believe in unconventional warfare and have been very busy at pushing boundaries abroad. They are very good and very covert. In fact, they even fix what they break on the way in. You never even know they are among you.

China opposes the militarization of cyberspace or a cyber arms race, said Zhu Haiquan, a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, adding China “firmly opposes and combats all forms of cyber attacks in accordance with law.” Yeah, well… it depends on what “law” means. And once again, they lie.

On to the Russians… they are very good as well and have just as many units dedicated to cyber warfare as the Chinese. The Russians love to go after diplomatic and political data. They are very good at tailored emails that ensnare their victims. They have dug into the networks at the Pentagon, State Department and White House, also using emails laced with malware, according to security researchers and US officials. The Russian’s have stolen Obama’s daily schedule and his diplomatic correspondence. The Russians say nyet, but of course, they lie.

“Russia has never waged cyber warfare against anyone,” Andrey Akulchev, a spokesman for the Russian Embassy in Washington, said in a written statement Friday. “Russia believes that the cybersphere should be used exclusively for peaceful purposes.” They always deny – lying is second nature to the Russkies.

US spies and security researchers say Russia is particularly adept at developing hacking tools. Some malicious software linked to Russia by security researchers has a feature meant to help it target computers on classified government networks usually not connected to the Internet. They have a virus that literally jumps onto USB thumb drives, just waiting for a user to plug it in on a classified network. It’s ingenious and evil.

The Russians are subtle. They will hide stolen data in a whole host of ways. They’ll mix it into normal network traffic. They know just how to fool most cyber security defenses. For instance, they have a piece of malware that hides its communications in consumer web services. The code downloads its instructions from a set of Twitter accounts. It then exports the data to a commercial storage service. Since corporate cyber security systems don’t block traffic to and from these sites, this can be very effective.

But the Iranians go even further. They aren’t content with just stealing information… they use cyberweapons to destroy computers. They’ve done it at least twice. Government investigators believe Iranian hackers implanted the Shamoon virus on computers at Saudi Arabia’s Saudi Aramco, the world’s largest energy firm, in 2012. The Aramco attack erased 75% of the company’s computers and replaced screen images with burning American flags. The attack didn’t affect oil production, but it rattled the company as it gave away the extent of Iran’s cyber capabilities. Ostensibly, the move was in retaliation for the alleged US-Israeli attack on Iran’s centrifuges utilizing the Stuxnet computer worm.

Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper has said that the Iranians used malware to destroy computers last year at the Las Vegas Sands Corp. The owner, Sheldon Adelson, is a major critic of the Iranian government.

The US also contends that Iranian hackers have taken down websites of numerous US banks in DOS attacks. This was in response to a YouTube video on the Prophet Mohammed supposedly. More likely, it had to do with economic sanctions and the Stuxnet attack.

In 2012, Iran announced the creation of the Supreme Council of Cyberspace charged to oversee the defense of Iran’s computer networks and develop “new ways of infiltrating or attacking the computer networks of its enemies.” Since Obama has inked the suicidal nuclear deal with Iran, cyber attacks have slowed somewhat, but that won’t last long. There are no illusions that Iran is in any way an ally to the US. They have aligned with Russia and China to eventually war with us. Tehran appears “fully committed” to using cyber attacks as part of its national strategy.

Let’s peek at the NoKos, shall we? Of course, their latest claim to fame is the Sony hack. It was in retaliation for the movie, “The Interview,” which portrayed their trollish leader in a less-than-favorable light. In it, Kim Jong Un gets offed. No big loss. The retaliatory hack was arguably one of the most successful nation-state breaches ever. Many suspect an inside job since the malware was implanted directly on Sony computers. This allowed the NoKos to steal and destroy data at will. South Korea has also said that the North Koreans have attempted to hack one of their nuclear reactors, as well as a television network and a major bank. The NoKos haven’t denied anything. They don’t care who knows or accuses them.

Looking for work? Defense contractor Northrop Grumman Corp. has advertised for a “cyber operations planner” to “facilitate” offensive computer attacks with the South Korean and US governments, according to a job posting listed online. The scope is undisclosed and probably above all of our pay grades.

I keep hearing the US has the most advanced operations. But as I said before, I highly doubt that. The NSA is touting itself as the “crown creator of cyberespionage.”

