Stubborn Syria

Stubborn Syria

Antithesis title because it isn’t Syria who is stubborn it’s Bashar Al Assad.

Understand the Geneva Protocols are an absolute. We do not play with chemical WMDs, they are always a serious matter.

Agent Orange is one of America’s worst incidents. Official story is a herbicidal that had fallout. Some claim it was intentional. Veterans affected by Agent Orange are bitter and angry about it, but most of all never want to see anything like it again. You’ll note that we haven’t had another incident like it, in accident or intention. I am not saying there haven’t been some stupid incidents. I am saying incidents where intention (including negligence) can be shown likely even possible, in hurting our soldiers for sake of someone’s need to know, these haven’t taken place.

Why is this so important? Because it shows our learning from our mistakes, be they witting stupidities of placing our soldiers in harms way or the innocent unwitting mistake as officially explained, we’ve learned and do not do things like this anymore.

Today Bashar Al Assad claims he’s President of Syria. Yet every time there’s a chemical attack he and his cohorts say “it wasn’t Assad.” Is that taking responsibility, especially after Russia guaranteed all the chemical weapons were destroyed and Obama’s Secretary of State John Kerry accepted that as true?

Think of it this way: If I come to your home and while there shoot and kill your neighbor’s entire family the police will want to know how much you knew of what I was going to do, how well you knew me, etc., to see if you were a part of it and if there was any way you could foresee what I had done and prevented it since I was from your house, your premises.

While the police clear you of any criminal wrongdoing or negligence, you’re still subject to a wrongful death suit brought by any relative of that family. Why? Because it was your house, your premises, and the responsibility falls on you to control who comes in and to assure their actions aren’t harmful to others like your neighbors.

Bashar Al Assad has this same responsibility for Syria, and so too President Trump for the United States of America.

President Trump put troops on the border on word of a group trying to push right through our border to promote their agenda over America’s and American’s Rights and the will of the American People to have and control their own nation. There could have been a chemical attack there, and our deployed troops would deal with it. We would then receive a briefing explaining the intel we had or didn’t have, what went wrong, what went right, and all in the pro-active step of taking responsibility to control our premises, our borders.

Assad never does that. His response, “it’s not me,” and he just goes about his protracted war effort. He doesn’t have an inkling of the responsibility he has as President of Syria to assure chemical weapon, production, use, sale, purchase will not be tolerated as a duty to his people let alone the Geneva Protocols. Instead Assad just wants to make sure he isn’t blamed and leaves a vacuum of irresponsibility to police the chemical weapons in his country. Assad isn’t taking on that his and the enemy’s production are an escalation in Assad’s irresponsibility, that they’ve both taken to buying and selling these weapons as commodities, as normal modern war strategies to carry out barbarism on a mass scale just because Assad won’t step down.

This is why America, Britain and France had to take action. Assad’s claims of “no WMDs” or “they’ve all been destroyed” must be absolute and for every possibility within Syria. Should a tragedy occur it is Assad’s duty in claiming to be the President of Syria that he show a full willingness to be responsible for the incident, with a sober, humble, and accurate briefing. This is an authority that has been abused by 7 years of war and irresponsibly claimed the lives of 500,000 civilians, and displaced millions abroad.

And to those who think Bashar Al Assad wouldn’t have done this when the rebels were about to surrender… In reality: Rebels didn’t surrender yet. In reality: Turkey is in Syria attacking the Kurds and trying to take some land too. In reality: The Middle East nations want each others land, for more food, more oil, more people to be supported. In reality: Every Middle East leader has to have a “tough guy” reputation, with an escalating ruthlessness to assure they can maintain control of their nation and discourage other leader’s aggression. So ask yourself what is more ruthless than gassing the surviving and supposed soon to surrender rebels in your nation as a means of demoralizing and hoping to make Turkey’s military retreat?

There can be peace in the Middle East. But peace is unlikely anywhere that stubborn dictators won’t step down in acquiesce to the passionate desires of the people of their nation, and any peace forced by a ruler is at the cost of the lives of those who dissent, from Mao, to Stalin, to Lenin, to Fidel, to, today, Maduro, Kim Jung Un, and South Africa over 100 million people have been murdered for the stubbornness of Dictators.

America’s goal and hope as this was our own hopes for our own future in the Founding of our nation, is a Syria based on the Will of the People of Syria and not the stubbornness of a Dictator and their arms, nor their opposition. But that can’t happen with both sides willing to use and proliferate chemical WMDs against the People of Syria and finger pointing is their answer to any inquiry, especially when Assad is meant to represent both sides as the President of Syria.

God Bless you and thank you for reading and sharing this,

Toddy Littman

London’s Murder rate HIGHER than New York City

Should background checks be required for anyone purchasing a knife that looked like a commando style knife?

On April 1st the London Daily Mail on line reported that London’s murder rate is HIGHER than that of New York for the first time. There was a similar report in London’s Sunday Times. The Daily Mail listed the victims of this murder spree. The list of twelve who were murdered included the cause of death.

Seven of those killed were stabbed to death. One was both stabbed and shot. Two were shot and for the remaining two no cause of death was reported.

Given that these deaths exceeded those of New York City it would appear that it is time for Parliament to take a page from their cousins across the pond in the United States and draw up legislation that would address these mass killings

Seeing as how almost seventy percent of these killings were caused by knives it would seem that members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords in the throes of hysteria would be falling all over themselves to introduce legislation to control the sale and purchase of – what? Knives. But what kind of knives?

If a knife has a camouflaged handle would it be fair to deem it of military quality and therefore more dangerous than say a kitchen knife? Would the length of the blade be a determining factor as to the lethality of a knife? Should background checks be required for anyone purchasing a knife that looked like a commando style knife? Would the politicians deem it necessary to restrict the number of knives one can own? Should knife sharpeners be regulated for, after all, without a sharp blade a knife is no more a threat than a gun with no ammunition. Should a concealed knife permit be a consideration when drafting Knife Legislation? Background checks – absolutely!

No doubt the hysterics from those in support of and opposed to any attempt to take away one’s right to own a knife would be akin to that of those in the United States who support gun control legislation and versus those who voice their opposition.

As I see it, it isn’t a weapon of any kind that is the problem. Rather it is, in the words of one law enforcement officer, “A people problem.” And Professor Walter Williams of George Mason University nailed it when he stated, “Problems of murder, mayhem and other forms of anti-social behavior will continue until we regain our moral footing.” Amen!

Unfortunately, those like Professor Williams who try to make this point continue to be ignored. Why, because it is far easier for politicians to pass feel-good legislation to appease those with the loudest mouths than it is to address the real issue Williams raises, a decline in moral values and a refusal to accept personal responsibility and accountability for one’s actions.

John R. Stoeffler

Judicial Watch Files 4th FOIA Lawsuit Relating to Government Funding of the Soros Political Machine

Legal Ethics and ReformJudicial Watch now has four FOIA lawsuits relating to the Obama administration’s funding for Soros’ Open Society Foundations operations 


(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits against the U.S. Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) for records relating to their funding of the political activities of the Soros Open Society Foundations of Romania (Judicial Watch v. U.S. State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (No. 1:18-cv-00667)) and the Soros Open Society Foundations of Colombia (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:18-cv-00668)).

The Soros Open Society Foundations of Romania lawsuit was filed after State and USAID failed to substantively respond to an October 16, 2017, FOIA request seeking among other records:

• All records relating to any contracts, grants or other allocations/disbursements of funds by the State Department to the Open Society Foundation – Romania and/or its personnel and/or any OSFR subsidiary or affiliate.

• All assessments, evaluations, reports or similar records relating to the work of Open Society Foundation – Romania and/or its subsidiaries or affiliated organizations.

The Soros Open Society Foundations of Colombia lawsuit was filed after State failed to respond to an October 23, 2017, FOIA request seeking among other records:

• All records regarding any contracts, grants or other allocations/disbursements of funds by the State Department to the Open Society Foundation – Colombia and/or any OSF subsidiaries/affiliates, and/or OSF personnel operating in Colombia, as well as the following entities: Fundacion Ideas para la Paz; La Silla Vacia; DeJusticia; Corporacion Nuevo Arco Iris; Paz y Reconciliacion; Global Drug Policy Program; and news portal Las Dos Orillas.

• All records of communication, whether by e-mails, text messages, or instant chats, between any officials, employees or representatives of the State Department in Colombia, including Ambassador Kevin Whitaker and any officials, employees or representatives of the Open Society Foundation, its subsidiaries/affiliates, and/or those entities identified in the first bullet.

See also: Shilling for Soros: Washington Posts’ Omission of Facts in Defense of a Narrative

As in other parts of the world, a number of Soros-funded entities and projects in Romania are also funded by the United States Government. The Romanian Center for Independent Journalism, which is supported by the Open Society Institute in New York, recently received $17,000 from the State Department.

In February 2017, Laura Silber of Open Society Foundations reportedly condemned “illiberal governments” in the Balkans, such as Macedonia, Albania and Romania, for working against the Soros NGOs. In Romania, in March 2017, the leader of the governing party reportedly charged that the Soros foundations “that he has funded since 1990 have financed evil.”

Soros’ NGOs in Colombia are reportedly receiving millions from USAID:

Verdad Abierta, a web-based portal created by Teresa Ronderos, director of the Open Society Program on Independent Journalism, boasts on its website that it receives support from USAID. Abierta has helped rewrite Colombia’s history, elevating terrorists to the same level as the legitimate police and military forces, and rebranding decades of massacres, kidnappings, child soldiering, and drug trafficking by a criminal syndicate as simply “50 years of armed conflict.”

Fundacion Ideas para la Paz, once led by peace negotiator Sergio Jaramillo, now a member of the oversight “junta,” is funded by the Open Society Foundations and has received more than $200,000 in U.S. tax dollars.

The left-wing news portal La Silla Vacia, another Open Society initiative, also boasts of being a USAID grantee. Its columnist, Rodrigo Uprimny, whose NGO DeJusticia also partners with USAID and Open Society, is considered one of the architects of the peace deal.

Former National Liberation Army terrorist Leon Valencia—Open Society collaborator and grantee—has received at least $1,000,000 in USAID funding through his NGOs Corporacion Nuevo Arco Iris and Paz y Reconciliacion, and left-wing news portal Las Dos Orillas, which he co-founded.