In a spectacularly treasonous move, former National Security Agency contractor, Edward Snowden. leaked documents that showed the NSA had implanted malware on tens of thousands of foreign computers. That allowed the US government secret access to data and potentially the industrial control systems behind power plants and pipelines. Color me skeptical, but who knows?

US Cyber Command now has nine “National Mission Teams” with plans to build four more. Each are comprised of 60 military personnel that will “conduct full-spectrum cyberspace operations to provide cyber options to senior policy makers in response to attacks against our nation,” a Pentagon spokesperson said. The Navy, Army, and Air Force will each build four teams, with the Marines building a single unit. Each will have a “separate mission with a specific focus area,” though these have so far remained secret.

In 2014, the Netherlands announced it would begin training its own Internet troops through a domestic cyber security company, called Fox-IT. The head of the Dutch armed forces, Major Gen. Tom Middendorp, said in a symposium the group should be prepared to carry out attacks, not just block them, according to a Dutch media report. The Netherlands’ military strategy, laid out in various documents, refers to hacking as a “force multiplier.”

In 2013, Denmark’s Defense Ministry began allocating about $10 million a year for “computer network operations,” which include “defensive and offensive military operations,” according to government budget documents. That amount is just 0.24% of the Danish defense budget.

There are a lot of software engineers out there producing canned systems for private parties. It’s a seller’s market out there and countries are paying top dollar for cyber warfare software. A document leak on the Italian firm Hacking Team revealed the company had sold its surveillance tools to dozens of countries, including Sudan, Egypt, Ethiopia and Azerbaijan. Money is king and everyone has a price. Our own FBI is evidently a customer of the Hacking Team who promotes their product as “the hacking suite for governmental interception.” It’s the perfect tool for exploiting holes in software to gain access to computers and mobile devices.

States aren’t the only players. About 30 Arabic-fluent hackers in the Palestinian territories, Egypt and Turkey are building their own tools to hit targets in Egypt, Israel and the US, according to researchers.

In August, the US used a drone to kill Islamic State hacker Junaid Hussain in Raqqa, Syria, showing the extent to which digital warfare has upset the balance of power on the modern battlefield. The British citizen had used inexpensive tools to hack more than 1,000 US military personnel and published personal and financial details online for others to exploit. He helped sharpen the terror group’s defenses against Western surveillance and built hacking tools to penetrate computer systems as well.

All this cyber warfare and espionage is making national security and cyberweapons experts very nervous. A really big and debilitating attack could come at any time and we would pretty much be powerless to stop it. We just have no idea what the bad guys are capable of. “What we can do, we can expect done back to us,” said Howard Schmidt, who was the White House’s cyber security coordinator until 2012. The US is thinking, “Yeah, I don’t want to pull that trigger because it’s going to be more than a single shot that goes off.”

The jokes on us… that trigger has already been pulled. Let’s just hope the US isn’t home to the walking dead because of it. Because the cyberweapons club is so easy, cheap and available… we are watching a new arms race take off. The US is not in the forefront of this race and we had better hustle to catch up and overtake our enemies. Cyberspace is the new battlefront.

10/7/15

Putin’s “Moral Clarity” Disguises Evil Intent

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

We as a nation are discussing ways to isolate and treat mental illness in society. How do we identify those who are mentally ill and get them help? These questions are also relevant on the world stage, as Russian President Vladimir Putin poses as the savior of the world.

You know that moral confusion is taking hold in society when a conservative website hails Vladimir Putin for his “moral clarity” in the War on Terror, and compares him to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Yet, Dr. Robin McFee, who generally focuses on Weapons of Mass Destruction preparedness as well as medical matters, writes that Putin, who has invaded Ukraine and is now backing the Assad dictatorship in Syria with troops and weapons, “has emerged as the go to global statesmen [sic] on the world stage” because he gave a U.N. speech describing chaos in the Middle East resulting from President Obama’s policies.

Both Obama and Putin have created instability in the Middle East, but that doesn’t mean that one is a statesman and the other is not. It may mean that they are both working in tandem to reduce American influence in the region, just as they partnered on behalf of a nuclear deal with Iran.

Regarding their U.N. speeches, McFee wrote, “Both Netanyahu and Putin shared a refreshing moral clarity, presenting an unvarnished snapshot of the world as it is, the threats awaiting us, and gave an unfiltered insight into the challenges they face, as well as approaches each will take in the protection of their respective nation’s interests and sovereignty.”

The idea that Putin is a leader we should admire is a notion that is nonsensical on its face. He gave asylum to NSA defector Edward Snowden, who still lives in Russia. In a recent edition of The Intelligencer, the journal of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO), Peter Oleson writes about how Snowden’s disclosures have facilitated the activities of the Islamic State—a group that Putin claims he opposes—along with other American enemies and adversaries.

Oleson, a former assistant director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) who served as senior intelligence policy advisor to the Under Secretary of Defense Policy, writes, “The damage to US intelligence has been extensive. Snowden leaked the identities of over 1,000 targets of US intelligence and 31,000 files revealing what US policymakers want intelligence to provide (i.e., a list revealing what the US doesn’t know). His releases contain sufficient detail to identify US and allied intelligence officers. He revealed previously secret details of the US intelligence budget.”

He goes on, “Perhaps even more significant is the exposure of specific sources and methods and techniques US intelligence uses. Snowden has exposed how the US tracks terrorists via e-mails, social media, and cell phones.”

These are some of the same terrorists running wild in the Middle East that Putin says he opposes.

Indeed, Oleson notes that “The MI-5 head warned that the Snowden leaks undermined British security as concerns grow over British Islamists fighting in Syria. He also revealed the hacking techniques of NSA’s Tailored Access Office, the group that focuses on difficult electronic targets. Islamic State of Iraq and Syria’s (ISIS) leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, has altered his communications to avoid detection. Electronic eavesdropping techniques used against Al Qaeda in Iraq no longer work.”

Summarizing the damage Snowden has done, Oleson concludes that Snowden is a traitor to the United States and quite possibly a spy.

There are other reasons to categorically reject the notion that Putin is a statesman who sees the world like Israel’s Netanyahu. The Russians created the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to destroy Israel. Israel has been terrorized by Soviet/Russian trained terrorists for decades.

But Putin, a former KGB colonel, wanted the world to forget this record of backing international terrorism when he spoke to the U.N.

McFee approvingly quotes Putin as saying in his U.N. speech, “We believe that any attempts to play games with terrorists, let alone to arm them, are not just short-sighted. This may result in the global terrorist threat increasing dramatically and engulfing new regions, especially given that Islamic State camps train militants from many countries, including the European countries.”

She then adds, “Beyond a few glaringly obvious issues, like Russian influence in Iran, and criminal money laundering, nevertheless, Putin highlights important facts.”

“Russian influence in Iran?” Is that how Russian sponsorship of the Iranian regime and its nuclear weapons program is best described?

Relegating “Russian influence in Iran” to a throwaway line ignores the terrorism this alliance has meant for the Middle East and the world. It is the Iranian relationship with Syria and Russia that Putin is determined to support in the Middle East. Iranian-supported terrorist groups are just as lethal as the Islamic State, and Netanyahu knows it. That’s why he has pleaded with Putin, to no avail, to look the other way when Israel bombs Syrian and Iranian supply lines for Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The fact that Putin invaded Ukraine, and that his separatist forces brought down a civilian airliner over areas they control, should also disabuse us of any notion that he is a moral statesman on the world stage. Of course, Putin also kills journalists and opposition figures. But particularly gruesome ways of killing, such as the poisoning of former KGB officer Alexander Litvinenko, are reserved for those who spill secrets about Putin and his KGB comrades. Litvinenko disclosed Russian training of al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri.

McFee’s praise for Putin’s “moral clarity on radical Islam at the U.N.” ignores the evidence that the Russians have their fingerprints all over the activities of the Islamic State, not only through facilitating Snowden’s disclosures but through the provision of actual manpower.

The Homeland Security Committee’s recent report on foreign fighters in the Islamic State lists Russia as number four among the top 10 countries of origin. Russia has supplied 1,700 fighters. The United States isn’t even in the top 10. Russia has done little to stop this flow of people to the Islamic State, suggesting that some are leaving under the watchful eye of Putin’s intelligence services. One Islamic State military commander is, in fact, considered a Russian plant.

Russia may not control every faction of the Islamic State, but it’s a sure bet that Putin’s intelligence operatives are in charge of at least some of them. It is significant that initial Russian airstrikes were determined to be hitting opponents of Assad, not Islamic State fighters.

As we have seen by the intervention in Syria, the Islamic State serves Russian interests by giving Putin the opportunity to act decisively on behalf of the Syrian regime, which also benefits Iran. Putin comes out on top no matter which side wins and looks like a statesman in the process. At least he looks that way to some.