In 2016, Soros’ Open Society Foundations gave more than $3.3 million to organizations operating in Colombia. Several of those organizations have also been financially supported by the United States government, having received more than $5 million from the Department of State, USAID, and the Inter-American Foundation (a federal agency) in recent years. One of the Soros-funded entities, an LGBT advocacy organization, was also selected by the Inter-American Foundation as a partner organization in its Colombia peace project initiative.

“It is time for Americans to be allowed to see State Department documentation regarding the public funding of Soros’ Open Society Foundations,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The billionaire George Soros needs zero assistance from taxpayers to promote his far-left agenda abroad.”

Judicial Watch now has four FOIA lawsuits relating to the Obama administration’s funding for Soros’ operations. Judicial Watch is pursuing information about Soros’ activities in Macedonia and Albania, as well. The former Prime Minister of Macedonia Nikola Gruevski reportedly called for a “de-Sorosization” of society. In February 2017, Judicial Watch reported that the U.S. government has quietly spent millions of taxpayer dollars to destabilize the democratically elected, center-right government in Macedonia in collusion with George Soros.

In a March 2017, letter to Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson, six U.S. Senators (Sens. Lee (R-UT), Inhofe (R-OK), Tillis (R-NC), Cruz (R-TX), Perdue (R-GA) and Cassidy (R-LA)) called on the secretary to investigate the relations between USAID and the Soros Foundations and how U.S. tax dollars are being used by the State Department and the USAID to support left-of-center political groups who seek to impose left-leaning policies in countries such as Macedonia and Albania.

Roger Stone: Schiff and Speier Say that DNC Handed Over Their Server


Roger Stone, having just testified before a closed-door meeting before Congress regarding the DNC security breach on September 26, is claiming that Congressman Schiff and Speier told him at the hearing that the DNC did, in fact, give over its server to the FBI. This contradicts James Comey’s testimony, when he stated that the DNC never handed over the server for investigation.

Answering the questions of Infowars as he apparently was leaving the hearing, Stone said: “The FBI Director… testified before this committee that the DNC did not allow the FBI to examine their servers. Mr. Schiff intimated today that that was not the case and claimed that the DNC servers had been turned over to the FBI.”

In another interview, this time with the The Gateway Pundit, Stone was quoted as saying:

“The most interesting about the hearing was that, in my statement, I strongly asserted my suspicion that the Russians never hacked the DNC and, of course, one of the central arguments, to that effect, is that the DNC refused to turn over their computer servers to the FBI, instead having it inspected by CrowdStrike, a forensic IT firm controlled directly and paid by the DNC. When I said that, Congresswoman Speier from California corrected me and told me that the DNC servers had been turned over to the FBI, and then Congressman Schiff essentially confirmed that, after which, Trey Gowdy said, ‘wait a minute, James Comey came before this committee, secretary Johnson came before this committee, and testified under oath that the servers were not turned over to the FBI, so what are you talking about?’ Schiff tried to change the subject and said, ‘well, we’ve got a lot of information that we learned during the recess and maybe we should talk about this privately.’ Gowdy seemed furious and stormed out of the hearing, so somebody’s lying.”

The question is, did the DNC turn over its server during the summer recess?

Questions the DNC Don’t Want Asked on Guccifer 2.0 And Their Claim He Took Only Two Files

The Washington Post article, National Security Russian government hackers penetrated DNC, stole opposition research on Trump” from June 14, 2016, states that the hacking group known as Fancy Bear “broke into the network in late April and targeted the opposition research files. It was this breach that set off the alarm. The hackers stole two files, Henry said.” The article then states that “The DNC said that no financial, donor or personal information appears to have been accessed or taken, suggesting that the breach was traditional espionage, not the work of criminal hackers.” The article continues, quoting DNC lawyer Michael Sussman of the Perkins Coie firm: “But at this time, it appears that no financial information or sensitive employee, donor or voter information was accessed by the Russian attackers,” he said.

However, in the subsequent article the following day, June 15, entitled “Guccifer 2.0’ claims credit for DNC hack“, the Washington Post reports that Guccifer 2.0 posted to a website some of the allegedly stolen documents. They included a file titled “Donald Trump Report,” dated Dec. 19, 2015, and a list of what was purported to be million-dollar-plus donors to the Democratic Party.”

Questions the DNC must answer are, 1) Why did the DNC say that only two opposition research files were taken, and not donor information, when Guccifer 2.0 did indeed take both the opposition files and the donor files? 2) Why did Guccifer 2.0 release the opposition research files, when those files could prove to be harmful to Donald Trump, if he was indeed a hacker on a mission to elect Donald Trump? 3) Did the DNC collude with Guccifer 2.0 in directing him to release the opposition research files? 4) Why did Guccifer 2.0 continue to release opposition research files, when he later released an archive of Sarah Palin’s Twitter messages on July 14, and the first page of the Trump Foundation’s income tax form and the Trump financial report on October 18, if he had already proven that he had hacked the DNC? and 5) What specific part of the software Crowdstrike used to analyze the DNC server would show that only two files were taken, when presumably hackers were in the DNC system for weeks on end?

If the answer is that the DNC or Crowdstrike did not have full visibility into the scale of intrusions on their security infrastructure, is it a coincidence that the only files the DNC or Crowdstrike thought were missing at the time were the two opposition research files, which if released would be damaging only to Trump and not Clinton, and that Guccifer the next day did indeed release those two opposition research files that are harmful to Trump but not Clinton? Those two files were entitled “Donald Trump Report” and “2016 GOP presidential candidates” in the releases. Are these opposition files that Guccifer 2.0 released the same ones that the DNC is referring to, or was Guccifer 2.0 holding on to even more harmful information, and released the Trump report and GOP report to deflect from it? All of the information from the Trump report comes from public sources. On the other hand, why would Guccifer 2.0 release the opposition research if he was supposed to be helping Donald Trump, if he could prove that he has hacked the DNC by sharing any of the 38 other files he subsequently leaked in later months?  

Contact Steve Cunningham at [email protected]


America War Afghanistan

By James E. Horn

I am a stalwart supporter of President Trump.
President Trump has listened to his generals.
President Trump has spoken.


Barack Hussein Obama’s legacy includes cashiering hundreds of very capable, competent flag grade officers whose first loyalty was to America. After gutting the military’s leadership, Obama promoted less capable, less competent and very accommodating acolytes such as National Security Council Chief (General) McMaster, Secretary of Defense (General) James “Mad Dog” Mattis, and Current White House Chief of Staff (General) Kelly, all of whom ae “soft” on Islam.


While I wholeheartedly support President Trump, I have less confidence with his “generals”, who are leading President Trump down the wrong path, especially in Afghanistan

In my book, EXPERIENCING ISLAM, I lauded President Bush for going after the Taliban’s and al Qaeda’s leadership in Afghanistan but cautioned against a prolonged involvement. I wrote to President bush and Condi Rice pointing out:

“The British spent enormous treasure, and thousands of lives lost trying to bring a modicum of civilization to Afghanistan. After 160 wasted years, the British left after being handed their butts in a basket.
More recently, the Russians spent enormous treasure and thousands of lives squandered during their 20-year sojourn with a half of a million troops. They were handed their backsides on a silver platter as they left with their tails between their legs.”

We are seemingly on track to repeat the failed British and Russian experiences in Afghanistan!
I won’t begin to question or second-guess General Mattis’ competence as a military strategist, as a warrior. However, after sixteen years of engagement in Afghanistan, we have not won. Throwing more troops (with accompanying body bags) into that fight essentially doing the same old thing may have some value, but may not be a comprehensive winning strategy. It’s Déjà Vu all over again. This is sucking President Trump into the wicked quagmire of Afghanistan.

At this point, a military presence is useful if not essential. But a broader strategy other than merely sending more of America’s most precious treasure (military fighters) into that sand pit is essential.


Afghanistan is a tribal land. The people of Afghanistan are not nationalists, they are simple (primitive) minded fundamentalist Islamic tribals who do not speak a common national language, who do not share a common sense of national pride, identity, or ownership. They do share a common hatred of filthy unbelieving Infidels and Kafirs – us, as well as a deep distrust of one-another. They want us out of their lives and off of their soil while they want to impose their bigoted and biased ways on us. Being followers of Mohammed who was a very vengeful person, they are likewise vengeful. Americans have killed many Afghans and they will never ever forget or forgive us. They will continue killing us wherever and whenever they can. We’ve seen this hundreds of times where they join the Afghan army or police and then we we look the other way, they gun us down.


They are patient in a timeless way and will wait us out, and kill as many of us as they can in the process as they did the British and the Russians.


Afghanistan has two major export products, hand woven carpets and opium. The peanut farmer, Jimmy Carter decided many years ago to get the farmers of Afghanistan to abandon their opium poppy production with his “alternative crops” program. He decided that better nourishment of the people of Afghanistan would be essential with an alternate program that would also generate money from exports. One of those ideas was to get farmers into the honey producing business.


Jimmy Carter sent dozens of DEA agents to school to learn all about managing honey bees and producing high quality (and high quantities) of honey. It was a wonderful idea, that backfired in a major way because of its shortsightedness and lack of proper planning and execution. Carter expected the rich and powerful of Afghanistan to build roads and work to develop all of the infrastructure and facilities to make this work, and to abandon their generating multiples of millions of dollars from their opium trade.


After their training, the DEA agents climbed on board cargo planes and returned to opium producing countries like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Burma, etc. and set up shop training local farmers how to manage their bees that the DEA agents provided. It was all wonderful, until the program failed. The farmers produced tons of honey and their warehouses were soon filled with honey. There was no way to market their products.


Within one season, those many impoverished farmers abandoned their honey producing business and bees, and returned to producing opium. A side effect is that these super productive productive bees were loosed in the poppy fields and opium production increased by 400% – all thanks to Jimmy Carter.

We need a well thought out and planned strategy to deal with Afghanistan. After sixteen+ years, we Americans are weary of this never ending conflict and wary of deeper military involvement without an accompanying strategy to actually prevail.