It’s time to face reality: Putin is a bloodthirsty killer whose only concern is building up Russian power and damaging the interests of the United States. Disgust for Obama should not blind people to that fact.

It’s time to identify Putin as not only mentally unstable, but so bloodthirsty that he constitutes a threat to the Middle East, America and the world. Putin’s nuclear weapons buildup is so alarming that our top generals have called Russia an “existential threat” to the United States.

We’ve identified the problem. So who among the presidential candidates has a plan to rid the world of this lunatic before thousands, or even millions, of Americans die?

09/16/15

Bolshevik Bernie and the Communist Spy

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

In a 1,500-word article about the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, The Washington Post waited until the 25^th paragraph to note that the self-declared socialist faces an “obstacle” to winning the presidency. The paper said that “…Sanders has not faced the kind of media scrutiny, let alone attacks from opponents, that leading candidates eventually experience.” The authors, Philip Rucker and James Wagner, added, “Sure to follow his summer surge is an autumn of investigations that could reveal new details about his personal background and record.”

What these investigations would find is that Sanders was a collaborator, if not a member, of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), the same group that backed Obama’s run for the presidency. DSA describes itself as the largest socialist organization in the United States and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International.

There is a video showing Obama campaigning for him when Sanders ran for the Senate. Interestingly, Sanders, who won his Senate seat in 2006, called Obama “one of the great leaders of the United States Senate,” even though Obama had only been in the body for about two years.

One of the more interesting members of the DSA is Kurt Stand, a communist spy for the Soviet Union (and then Russia) and East Germany who was sentenced to prison in 1998 and released in 2012. He served over 17 years. He was convicted of conspiracy to commit espionage, attempted espionage, and illegally obtaining national defense documents.

Where is he now? Thanks to the DSA, we know that Stand has returned to the organization, which is campaigning hard for Sanders for president. Indeed, DSA has posted photos of Stand and his comrades promoting “socialist values” and the Sanders campaign at the Greenbelt (Maryland) Labor Day Festival.

Stand has himself posted an article about how the group called Progressive Maryland is working hard to mobilize left-wing forces throughout the state.

According to the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Defense Intelligence Agency, Stand and his comrades, Therese Marie Squillacote and James Michael Clark, were on a mission “to cultivate other spies” in the Washington, D.C. area. Stand allegedly received $24,650 for his recruiting and coordinating efforts, according to a summary of the case. The summary says Stand and his comrades apparently became enamored with socialism when going to college: “Clark, Squillacote, and Stand attended the University of Wisconsin in the 1970s where they were affiliated with leftist groups, specifically the Progressive Student Forum and the Young Workers Liberation League, the youth arm of the Communist Party USA.”

It looks like there is quite a bit of overlap between the various socialist, communist and progressive groups.

When he was in prison, Stand came out in strong support of Barack Obama for president, saying, “The conversations I’ve listened to and taken part in over these past months have made me a stronger supporter of Obama than I otherwise would have been; have strengthened my perception that his election could be a critical part of building a movement of resistance to our country’s current direction, could help provide the space or framework in which more radical alternatives are again spoken and heard.”

At the end of his letter, dated June 2008, Stand said that “radicals and progressives ought to join those—including those in prison—who have already decided to back Obama, see where the campaign can take us, see what can then be accomplished.”

Bernie is now his candidate.

In the same edition that carried the story about Sanders’ run for the Democratic presidential nomination, The Washington Post ran a story, “The Bernie Sanders of Britain,” about the Marxist who has taken over leadership of the British Labor Party. The online version carried the softer headline, “Leftist Jeremy Corbyn elected leader of Britain’s Labour Party.” Corbyn “has previously called for Britain to leave NATO, favors unilateral nuclear disarmament and champions the nationalization of vast sectors of the economy, including the railways and the energy industries,” the paper reported. Corbyn admires Russia’s Vladimir Putin and excuses the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Sanders, labeled by his critics as “Bolshevik Bernie,” told The Huffington Post that he was “delighted” to see that the British Labor Party had elected Corbyn as its new leader.

While Hillary Clinton has been sidetracked by her email scandal, Sanders has been popularizing socialism and expanding the Democratic Party base, noted Jeff Weaver, the Sanders campaign manager who was quoted in the Post. The unspoken assumption is that these new voters will turn out for whoever is the Democratic presidential nominee. This explains why Sanders has been spared media scrutiny. The media figure that he won’t get the nomination but that he will bring more people to vote for the eventual Democratic nominee.

Bill Ayers, the former communist terrorist and Obama supporter, is hopeful about what Sanders can do for the far-left. “Certainly among the Sanders supporters there are many who will flock like liberal sheep to Hillary once the Bern burns out,” he writes. “However, I believe that among the Sanders supporters there are thousands who are dissatisfied, who are disgruntled, but who do not have a coherent left analysis, who therefore are open to our ideas as they weren’t before they got involved in the Sanders surge. These seekers will be open (certainly many of them) to ideas from the Left of Sanders.”

Ayers adds, “We must think as organizers. Yes, demonstrate, fight in the streets but spend some time and energy going to places where the Sanders campaign has gathered a crowd or a meeting but go not to disrupt, disrupting there would show how true we are to our knowledge, to our anger, to our need to show ‘them’ us… So I think that we should jump in the water. After all, the anti-war multitudes of the 60s and 70s were only disgruntled, dissatisfied people and without a coherent left analysis, yet we jumped in. Why? Because a movement can only be built on motion. Motion is people open, people leaving their normal placid acceptance if only a little, if only briefly. So, things swirled. Liberal anti-war marches. My collective would go, stand alongside the marchers with paper Viet Cong flags and pins, encouraging people to wear the flags. We gave maybe a thousand away. A good left action. We also had leaflets with our analysis of the war on Vietnam. Many people took those. Good. Better than if we had stayed home.”

This is how a pro-communist message was inserted into the “anti-war” demonstrations that convinced a Democrat-controlled Congress to cut off aid to a non-communist South Vietnam, paving the way for a communist victory in Vietnam and the Khmer Rouge genocide in Cambodia.

The Washington Post is correct that Sanders has a lot to explain.

Let’s take the USSR first. Sanders went on his honeymoon to the former USSR. He was a supporter of the communist Sandinista regime in Nicaragua. He was a collaborator with the U.S. Peace Council—a Communist Party front—against the Reagan military build-up. He worked with the Venezuelan regime of Hugo Chavez to distribute Venezuelan oil in the U.S.

The Post is right that Sanders deserves “media scrutiny” and “investigations that could reveal new details about his personal background and record.” So what accounts for the delay in the media doing their jobs? Would the results cast the Democratic Party in a bad light?

It’s no wonder, as we previously reported, that Sanders has been concerned that the NSA is conducting surveillance on links between American politicians and foreign regimes and movements. As I noted at the time, one of the NSA’s greatest successes was known as Venona, the code name given to the intercepted and deciphered KGB and GRU (Russian military intelligence) messages between Moscow and the Soviet espionage network in the United States. The project led to the apprehension of such spies as State Department official Alger Hiss.

Has the NSA been watching Bolshevik Bernie? This could make Hillary’s email scandal look mild by comparison.

Of course, Sanders would twist it against the NSA, arguing that he was just an innocent victim. The facts suggest otherwise.

09/1/15

China and Russia are Waging War on America

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

In a typically cynical article, “GOP presidential candidates have a new country to bash: the People’s Republic of China,” Politico complains about “China-bashing” by various Republican candidates. The story by Nahal Toosi carries the headline, “The Republicans’ Red Scare,” but only mentions one time that China is a “communist-led state.”

Politico uses the term “red scare” to suggest that the problem is being greatly exaggerated.

If there is any doubt about the “red” in Red China, consider the Chinese Constitution, which declares, “The People’s Republic of China is a socialist state under the people’s democratic dictatorship led by the working class and based on the alliance of workers and peasants. The socialist system is the basic system of the People’s Republic of China. Sabotage of the socialist system by any organization or individual is prohibited.”

Mao Zedong, considered by many the greatest mass murderer in history, ispictured on the Chinese currency.

After Politico went to press with its defense of Beijing, the Los Angeles Timesreported that “Foreign spy services, especially in China and Russia, are aggressively aggregating and cross-indexing hacked U.S. computer databases—including security clearance applications, airline records and medical insurance forms—to identify U.S. intelligence officers and agents, U.S. officials said.” The Times added, “At least one clandestine network of American engineers and scientists who provide technical assistance to U.S. undercover operatives and agents overseas has been compromised as a result, according to two U.S. officials.”