Afghanistan is warlike and violent and has been so since the Islamists invaded, murdered all of the peaceful Buddhists and Hindus to create their Islamic utopian culture of hatred, fear, poverty, suffering ignorance, and betrayals.

In my book, EXPERIENCING ISLAM, I offered effective as well as strong suggestions on how to tame a wild Afghanistan. Some were draconian, but by overwhelmingly terrorizing the terrorist, we could win. I’ll move forward to the present and suggest consideration: That Afghanistan be amalgamated to be a republic with distinctive “states” in accordance with tribal boundaries. This may or not be a viable solution with Sunnis and Shia in the mix, but worth looking into. Alternatively, dividing Afghanistan into smaller, independent nations based on their unique tribal, linguistic, religious, and cultural systems could create nations somewhat beholding to or even appreciative of the United States. Consideration or inclusion of these or related thoughts by the “geniuses” in Washington might serve to ease our involvement and assist in an effective solution or solutions along with a viable exit strategy from a prolonged, burdensome war.

How Donald Trump Orchestrated ‘the Greatest Land Deal in History’

By: John Grayson.

“Psychological operations” campaigns, or psy-ops, are “planned operations designed to convey selected information and indicators to audiences, to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.”

What President Trump did at the UN on December 23, 2016 was on a whole other level. It wasn’t just a “call to arms”. It was a layman’s psy-op, from September to April. The best stories, however, always start in medias res.

With one phone call, Donald Trump gained control over the Israeli/Palestine peace process, effectively destroyed the legacies of Obama, Clinton, and Carter, started up the (eventual) Muslim ban, banked (future) favors from Egypt, and stumped the UN into (again) showing their true anti-Semitic colors.

Here’s how he did it.


Friday, December 23:

Egypt was planning to submit a resolution to the UN that would’ve declared the West Bank as occupied territory, including the Western Wall.

Donald phoned Egypt, whom promptly canceled their plans. New Zealand, Senegal, Malaysia, and Venezuela therefore decided to submit the Resolution instead. The Security Council, which has 15 members, voted 14 – 0 in favor of the resolution. The United States (under Obama) however, abstained, whereas previous American foreign policy had dictated a veto.

While Obama claimed that he had nothing to do with the resolution, this was one of the few times the United States had failed to support Israel. Of the 226 anti-Israel Resolutions passed previously, only 17 were abstained from by American foreign policy, making this a significant event for all sides.

The UN Resolution 2334, thusly adopted, “reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity.” As well, the resolution also condemns acts of terrorism, provocative actions, incitement and inflammatory rhetoric – heavily implied against the Palestinian side. “Settlements” include anything annexed after the 1967 war with Jordan.

So on the face of it, it would appear that Obama’s abstaining is in line with his administration’s policies – as a means of supposedly punishing Israel for building the settlements while providing a condemnation of rhetoric that leads to conflict – but not in line with American foreign policy.

Yet while this was the opposite of long-standing American foreign policy doctrine with regards to the two-state solution and the inherent borders therein, this course of action was the best thing possible for Israel, and while it looks like Donald was finally stumped, he’s really just playing the part.

During the Primaries, Marco Rubio mentioned that Donald’s stance of neutrality was anti-Israel in nature. Rubio would be right in that regard, if he were dealing with any other situation wherein one’s anti-war pacifism would only serve to support the inflammatory rhetoric of the opportunity-stealing opposition. However, Donald always has another trick up his sleeve.


Donald’s nimble navigating:

The thing to remember is that Donald is pro-Jewish even though he puts on the guise of being indifferent. After all, his daughter’s Jewish, his grandchildren are Jewish, he grew up in New York City and entered the Real Estate Business. Simply put, he has always been pro-Israel:

“You know, you have both sides, really, but one side in particular growing up learning that these are the worst people these people are the worst people, etc. etc.,” he said. “I was with a very prominent Israeli the other day, he says it’s impossible because the other side has been trained from the time they’re children to hate Jewish people.”

As evidenced by his Facebook message a day before the UN vote, despite claiming he’d be neutral, Donald really plays all sides in pursuit of the greater goal. And with the Facebook post and the phone call, Donald changed the game:

“As the United States has long maintained, peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians will only come through direct negotiations between the parties, and not through the imposition of terms by the United Nations. This puts Israel in a very poor negotiating position, and is extremely unfair to all Israelis.”

First off, in even commenting on the matter, he solidified the fact that Obama would abstain purely on the principle of the matter, and ensured that the Democrats would only double-down on their support (due to their irrational hatred of Donald himself).

Previously, the Obama administration wasn’t sure how they’d vote, and were virtue-signaling to gauge liberal reactions. Donald forced them to choose on his terms. Thus, whichever side he took, Obama had to take the opposite. The US Government only ever had two options; abstain, or veto. An Agreement would never be on the table as long as Israel maintained relations diplomatically, and Donald advocating for a “veto” ensured that Obama only had one option left – to abstain.

More importantly, Donald united even more GOP establishment Republicans to his cause. He now had a carrot to dangle over them, as they need Israel to exist to fulfill their religious “End Of Days” prophecy as foretold in the Book of Revelations:

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said in a statement, “[T]he consequences of this disgraceful U.N. resolution should be severe. I look forward to working with Sen. Graham, and with the incoming Administration of President-elect Trump, to significantly reduce or even eliminate U.S. funding of the United Nations, and also to seriously reconsider financial support for the nations that supported this resolution.”

Now we know Donald was responsible for the immediate result, but is this detrimental to his incoming Presidential policy? A reversal of campaign terms (like Obama did to Israel several times over, much to Alan Dershowitz’s chagrin)?


See, Donald isn’t sabotaging his own platform, he’s sabotaging everyone else’s by only appearing to destroy his.

And he’s played people before.

He did it at the Colorado Convention, when he threatened to go 3rd Party if the GOP chose Cruz. He made both himself and Ben Carson into “media victims/underdogs” in highlighting how Cruz stole votes from Carson, as well as in how Cruz was playing by unfair voting rules with Delegates. The same happened with “Pussygate” and his pre-emptive public apology.

He didn’t attack the issue head-on, he made it seem like he was vulnerable. It’s classic misdirection on his part, and while the liberal media was focused on the superficiality of how Donald presents himself, he’d already advanced three, four, five steps ahead.

Trump is no stranger to priming worldviews; he’s working overtime to combat Obama’s policies at every step. After Obama helped pass the UN Resolution, Trump again started enforcing the worldview that everything Barack Obama does turns out terribly. He was, of course, doing this before, but he really ramped up the rhetoric afterwards.

One of his latest Tweets at the time was very dramatic:

Donald J. Trump on Twitter

The world was gloomy before I won – there was no hope. Now the market is up nearly 10% and Christmas spending is over a trillion dollars!

He was actively hammering home the point that Obama was a failure as a President, and that this is simply another one of his terrible decisions.

Donald J. Trump on Twitter

not anymore. The beginning of the end was the horrible Iran deal, and now this (U.N.)! Stay strong Israel, January 20th is fast approaching!

Donald J. Trump on Twitter

Doing my best to disregard the many inflammatory President O statements and roadblocks.Thought it was going to be a smooth transition – NOT!

As petty as it sounds, he’s even resorted to taking the legacy of Obama’s catchphrase.

Donald J. Trump on Twitter

The U.S. Consumer Confidence Index for December surged nearly four points to 113.7, THE HIGHEST LEVEL IN MORE THAN 15 YEARS! Thanks Donald!

Imagine that tweet later being appended with “Obama tried and failed to bring peace to the Middle East for 8 years. I did it in 8 months. Sad!”.

In the media landscape, Donald might appear to have “lost”, but it’s all posturing.  In fact, shortly after, Trump was already considering inviting Israeli PM Netanyahu to the White House as well as moving the American Embassy to West Jerusalem (a section of land even Palestinians officially admit is Israeli territory).

Of course, this isn’t to say that Donald has ensured his victory in a peace deal, but he completely defined the narrative of things to come. A false sense of (Obama’s) security, and people start to believe the lie.

But what’s most important is that Donald just dragged the Palestinian Authority kicking and screaming to the table they’ve always shouted about wanting a seat at:

“Well, Iran has done it again. Taken two of our people and asking for a fortune for their release. This doesn’t happen if I’m president!”

This nutshell of a foreign policy will (now) also extend to “Palestine”, which has kidnapped plenty of Israeli civilians and soldiers before, demanding the release of thousands more Palestinian terrorist prisoners in an exchange.

Now that Donald is our President, this Islamic sabotage will no longer be an acceptable option under a Trump administration.

What also won’t be acceptable are Islamist terror cells in Israel. You know, things Obama never cared to mediate with in his weak eight years as a mediating President…


It’s like playing football and scoring on your own team (Obama BTFO):

Obama is really, really bad at foreign diplomacy, as “he has alienated the Saudis, the Egyptians, the Jordanians, the Emirates and other allies by his actions and inactions with regard to Iran, Syria, Egypt and Iraq”. As a contrast, Donald appointed David Freidman as Israeli Ambassador.

For those unawares, David Friedman believes that Palestinian mayhem, rather than the settlements, are to blame (to put it lightly). The Palestinian Leadership considers David’s opinion to be a “green light” to Israeli “extremists” and “racists”.

Bit of an odd reaction to take, isn’t it? Everyone I don’t like is an extremist and racist? Where have we heard that before?

Weird, since if Israel were an apartheid, as Palestinians claim, one wouldn’t be able to vote, work, gain citizenship, reside in, marry, etc. if they weren’t Jewish – everything they can do in Israel. The crux of it is that the “minority” feel they are oppressed, when the reality highlights everything differently. Simply put, they are professional victims, and because no one challenges their narrative, they remain as such.

Obama’s Resolution calls for a two state solution. This is incredibly impractical because the thing we have to understand about the Palestinian Authority is that calling for a two-state solution is more socially acceptable than calling for Israel to not have one at all. For the Palestinians, it’s never been about “settlements” or “UN Statehood recognizance”. It’s all Taqiyya (professional Islamic lying) designed to cripple the stance of the Israelis as much as possible, until all the land is sequestered away.

And this was the official Obama administration policy as well:

“The United States acted with one primary objective in mind: to preserve the possibility of the two state solution, which every U.S. administration for decades has agreed is the only way to achieve a just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians,” Kerry said Friday. “Two states is the only way to ensure Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state, living in peace and security with its neighbors, and freedom and dignity for the Palestinian people.”

See, the Palestinian Authority rejects the Holocaust wholesale (even though they actively participated in it). Hamas calls for the destruction of Israel in their Charter, and the PLO (Fatah’s predecessor) was responsible for the terrorist attacks in the 70s and 80s – the most famous of which was the Munich Massacre – when an Israeli Olympic team was murdered. Not to mention everything else, like the frequent hijackings in the 60s and 70s of Israeli commercial planes.

Additionally, after an earlier attempt to overthrow the Jordanian kingdom (referred to as Black September), the Palestinians realized they were running out of legitimacy in terms of their status as a “victimized” people. This is actually why the Oslo Accords (based on the 1978 Camp David Accords) happened, since Israel didn’t want to govern a hostile population and Jordan and Egypt definitely didn’t want to take them either (the three places considered in the British Mandate of Palestine and the Sevras Treaty). Funny then, how the First Intifada (or, “uprising”) only came to an end after the paperwork was signed. Was it a peace accord, or a ransom negotiation tactic?

As /u/high4power (an Israeli Redditor) states:

Even after the existential wars. We were faced with daily bombers and attacks during active negotiations in the early 90s, and again later by suicide bombers in the early 2000s, and again later when we took those settlements out of gaza with no conditions (Hamas was voted in, sworn on Israel destruction) So we received tens of thousands of rockets in exchange. Consider that anyone who is 21+ lived through those backstabs.

The narrative that jews are subhuman and should be ethnically cleansed from the land of our forefathers is the norm in the palestinian society, which western media often fails to report. We’ve been fooled, especially when we reached out our arm to peace.

Simply put, reality does not have a Palestinian bias. Through Taqiyya, the Palestinians subvert and destroy – and the media and “inter-governmental organizations” / “activism industry” helps them amplify such actions.

And Obama is definitely practicing Taqiyya, as he did with the Iran Deal wherein he gave Iran nuclear capabilities with the Deal in order to build up the country as an excuse for a future invasion.

A sweet side-benefit for Obama was the inherent delegitimization of Israel, a country he’s never respected. It was all Taqiyya, and it would have worked here if it hadn’t been for Donald.

So how did Obama extraordinarily mess up (something Donald has taken full advantage of)?

He passed the UN Resolution under the wrong Chapter!

UN Resolution 2334 was passed under Chapter VI, rather than VII. The former is for resolutions meant for peaceful negotiation and mediation, whereas the latter is for resolutions that require the use of the Security Council’s military forces.

If this deal truly was about peaceful negotiations between two nations already hostile towards each other, then the matter would have been referred to under Chapter VII because the end goal in that format is always to prevent war. Or as VP Mike Pence states, “Peace through Strength”.

In fact, Chapter VII is always a better fit to actually maintain anything more than a courtesy ceasefire – which Hamas uses to stockpile up on food and weapons – if one is truly looking for long-lasting peace. That Chapter allows the Council to “determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression” and to take military and nonmilitary action to “restore international peace and security”.

The Obama administration was thus fully aware that since this resolution was passed under Chapter VI rather than Chapter VII of the UN Charter, there is no enforcement mechanism required to implement it, that it is not necessarily binding and UN military presence isn’t granted.

Obama’s aim was to give the Palestinians a boost in support and blame the (eventual) breakdown in the peace process on the Trump administration…

Therefore, the entire resolution either highlights that the Palestinian intifadas don’t matter, or they very much do. In this scenario, where there’s been 70 years of war, you only pass something in Chapter VI if you’re angling for UN Statehood in an otherwise purely symbolic gesture with no intent of actually following through. Because it’s evidence that “mediation” is never going to work without military force backing it.

But this Trumpian strategy only works if Palestine is pressured into actually accepting Statehood status, instead of just whining about it. Trump defined any weaseling of Arab nations as a “put up or shut up” moment. Fortunately, given the change of circumstances in which this Resolution was passed, an educated guess can be made as to how it will all end… in Cairo.

What’s extremely telling is that Egypt wanted to pass the UN Resolution first – despite being the long-standing ally of Israel. It’s nothing personal, just incredibly long-term business. It’s not that Egypt is trying to de-legitimize Israel as Obama did, it’s that they’re trying to end the Palestinian “cause” once and for all. They’re tired of playing “politically correct” at the expense of Egyptian lives.

See, Egypt also instituted a blockade after too many Palestinians were utilizing state services (like construction companies and ambulances) to smuggle in weapons for the jihadi cause.

Egypt’s end goal was to recognize Palestine so the next skirmish that occurred would mean Palestine (and all their leadership) were committing acts of war, “justified” for retribution (not necessarily on behalf of Israel).

If necessary, some could be tried for War Crimes, and that is why the Palestinian Authority would previously shout about being accepted, but always shirk away from actual state recognition. It’s like a restaurant owner who yells about being up for certification, saying their kitchens are the cleanest, but never goes through with the inspection because the Health Inspector would find rat excrement in the soup.

Donald, however, understood what Egypt was going for, and framed it accordingly by making that phone call.

While the reversal in Egypt’s opinion is odd (in submitting a proposal and then rescinding it), it revealed a deeper thinking of Donald’s – the resolution couldn’t be passed by Egypt because they needed plausible deniability, they needed diplomacy. The proposal’s rescinding only happened because Donald asked them to do so.

The importance of the phone call in the decision-making process  was actually confirmed by the Sissi government.

To that end, recognizance of Palestine (and the legacy of the brokerage regarding the Suez Canal) has been important for ex-President Jimmy Carter, and he, in championing the Palestinian cause, just got played.


Donald’s proposal to ban all Muslims (Jimmy Carter/Bill Clinton BTFO):

The Resolution was ultimately sponsored by countries that have no interests strategically in Israel – Venezuela, Malaysia, Senegal and New Zealand. Deeply, deeply misinformed countries with no dog in the fight.

As Reddit User UWarchaeologist explains why:

The most NZers ever hear about these things is “settlements on occupied Palestinian land breaking international law”. They don’t stop and ask ‘what is a settlement’, what is ‘occupied’, what is ‘Palestinian’ and how do we know whose land it is, or what law applies to it. Most people would just accept that statement at face value, especially when they see ostensibly “neutral” people & countries who ought to know the complexities of the situation agreeing with the UN resolution, and that’s it – the Israel govt must be in the wrong, case closed. My impression is that NZers believe they took a moral and idealistic stand against “illegal settlements”, they want to stick up for the underdog and don’t see themselves as part of some big conspiracy against Israel or Israelis, even though they are justifiably pissed off at how Mossad was using NZ passports. So yeah, that’s not really a sense that there is even another side and an historical basis to the settler argument… so “what we have here is a failure to communicate” – among many other failures of course 😦

As Carter mentions (who, remember, is the anti-war pacifist ex-president whose personal morality enabled the Ayatollah Khomeini to revolutionize Iran):

“I am convinced that the United States can still shape the future of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict before a change in presidents, but time is very short, ” Carter wrote. “The simple but vital step this administration must take before its term expires on Jan. 20 is to grant American diplomatic recognition to the state of Palestine.”

Carter’s sentiment is exactly what Donald wanted, because both Obama and Carter unwittingly played into Trump’s hands. Now the Palestinians have to actually follow through for once in attaining UN Statehood! So how does that affect them (in ways it didn’t before)? Why will Palestinian resistance finally matter, in following the rules of warfare?


The Fourth Geneva Convention:

First, let’s do away with any notion that the UN is some bastion of morality and peace in the conflict. In 2015 alone the UN General Assembly adopted 20 resolutions singling out Israel for criticism — and only 3 resolutions on the rest of the world combined. This is despite the Palestinian Authority still paying terrorists salaries, and “losing” over 1.6 billion in aid money

The views of the Palestinian populace are not much better.

The UN has never been neutral (even though they proclaim to be):

The Jewish state is the U.N.’s scapegoat for anything and everything,” Greenfield continued. “These days, the United Nations is a forum for Islamist powers and the rotting remains of the Communist front to continue its war against the free world while seducing weak-minded nations into going along.”

UNRWA schools are turning out students who want to fight for ISIS.  The UN’s email system has been used to distribute child pornography. UN staff members have smuggled drugs, attacked each other with knives and pool cues, not to mention a tractor. This month the UN marked Anti-Corruption Day despite refusing to fight its own corruption. The former President of the UN General Assembly was arrested on bribery charges last year. He had also headed UNICEF’s executive board. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is battling accusations of bribery.

So why is the Fourth Geneva Convention so important?

The Convention essentially makes it illegal for nation-states to either move populations, or establish settlements on occupied land. While violating the Fourth Geneva Convention offers no sanctions, there are talks of this new resolution justifying cases to be sent before the International Criminal Court in The Hague. Basically, there is a code of conduct that both nations must adhere to in order to not be accused of committing war crimes in the first place).

Remember the rhetoric within the UN Resolution, which “reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity”?

the resolution makes it possible to file lawsuits against Israel and Israeli officials as well as Israeli citizens involved in settlement activity at the International Criminal Court and for sanctions to be imposed on Israel both by the UN and by individual countries”.

The Palestinian Authority has been maneuvering to gain the status to take the State of Israel to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

However, neither Israel nor the U.S. are signatories to the Rome Statute which created the ICC, and entities must have the status of states in order to have standing at the ICC.

It’s a double-slap to Palestinians, because not only does it superficially blame Israelis (as is UN tradition), but deeply within, the clause’s existence ensures that the Fourth Geneva Convention is forever intertwined to the Palestinian cause. It doesn’t matter if Palestinians aren’t facing accusations of building settlements, both nations now have to follow the code of conduct set out in the “War Crimes” legislation.

But to the Palestinians, it’s really never been about the “settlements” (which comprise 3% of actual land in the West Bank), it’s always been about the land Israel won in their existential wars after 1967.


Those Settlements:

So why are the settlements important to Israel? Because they were de facto spoils of war. And why are the condemnations of violence important to the Palestinians? Because it “undermines their right” to Statehood.