Politico reported that criticism of China “might lead Chinese leaders to cozy up to another world power instead, like Russia (another favorite GOP boogeyman), the former ambassador said.”

This former ambassador is Jon Huntsman, the “moderate” Republican who served as Obama’s Ambassador to China. He ran for president in 2012, dropped out, and threw his “support” behind Mitt Romney, who lost a race he should have won.

Later in the article, Politico refers to China’s “alleged” cyberattacks.

“U.S. officials have not publicly blamed Beijing for the theft of the OPM and the Anthem files, but privately say both hacks were traced to the Chinese government,” reported the Los Angeles Times. “The officials say China’s state security officials tapped criminal hackers to steal the files, and then gave them to private Chinese software companies to help analyze and link the information together. That kept the government’s direct fingerprints off the heist and the data aggregation that followed. In a similar fashion, officials say, Russia’s powerful Federal Security Service, or FSB, has close connections to programmers and criminal hacking rings in Russia and has used them in a relentless series of cyberattacks.”

Why is there such a determination by a well-read publication like Politico to play down threats from China and Russia? This article is a case study in Republican-bashing. Politico is trying to warn Republicans running for president not to follow Donald Trump’s lead in focusing on how foreign countries are taking advantage of the United States.

The article by Nahal Toosi says that “…while scapegoating Beijing and its questionable economic policies may seem like an appealing campaign tactic, China specialists—including many in the GOP—warn that Republicans run the risk of looking ignorant about U.S.-Chinese ties.”

The ignorance comes from those in politics and the media who play down the nature of the communist regime.

The author goes on to warn against “bullying” or “isolating” the world’s “most populous country.”

“To be fair,” she writes, “China gives White House hopefuls lots of material for a tough-guy routine. Beijing’s aggressive moves in the South China Sea, its suspected role in cyberattacks on the U.S. and its dismal human rights record are just a few areas already seized upon by Republicans (and some Democrats) for criticism. China’s currency policies have long frustrated the United States in particular, and its increased military spending has led to wariness around the world.”

Notice how “alleged” cyberattacks have become “suspected.”

But in order to “be fair” to Republicans, she grudgingly admits some “questionable” Chinese policies that give the GOP candidates enough material to appear “tough.”

This is a despicable whitewash of a communist regime that is clearly waging war on the U.S.

“Potential enemies of the United States have claimed that they have the ability to crash our markets and our former head of NSA acknowledged that they do have that capability,” notes Kevin Freeman, author of Secret Weapon: How Economic Terrorism Brought Down the U.S. Stock Market and Why It can Happen Again.He notes that the Dow Jones Industrial Average crashed by more than 1,000 points at the open on August 24 “after China accused us of crashing their market.” He says that China has published a book, Unrestricted Warfare, calling a stock market crash a “new-era weapon.”

Instead of holding the Obama Administration accountable for safeguarding our national security information, Politico attacks Republicans for being too critical of China.

Later in the article, Politico quotes some comments about why we have to take the time to understand that the rulers in Beijing will realize this is just campaign rhetoric. “Top U.S.-watchers in Beijing are pretty savvy,” says Melanie Hart, identified as “director for China policy at the left-leaning Center for American Progress.” It turns out she “worked on Qualcomm’s China business development team, where she provided technology market and regulatory analysis to guide Qualcomm operations in Greater China. She has worked as a China advisor for The Scowcroft Group, Albright Stonebridge Group, and the University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation.”

In other words, part of her career has been devoted to facilitating U.S. investment in China. She went to China in June to work on U.S.-China cooperation on “climate change” matters. She has a vested interest in making the communists look non-threatening.

Meanwhile, last January, a Russian spy ring was uncovered in New York City whose purpose in part was to “collect economic intelligence” and recruit New York City residents as intelligence sources. One of the targets of the economic intelligence gathering, a Justice Department press release said, was the New York Stock Exchange. The actual complaint filed against the Russians went into more detail, as they are shown discussing how to obtain information about the “destabilization” of U.S. financial markets.

So despite the wisdom conveyed by Jon Huntsman about forcing China into the arms of Russia, it looks like Russia and China are already working very well together.

Nevertheless, the first state visit by President Xi Jinping of China to the United States will take place in September.

Look for another Politico article about GOP “obstructionists” getting in the way of our blossoming relationship with the butchers of Beijing.