This Resolution may not have been legally binding, but Donald made it spiritually binding. He’s forced the hand of the Palestinians (just as Obama inadvertently did in filing the resolution under the wrong Chapter).

In fact, the argument regarding the settlement’s legality is based on Fourth Geneva Convention, an international treaty governing the treatment of civilians in a war zone or in territory occupied in the course of a war. It was adopted in 1949 as a humanitarian measure in reaction to the annexation of Czechoslovakia by Hitler’s Third Reich. Article 49 of the convention forbids the transfer by an occupying power of its civilians into the occupied territory. Note that the annexation of the West Bank by Jordan occurred in 1947. No one claimed it was illegal.

That’s why the UN is so hypocritical. The Fourth Geneva Convention / Article 49 was always passed as an act of collusion, similar to what we’ve seen last month. The UN is a mouthpiece for the will of the Arab Nations – it always has been. Just as it was during the League of Nations.

Extraordinary tolerance has been granted towards Islamic Nations by those suffering from white guilt, and only now is it so drastically showing. It is no different than the Democratic National Party standing for Progressivism yet promoting Islam which kills gays and stones women.

According to

The territory was slated under the 1947 U.N. Partition Plan to become an Arab state alongside the Jewish state of Israel. When the Palestinians rejected the partition plan and refused to set up their state, Jordan captured the territory and annexed it. Only two countries, Britain and Pakistan, recognized Jordan’s annexation of the West Bank as valid and legal.

Israel maintains that the Geneva Convention doesn’t apply to the West Bank. The treaty states at the outset, in Article 2, that it addresses situations in which one signatory state captures the territory of another signatory state in the course of war. Israel captured the West Bank in 1967 from Jordan, which had no legal claim to it, so it didn’t capture the territory “of” another state.

The issue has been a source of frustration for U.S. administrations ever since Arabs attacked Israel in 1967, only to lose the West Bank and Gaza and then demand the return of the territories. Israel gave back Gaza but its government maintains the tiny Jewish state needs to retain the West Bank and allow settlers there in order to maintain a buffer zone against terrorists and any future invasion.

This is actually a great thing, because according to Foreign Policy:

“British and U.S. diplomats, as well as the American and European press, may be fooled by Palestinian and Peace Now complaints that Bibi is gobbling up Palestinian territory, but the settlers live in those places and know better — construction is slowing down.”

Here’s the official settlement activity report, as released by Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics. Note that how the only reason we hear about “settlements being built” is by the “activist” groups on the ground (the exact same thing we’ve seen in Syria) – many funded by Soros with the clear goal of delegitimizing Israel’s status in the world stage.

You know what the “activist groups on the ground” don’t report (because it’s not in their interest)?

War Crimes (of the 4th Geneva Convention, again, the very charge the Palestinians try to pin on the Israelis).

The Palestinian Authority is no stranger to those accusations, especially during the last (third) intifada!

Here’s the admission of the Palestinian Authority stating it is intentional and religious in nature.

Here’s a report on schools teaching students to hate Jews.

Here’s a bus driver being stabbed by palestinian children passengers as part of the stabbing intifada.

Here’s a random civilian being stabbed by two palestinian teenagers as part of the stabbing intifada.

Here’s another video of palestinian teens trying to stab a Jewish civilian.

Here’s a video of a woman stabbing an Israeli security guard civilian.

Here’s a video of a Palestinian children being taught stabbing games.

Here’s a story about a 19-year old Palestinian killer whose name now bears a stadium in honour of killing 2 Israelis and wounding a mother and her baby.

And who could forget the lovable Farfur, Hamas’ Mickey Mouse – in this episode martyred by the Jews?

None of this will be tolerated by Donald’s administration. When Palestine is granted official UN Statehood, they will be finally held accountable for war crimes, with the “authority” coming from the very institution they thought had finally stumped Trump.

The 4th Convention applies to non-combatants, members of armed forces who have laid down their arms, and combatants who are hors de combat (out of the fight) due to wounds, detention, or any other cause shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, with the following prohibitions:

(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) taking of hostages;

(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment

(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

All of which the Palestinian Authority and Hamas have violated in recent years.

And here’s the best part: it’s a good pretext for Arab nations to declare war, due to “a violation of UN law”.

Because of the incorrect Chapter filing, and the peer pressure to become signatories to conventions and ratified resolutions they’d rather not be a part of, eventually the UN Resolution will have to be voided by the Palestinians. The filing of the Resolution under the wrong Chapter means that if they want to pursue anything other than peace (and have military strength to back it up) they themselves will have to do the very thing they blame the Israelis of.

And while it is possible that the Arab nations could convince the UN to deploy troops against Israel, on behalf of the PLO, regardless of the logistics of its possibility, it would still look really, really bad diplomatically. Even though they’ve performed such actions before against Israel, they’ve never been held accountable like they will be since the Resolution passed. If it were to happen that the very organization that demands its members follow the UN Resolutions was working back-room deals to violate their own decrees, well, that level of collusion would be completely contradictory in its nature. The UN would become redundant overnight.

In fact, the only nation (and terrorist proxy group) that could really go to bat for the Palestinians is Iran and Hezbollah. And even that relationship will be tenuous (if it’s even possible) as Iran is comprised of Shia Muslims, and Palestinians are majority Sunni Muslims, embroiled in their own religious sectarian war.

As for the other usual suspects, as Alan Dershowitz previously mentioned, Iraq still hasn’t recovered from Bush era (through actions led by Obama), Egypt and Jordan are steadfast allies with Israel, Libya was destabilized, Syria’s undergoing a civil war, and Saudi Arabia is busy fighting ISIS/won’t be able to get America to do their dirty work.

Indeed, thanks to the boost of confidence they received from the previous Obama administration, they’re now officially a threat. If fact, it is questionable if another reason the Iran Deal was made was specifically to help the Palestinians as their ally in the long run.

The beautiful part about giving the Palestinians Statehood also means that any historical arguments regarding the logistics of war are then completely off the table. Should Palestine start a war with Israel (both being recognized by the UN), the outcome of that war then sets the precedent. To lose in 1967 is one thing. To lose in 2017 will be another.

It’ll be fair game, a clean slate. Not only for the evidence of previous war crimes committed by the Palestinians, but also for actual “land takeovers” and “hostage takings”.

Because you cannot pretend to be for peace and then commit acts of kidnapping, rocket launching, knifing attacks, van attacks, school bus attacks and then claim to be a victim.

And this, of course (if it happens), will only strengthen Donald’s proposal to completely ban all Muslims (rather than those from specific countries). Donald’s been wishy-washy in public about the exact requirements for the ban – first claiming that a full and complete ban would be in place until they could figure out what was going on. Then adjusting his views to include extreme vetting (albeit no contradiction in grammatical terms actually exists).

But why re-invent the wheel to keep out dangerous radicals, when Carter showed us how he did it (a guideline for Donald to follow, no doubt)?

During the hostage crisis, Jimmy Carter banned Iranian students as a result of the Iranian turmoils, an event bolstered heavily by his anti-war pacifism. If there’s an uptick in Jihadi Palestinians, Donald will be ready.

As Carter did to block Iranian immigration:

“The Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly.”

Indeed, the past six presidents have all used the executive power to bar different classes of immigrants:

“Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 states: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

The funny thing is that had Carter not gone on a crusade of pro-Palestinian advocacy, he’d be remembered as a great leader in the region.

Carter maneuvered the Israeli-Egyptian landmark peace treaty. Israel gave the Sinai peninsula back, Egypt agreed to station no soldiers in the Sinai without Israel okaying it, and Egypt and Israel both got the most military weapons and funding from the US amongst American allies. And it wasn’t even equipment that we were going to use, it was obsolete equipment that our own Army wouldn’t buy back from the paramilitary organizations we contracted out labor to!

Egypt and Israel have been peaceful since 1978, and Carter was a large part of that. And that is why Egypt “betrayed” Israel – they both have the same Palestinian problem. Israel and Egypt are allies and both have border enforcements and blockades in place against Gazan/West Bank terrorism. If Carter had understood this and not sided with the Palestinians in spirit, he would have furthered Middle Eastern relations even more!

But he didn’t, and in doing so trashed his legacy.

Funnily enough, even at the “failed” Camp David Summit, hosted by none other than Bill Clinton himself, a man Donald has raked over the coals (in every stance possible) for the last 2 years, he’s been given congratulations by Liberals and Republicans alike for at least recognizing his errors. Bill saw that the problem wasn’t the Jewish negotiating side, but the Palestinians.

In reference to Yasser Arafat congratulating him on trying at the Summit, Clinton replied, “I am not a great man. I am a failure, and you have made me one.”.

In pulling off this deal, Donald trashed the final vestiges of what remains of the legacies of Clinton, Obama, and Carter – all the while setting up the machinations to not only support his Muslim ban (should the need arise), but also to deal with the Palestinian (and by proxy, the Saudi Arabian) problem that both Israel and Egypt were having. With one phone call.

4D Chess, folks. 4D Chess.

The best part of all this? This UN mishap occurred under Obama’s administration, meaning if anything went wrong at that stage, Obama’s tenure would have been to blame.

But Donald was giving so much of himself to this deal, what did he get out of it? Why go through with it in the first place, and what were the ramifications if he didn’t?

Well, Donald’s got a strengthened relationship with a fresh “prince” of Egypt – a man who had only been in power since 2014 – himself fighting the Deep State of the Middle East.


Abdul al-Sissi, the “Prince” of Egypt: 

Whatever happened in their meeting, it must have been a pretty big deal for the humanitarian aid worker to be released, from a President who had formerly, and formally, stated “Aya Hegazy is a judiciary matter, as a president I don’t have the authority to intervene”.

We are very happy to have Aya back home,” President Trump remarked, “It’s a great honor to have her in the Oval Office with her brother.”

A senior administration official told the Washington Post that behind the scenes, President Trump told top aides, “I want her to come home.’ More importantly, the official said there was “no quid pro quo offered for her release,”  i.e., it was not a trade off.

However, Antony Blinken, the former deputy Secretary of State under President Obama, said thatwhile he’s pleased Hijazi has been released, he’s skeptical that al-Sissi received nothing in return for her freedom.”


Who is Aya Hegazy?:

Aya Hegazy (the American aid worker imprisoned for three years in an Egyptian jail) was released by Abdel Fattah al-Sissi’s government late April. The deal was brokered at the White House on April 3rd. She was released two weeks later. Her trial acquittal came on the 17th after her trial charges were dropped on the 16th.

The Background Story: On March 23, the Cairo Criminal Court adjourned the hearing of the case against the Belady Foundation for the Care of Street Children to May 21, 2016. The special committee summoned to review the evidence has claimed it was not qualified to do so. This is the sixth time the trial has been postponed. The eight defendants, including Egyptian-American Aya Hegazy and her husband, Mohamed Hassanein, have spent nearly two years in pretrial detention. They face charges ranging from running an unlicensed organization to sex trafficking and child abuse.

Basically, Aya was facing trumped up charges, and Trump lobbied al-Sissi for her release behind closed doors.

So who is al-Sissi? Al-Sissi helped orchestrate the Egyptian coup – and in the aftermath of the ousting of former President Mohamed Morsi in 2013, Egypt banned the Muslim Brotherhood and labeled the group a terrorist organization. Reasons for demanding Morsi’s resignation included accusations of increasing authoritarianism and his pushing through an Islamist agenda disregarding the predominantly secular opposition or the rule of law. Prior to Morsi, however, Hosni Mubarak had been in power for 30 years. He was ousted in the 2011 protests.

Just before the meeting, however, Trump was being criticized for giving the appearance of not taking “human rights” seriously. The New York Times said that al-Sissi’s government has persecuted “violent and nonviolent Islamist groups with equal zeal and without due process. It has maligned and harassed human rights activists, rendering their work all but impossible. And it has smothered what remains of the political opposition.” Obvious bias of the NYT aside, even Tim Kaine lobbied against Trump for better awareness of Egypt’s treatment of jailed NGO workers:

“We are alarmed by the repeated delays in the trial and verdict for Ms. Hijazi,” a bipartisan group of senators, led by Tim Kaine (D-Va.), wrote in a letter to Trump on Monday. “She has been unjustly imprisoned since May 2014 and held on unsubstantiated charges related to her nonprofit’s efforts to educate and rehabilitate street children.”

This extended as far as the Middle East, where Trump was criticized for granting Sissi any kind of audience at the White House:

It was hard enough for human rights organizations to get former President Barack Obama to speak up about Hegazy’s case during his second term in office. Today, under President Trump, a man that has called the most brutal dictator in modern Egyptian history, a “fantastic guy”, Hegazy’s chances for freedom have been dashed.

As he welcomed al-Sissi to the White House, Trump unsurprisingly put aside concerns about Egypt’s human rights abuses. And so, Aya Hegazy, an American unjustly detained and blatantly persecuted by a foreign government, did not make the agenda. It seems, then, that Trump’s ‘America First’ principles are little more than empty rhetoric.

Note how this is after The Washington Post ran an op-ed in June 2016 stating that “the Obama administration was ignoring an American imprisoned in Egypt”!


The Secret Meeting:

Cairo appeared eager to push for a stronger bilateral relationship that it perceived would do more to benefit its interests than its strained relationship with the Obama administration.

The April 3rd meeting was publicly diagnosed in having four aims:

  1. securing U.S. support for Egypt’s counterterror interests,

  2. pressuring the United States to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization,

  3. promoting Egypt’s economic reform program, and

  4. presenting Egypt as a leading regional power.

Clandestinely, however, Al-Sissi felt the US was involved in what he refers to as the “fourth generation war”, U.S.-backed subversion intended to destroy the anti-Islamist movement within Egypt, and to relinquish control once again to Hosni Mubarak’s pro-Muslim Brotherhood forces.

Fourth-generation warfare, Sissi once explained to cadets at Egypt’s military academy, occurs when “modern communication channels, psychology and the media are . . . deployed to create divisions and harm Egypt from within,” according to the website Mada Masr.

The reason why Aya Hegazy was jailed under al-Sissi’s reign is because she was pro-Muslim Brotherhood (which is not good), working against al-Sissi’s anti-Islamist agenda. This is why al-Sissi didn’t want to release her.

Aya Hegazi was attempting to give “street children” a better life. She was attempting to lift children living in poverty out of their socio-economic class, something that is taboo in the Middle East.

It has long been known that the entirety of the Middle East has been a huge boon to human trafficking. Muslims literally invented the slave trade down in Africa.

Aya was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time…but how does “fourth-generation warfare” work exactly?


“The Press Is The Enemy”:

Donald has long decried the “all-talk, no-action politicians” of yesteryear, therefore his fulfillment of proving a solution to al-Sissi’s aforementioned Palestinian/UN problem meant that Egypt could now re-establish diplomatic ties on better terms, with a base level of trustworthiness between the two.

In Egypt, after two revolutions, there’s an information war going on for their minds, and it affects Americans too! The Washington Post and the New York Times are usually a conduit in “determining” the outlook on the Middle Eastern region.

“All these newspapers used to have foreign bureaus,” [Rhodes] said. “Now they don’t. They call us to explain to them what’s happening in Moscow and Cairo. Most of the outlets are reporting on world events from Washington. The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns. That’s a sea change. They literally know nothing.

The easiest way for the White House to shape the news, he explained, is from the briefing podiums, each of which has its own dedicated press corps. “But then there are sort of these force multipliers,” he said, adding, “We have our compadres, I will reach out to a couple people, and you know I wouldn’t want to name them — ”

I can name them,” I said, ticking off a few names of prominent Washington reporters and columnists who often tweet in sync with White House messaging.

Price laughed. “I’ll say, ‘Hey, look, some people are spinning this narrative that this is a sign of American weakness,’ ” he continued, “In fact it’s a sign of strength!”

“And I’ll give them some color,” Price continued, “and the next thing I know, lots of these guys are in the dot-com publishing space, and have huge Twitter followings, and they’ll be putting this message out on their own.”

This is something different from old-fashioned spin, which tended to be an art best practiced in person. In a world where experienced reporters competed for scoops and where carrying water for the White House was a cause for shame, no matter which party was in power, it was much harder to sustain a “narrative” over any serious period of time. Now the most effectively weaponized 140-character idea or quote will almost always carry the day, and it is very difficult for even good reporters to necessarily know where the spin is coming from or why.

The reason why the Deep State wants Egypt so badly is because it serves a crucial strategic role within the Middle East and Northern Africa.

Al-Sissi has positioned himself as a bulwark against religious extremism and as a strong leader who can maintain stability in Egypt, even as neighboring countries like Libya, Yemen, and Syria have collapsed under civil wars fueled by foreign intervention. On the other hand, the importance of Egypt’s relations with the Gulf allies should not be understated, as the security of the Gulf region is a part of Egypt’s as well.

For Trump, time is of the essence because in November 2016, when Obama was still President, Egypt signed a three-year $12 billion agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) that aimed to help the country achieve macroeconomic stability and promote inclusive growth. Egypt has also been negotiating funding agreements to fulfill its ambitious commitments in the IMF program with France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan and other G8 member countries.

According to The Nation, “the economy is on the brink of collapse, with skyrocketing inflation, massive debt, and austerity measures that recently helped secure a stringent new IMF loan”.

But that’s not to say that Egypt is only having problems outside its borders or within its economy, they’ve plenty of problems with jihadi violence right at home.

For example, al-Sissi and his government are major targets of ISIS-related terrorist attempts. Cairo has been battling militants in the Sinai since 2013; in late 2014, the militant group Ansar Beit al-Maqdis pledged loyalty to ISIS. Days later in Amman, Jordan, at the 28th Arab summit, al-Sissi (having already faced enough plots to round up 292 conspirators) called for a “comprehensive” approach – religious reformation.

Whether such reformation is possible is another story, but come to thing of it, the only ones who have a problem with al-Sissi are literal terrorists:

“We’re giving $1.5bn to an autocrat who has killed thousands of people, who has imprisoned tens of thousands of people, including Americans,” said Mohamed Soltan, an American who was jailed in Egypt for nearly two years. “We’re here to shed light on their plight.”

“We need to tell the world what kind of man Trump is bringing to the White House,” Soltan, who was jailed after attending a sit-in against Morsi’s removal in Cairo’s Rabaa al-Adawiya square, told Al Jazeera.

Hundreds of people were killed as security forces dispersed the protest on August 14, 2013. Soltan’s father, a Muslim Brotherhood official, was also arrested and imprisoned.

Mass trials have since been held for thousands of Brotherhood supporters [when someone is a “Brotherhood supporter, they’re literally ISIS”], and hundreds have received death sentences or lengthy prison terms.

No wonder Trump was able to strike a deal with al-Sissi, both are under constant threat of islamist extremism!

But now that Aya’s free, her saga is mostly over.

What remains is why Trump was able to orchestrate what he did at that time.

In later leaving for his trip to the Middle East, as well as simply not tweeting out derision against Fake News, he gave the liberal media enough rope to hang themselves. Each and every day the media rails against Trump, more and more people feel they’re being unfair against the President unconditionally.

This, however, wouldn’t be the first time a President railed against the media machine. The difference is that when JFK was railing against the Press, he was actually congratulating them. JFK was the Obama of his time, charming and beloved – they also covered up his sexual impropriety.

JFK knew the media was in his pocket given how hard he defended Nixon from the very same liberal slurs that could have befallen him:

“You have no idea what he’s been through. Dick Nixon is the victim of the worst press that ever hit a politician in this country. What they did to him in the Helen Gahagan Douglas race was disgusting.”

Unfortunately, in their haste to feel smug and superior, the liberal media is finally pushing out their last memo from the Deep State – to fire Kushner and blame Ivanka. It’s not because of the “Russian connection”, but because Trump consensually made him out to be his political pinata. Specifically, Donald left Kushner in charge of the “Israel-Palestine” peace-process, and since the Israel-Palestine peace process is considered the bulwark of the interventionist, globalist, Deep State, ShareBlue has had an initiative to get rid of Jared at all costs.

The “problem” is that Trump’s detractors don’t realize that once again, they’re playing into his hands.

As a member of the president’s family, Kushner had to retain a law firm to navigate him through potential legal obstacles to working for his father-in-law– specifically, an anti-nepotism law which states that “a public official may not appoint, employ, promote, advance, or advocate for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement, in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official.”

But his legal counsel, WilmerHale, concluded last month that precedent was laid for Kushner by Trump’s former rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton, who won a court case in the 1990s in her fight to chair a national task force on health care reform for her husband, then-president Bill Clinton. That case found that existing law bans appointments to agencies and departments, but not within the White House itself.

Indeed, by focusing on a non-existent Russian connection, by focusing on the son-in-law’s identity as a Jew (which is actually somewhat racist – the idea that only a Jew could solve the problem), he’s buying time he doesn’t even need to once again solve problems behind closed doors.

Since he started planning for Middle Eastern peace in September, took the beginning steps in December, and went head-on in April, he’d laid the framework before he’d even left America for his “goodwill” tour between Saudi Arabia and Israel.

People keep assuming things that are valuable to them are valuable to Trump. In harping on his “legacy in the making”, in slandering him for a Russia connection, they fail to realize that Trump doesn’t necessarily have the same goals as everyone else. His primary goal is to “fight for the American people”.

Either way, it looks like this is the continuation of a beautiful friendship.

2008, the Russians Hacked Obama’s Campaign Too

Obama’s Strategy for Stopping Russian Hacking was Telling Putin to ‘Cut it Out’

Washington Free Beacon
Why are we learning this now? It is a dereliction of duty to advise the American electorate, campaign operators and all later political candidates, regardless of the kind of race. Further, should we be blaming Obama on this and did he invite the FBI to investigate? If so, the matters of phishing operations and Russia should have been a clarion call.



Clinton presenting Lavrov with gift; “reset” button, Lavrov and Clinton pressing button together to “reset” US-Russian relations, UPSOUND: (English)
Clinton: “I wanted to present you with a little gift which represents what President Obama and Vice President Biden and I have been saying and that is: ‘We want to reset our relationship.”
Lavrov: “Let’s do it together.”
Clinton: “So we will do it together.”
Lavrov: “Thank you very much.”
Clinton: “We worked hard to get the right Russian word. Do you think we got it?”
Lavrov: “You got it wrong, it should be ‘perezagruzka’, this says ‘peregruzka’ which means ‘overcharged’.
Clinton: “Well we won’t let you do that to us, I promise.”


A round of talks between Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may have turned out well, but their meeting in Geneva got off to an odd and awkward start.
With reporters looking on, Clinton met Lavrov and handed him a gift – a green box tied in green ribbon.
He unwrapped it to reveal a “reset button,” a lighthearted reminder of Vice President Joe Biden’s recent remark that the administration of US President Barack Obama is hitting the reset button with Russia after years of friction during the Bush administration.
The trouble was, the Russian-language label the Americans put on top of the button had the wrong word.
Before she realised the mistake, Clinton assured Lavrov her staff had “worked hard” to get it right. Was it right? she inquired with a smile.
“You got it wrong,” Lavrov responded, also smiling. He said the word the Americans chose – “peregruzka” – meant “overloaded” or “overcharged” rather than “reset”.
Clinton quickly retorted with: “well, we won’t let you do that to us, I promise”.
It was an embarrassment for the Americans, but in front of the cameras, the two pushed the button together to show they share a desire for improved relations.
The subsequent meeting between the two produced no announced breakthrough, in arms control or other issues, but it seemed to set the stage for a new beginning in US-Russian relations.
Clinton finished off her week-long European debut tour with a trip to Turkey on Saturday.


Okay read on….the anger mounts.

Exclusive: Russian Hackers Attacked the 2008 Obama Campaign

Jeff Stein: Russian hackers targeted the 2008 Barack Obama campaign and U.S. government officials as far back as 2007 and have continued to attack them since they left their government jobs, according to a new report scheduled for release Friday.

The targets included several of the 2008 Obama campaign field managers, as well as the president’s closest White House aides and senior officials in the Defense, State and Energy Departments, the report says.

It names several officials by title, but not by name, including “several officials involved in Russian policy, including a U.S. ambassador to Russia,” according to a draft version of the report, authored by Area 1 Security, a Redwood City, California, company founded by former National Security Agency veterans.

“They’re still getting fresh attacks,” the company says.

The attacks on their email accounts have continued as the officials migrated to think tanks, universities and private industry, the company says. The favored weapon of the Russians and other hackers is the so-called “phishing” email, in which the recipient is invited to click on a innocent-looking link, which opens a door to the attackers.

China can’t be excluded as a perpetrator in those attacks, Area 1 Security’s report says, but its new data “show that Russia tried to hack several members of the Obama campaign and could have done so at the same time as someone that achieved massive data exfiltration.”

Blake Darché, a former NSA technical analyst who co-founded Area 1 Security, tells Newsweek that “state-sponsored Russian hackers have been targeting United States officials and politicians since at least 2007 through phishing attacks.” Russian hackers reportedly breached the Joint Chiefs of Staff email system in 2015.

The company says one of the Russian targets was a “deputy campaign manager” in the 2008 Obama campaign, but was otherwise unidentified in its report. There were a number of them over a period of time. One was Steve Hildebrand. Reached in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, where he now runs a specialty bakery and coffee shop, Hildebrand says he was “not aware” that he might have been a Russian target and didn’t remember being warned about cyberattacks of any kind during the campaign. Another senior 2008 campaign aide (and later White House National Security Council spokesman), Tommy Vietor, tells Newsweek he had “no knowledge” of Russian hacking at the time.

Besides top officials in the Energy, Defense and State departments, the Area 1 Security report cites a half-dozen positions in the Obama White House that were targeted from 2008 through 2016, including the president’s deputy assistant, special assistant, the special assistant to the political director, advance team leaders for first lady Michelle Obama, and the White House deputy counsel. None of them could immediately be reached for comment.

Among the State Department targets named by Area 1 Security were three top offices dealing with Russia and Europe. Evelyn Farkas, who served as the Obama administration’s deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia/Ukraine/Eurasia from 2012 to 2015, says she could not discuss matters that remain classified, but says “the biggest impact” she remembered offhand was the Russian hack of the Joint Chiefs.

Among the three top, unnamed targets at the Energy Department was the director of the Office of Nuclear Threat Science, which is responsible for overseeing the U.S. Nuclear Counterterrorism Program.

The Area 1 Security report names the “Dukes,” also known as “Cozy Bear” and APT-29, for the Obama attacks, the same Russian actors named in the 2015 and 2016 hacking of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the State Department.

In an interview, Darché calls the Dukes a front for Russia’s “premier intelligence-gathering arm,” which would be the SVR, or External Intelligence Service, the Kremlin equivalent to the CIA, although he declined to specifically name it. As opposed to the DNC hacks launched to steal and publicize information damaging to the campaign of Hillary Clinton, he says, the Russian offensives that Area 1 Security uncovered were clandestine “intelligence gathering operations” designed to secretly penetrate a wide variety of institutions and industry.

Oren Falkowitz, a former analyst at the National Security Agency who co-founded Area 1 Security, says he launched the company to stop phishing attacks, which until then was thought to be impossible because so many employees continue to click on risky links in emails. The key to the company’s success was persuading clients to let it monitor its servers, he told The New York Times in a 2016 interview.

In Friday’s report, Area 1 Security says it uses a “vast active sensor network” to detect and trace phishing attacks. It says it could imagine the Dukes “operating a giant spreadsheet where new targets are added, but never leave.” It “moves quickly, compromising a server or service to send out phishing emails from it, and then leaves, never returning to check for  bounced email messages to cull from its list.”

Most ex-officials don’t realize they are carrying “the blemish of being a Russian target into their new workplace,” the Area 1 Security report says.  As a result, “they give the Dukes beachheads in companies and organizations they never even planned on or imagined hacking,” such as Washington think tanks, defense contractors, lobbyist offices,  financial institutions and pharmaceutical companies stocked with high ranking former political, military and intelligence  officials.

Russia is “notoriously persistent in pursuing targets,” the report says. “It’s a lesson on why every organization needs great security.”

FireEye CEO: Russians are at Work in Election Hacking

FireEye CEO Kevin Mandia said Thursday that strengthening U.S. cybersecurity defenses begins with protecting the country’s own systems first, and he is hopeful the Trump administration will implement a strategy to defend from cyber threats, during an interview on FOX Business’ “Countdown to the Closing Bell.”

“You gotta protect critical infrastructure and under times of duress, you have to be able to have shields up as a nation, and I think this order is going to move toward that,” he said, referring to the executive order President Trump signed Thursday, aimed at strengthening the America’s infrastructure to help prevent cyberattacks.

Cyber hacking has been in the forefront of an FBI investigation over Russia’s alleged involvement in the 2016 presidential election. Mandia said he believes acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe will continue the investigation into these claims.

“When you awake the sleeping giant, they get the job done and I think the FBI, whenever they apply the resources at their disposal and their capability, they can get the job done as they see fit,” he said.

Mandia believes the Russians are at work in election hacking and thinks it will continue to happen.

“The tool in every emerging nation’s tool box now [is] a cyber component,” he said.

The FireEye CEO added that the risks from cyberattacks can’t be eliminated because persistent hackers are exploiting human trust and not exploiting systems.

Slave Labor Markets in Libya and Beyond

Libya Slave Labor Markets

So, the United Nations reports this but so what? Is anyone at the United Nations taking action? Never heard anything out of the Obama White House either, did you? How about out of the Hillary Clinton or John Kerry State Department? Anything? Did WikiLeaks cables include any of this? Nah…

That whole Hillary Libya operation did not work out well at all, the country remains in a tailspin.

Migrant Smuggling – a deadly business

Currently, data is too scattered and incomplete to paint an accurate picture of numbers of people who are smuggled each year and the routes and methods used by those who smuggle them. Still, available evidence reveals the following trends and patterns:

  • Criminals are increasingly providing smuggling services to irregular migrants to evade national border controls, migration regulations and visa requirements. Most irregular migrants resort to the assistance of profit-seeking smugglers. As border controls have improved, migrants are deterred from attempting to illegally cross them themselves and are diverted into the hands of smugglers.
  • Migrant smuggling is a highly profitable business in which criminals enjoy low risk of detection and punishment. As a result, the crime is becoming increasingly attractive to criminals. Migrant smugglers are becoming more and more organized, establishing professional networks that transcend borders and regions.
  • The modus operandi of migrant smugglers is diverse. Highly sophisticated and expensive services rely on document fraud or ‘visa-smuggling’. Contrasted with these are low cost methods which often pose high risks for migrants, and have lead to a dramatic increase in loss of life in recent years.
  • Migrant smugglers constantly change routes and modus operandi in response to changed circumstances often at the expense of the safety of the smuggled migrants.
  • Thousands of people have lost their lives as a result of the indifferent or even deliberate actions of migrant smugglers.

These factors highlight the need for responses to combat the crime of migrant smuggling to be coordinated across and between regions, and adaptable to new methods. In this regard, UNODC seeks to assist countries in implementing the  Smuggling of Migrants Protocol while promoting  a comprehesensive response to the issue of migrant smuggling.

More here. Has anyone heard from the African American community on this issue at all?

Image result for slave labor markets  PBS

Back in 2013, the UN essentially reported the same conditions in North Korea.

North Korea’s hidden labor camps exposed: A new UN panel is vowing to hold North Korea’s Kim regime to ‘full accountability’ for decades of mass crime and murder. Will Pyongyang face ICC indictment? 

More here from CS Monitor.

The Global Slavery Index also provides insight into the estimated absolute numbers of people in modern slavery, in 162 countries. When the estimated number of enslaved people is considered in absolute terms as a single factor, the country ranking shifts considerably.

The countries with the highest numbers of enslaved people are India, China, Pakistan, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Russia, Thailand, Democratic Republic of Congo, Myanmar and Bangladesh. Taken together, these countries account for 76% of the total estimate of 29.8 million in modern slavery.

The country with the largest estimated number of people in modern slavery is India, which is estimated to have between 13,300,000 and 14,700,000 people enslaved. The India country study suggests that while this involves the exploitation of some foreign nationals, by far the largest proportion of this problem is the exploitation of Indians citizens within India itself, particularly through debt bondage and bonded labour.

The country with the second highest absolute numbers of enslaved is China, with an estimated 2,800,000 to 3,100,000 in modern slavery. The China country study5 suggests that this includes the forced labour of men, women and children in many parts of the economy, including domestic servitude and forced begging, the sexual exploitation of women and children, and forced marriage.

The country with the third highest absolute number in modern slavery is Pakistan, with an estimated 2,000,000 to 2,200,000 people in modern slavery. Read the 2013 report here.


British Role Confirmed in Trump Spying Scandal

The British Guardian posted a report on April 13 claiming that its sources now admit that the British spy agency GCHQ was digitally wiretapping Trump associates, going back to late 2015. This was presumably when the December 2015 Moscow meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Lt. General Michael Flynn took place.


This runs contrary to the blanket nature of the denial insinuated in GCHQ’s carefully-crafted statement of March 17claiming it was all “nonsense” and “utterly ridiculous” that they conducted surveillance of “then president-elect” Donald Trump (emphasis added). The surveillance went back a year before he became “president-elect.”


President Trump’s claim of being “wire tapped” has been vindicated. Indeed, the surveillance is far more extensive than even he suspected at the time.


Based on the new disclosures, we can safely conclude that the world’s most advanced and extensive system of computerized espionage was indeed used against him and people he worked with, for political purposes, with the knowledge and approval of top Obama officials such as CIA Director John Brennan (one major name implicated by the Guardian).


Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst, Judge Andrew Napolitano, who said GCHQ was involved in wiretapping Trump, has also vindicated. Fox News owes Napolitano an apology for yanking him off the air for a week for making that “controversial” and now-verified assertion.


Trump Was Right


President Trump stressed the pervasive “extent” of this Obama political “wiretapping” to Maria Bartiromo of Fox Business in an Oval Office interview on April 11 (aired April 12).  “Me and so many other people” surveilled, Trump said. He explained again that he had picked up the “wire tapped” terminology straight from the headline of The New York Times (of January 20) as he has explained before (on March 15; see AIM report).


Now we’re learning that GCHQ did wiretap Trump for a year before the election. “Trump” is, of course, shorthand for Trump associates and possibly Trump himself directly, depending on context. But GCHQ is trying to put a positive spin on what it admits would be illegal spying on U.S. citizens if done by U.S. agencies.


The Guardian’s sources claim a heroic role for the British GCHQ as a courageous “whistleblower” in warning U.S. agencies to “Watch out” about Trump and Russia—but carefully avoiding mention of the U.S.’s NSA, which must be protected at all costs as part of the NSA-GCHQ spy-on-each-other’s-citizens “wiretap shell game.” (See AIM Special Report of March 18).


These sources virtually admit the mutual “wiretap shell game” by inadvertently mentioning the Trump-Russia data was originally passed on to the U.S. by GCHQ as part of a “routine exchange” of intelligence. The use of this term, “exchange,” suggests what we had previously reported—the shell-game “exchange” between the NSA and GCHQ where they can spy on each other’s citizens and deny it all.


British Wiretapping


Past British Prime Ministers have been implicated in various scandals involving wiretaps.  Some have involved the “Echelon” global surveillance system set up by the NSA with its counterparts in the other “Five Eyes” nations—UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.  Any one of these countries is able to circumvent domestic laws against spying on their own citizens by asking another Echelon member country to do it for them. This is precisely the “wiretap shell game” used by the Obama administration to have British GCHQ spy on Trump, as outlined by Judge Napolitano and his sources.


To avoid unraveling the longstanding Five Eyes spying “wiretap shell game,” the GCHQ had to pretend they “routinely” came across this Trump-Russia wiretap data “by chance,” unprompted by requests from U.S. agencies (such as the NSA or CIA) or by Obama officials, working outside normal NSA chain of command on Signals Intelligence or SIGINT (as Judge Napolitano reported on March 14).


So the heroic British GCHQ comes to the rescue with conveniently “accidental” (our word) captures of wiretap communications between Trump people and sinister-sounding “Russian intelligence agents,” with the wiretaps sent here to help out the U.S. agencies. We are supposed to believe the U.S. agencies and the Obama White House just passively received this bombshell wiretap data from GCHQ, no questions asked, for over a year from late 2015 to early 2017. (The Guardian has no end date for the surveillance, such as the November 8 election, and indicates continued surveillance into the Trump transition, with the FBI “throwing more resources” into the investigation then.)


Did Obama officials ever say, “Wait! Stop sending us this material, it may be illegal!” It does not appear so. Hence, the questions that have to be asked by the House and Senate Intelligence Committees are:


  • Were there requests for more wiretap data on Trump and his team?
  • Were there requests for more complete transcripts, or even voice recordings?


This “alerting” of the U.S. on Trump-Russia communications was needed, according to the Guardian and its U.S. and U.K. intelligence sources, because the U.S. agencies were “asleep” or “untrained,” or were legally prohibited from “examining the private communications of American citizens without warrants.” But to the GCHQ, America is a “foreign” nation and evidently they think they are free to spy on Americans “without warrants.”


Obama’s CIA and the Anti-Trump Task Force


Previous reporting has said that an interagency task force of six U.S. intelligence agencies was set up to investigate the alleged Trump-connected names supposedly discovered in “incidental collection” of digital wiretap surveillance of Russian communications. The six agencies are said to consist of the CIA, NSA, FBI, the Justice Department’s National Security Division, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Treasury Department financial crimes unit.


Until now, no one has known who in the Obama administration set up the task force, who directs it, what its operating directives state, what its activities have entailed, and who it is really accountable to.


But the Guardian is now reporting that it was CIA Director John Brennan who initiated, in about August 2016, what clearly seems to be an illegal domestic investigation of the Trump political campaign, which would be prohibited by the CIA charter.


Reportedly “Brennan used [British] GCHQ information and intelligence from other partners to launch a majorinteragency investigation.” The infamous fake “Trump dossier” is apparently dragged in too.


Brennan then proceeded to give highly classified “urgent” briefings to individual members of the Congressional “Gang of Eight.” Beginning on about August 25, with then-Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) on that date, CIA chief Brennan claimed that the Russian email hackings of the Democratic National Committee were designed to help Trump win the election, according to The New York Times. These partisan briefings represent the politicization of the CIA under Obama, and are of dubious legality.


In September 2016, this anti-Trump intelligence task force changed the previous “incidental” collection to outright direct targeting of Trump people so that their communications with Russia were “actively monitored,” not merely retrieved retroactively in digital archives with names having to be laboriously “unmasked.” (See also New York Times January 19/20, February 14.)


Unmasking is unnecessary if one starts with the specific names of Trump personnel first, and then flags them for future surveillance, going forward in time. In that case, the “actively monitored” and flagged Trump names automatically trigger alerts in the NSA-GCHQ computers whenever the names turn up. These wiretap reports would then have been submitted to Obama officials at the level of national security adviser Susan Rice and CIA director Brennan, and perhaps to Obama himself.


Interestingly, the Guardian’s sources carefully try to avoid implicating or involving the NSA in GCHQ’s allegedly unprompted reporting on intercepted wiretap data on Trump associates. It’s the “shell game” again with the NSA and GCHQ covering for each other.


British GCHQ Director Implicated


Instead, the Guardian’s anonymous intelligence sources say that then-director of GCHQ Robert Hannigan passed on a top secret “director level” report on Trump-Russia in “summer 2016” to CIA Director John Brennan, rather than to the NSA. However, if GCHQ was using NSA’s digital wiretap facilities to “routinely” spy on Trump people, then the NSA would be implicated by the very arrangement used.


As we predicted at AIM, the unexpected sudden resignation of GCHQ director Hannigan, announced on January 23, makes him the potential villain and scapegoat. Hannigan stayed on his job until his replacement took office on April 7.


In an unprecedented BBC interview on April 5, Hannigan fired a parting shot at the Judge Napolitano and White House reports of his GCHQ’s spying on Trump. Hannigan snidely dismissed the reports, saying, “We get crazy conspiracy theories thrown at us every day. We ignore most of them. On this occasion it was so crazy that we felt we should say so and we have said it’s a ridiculous suggestion.”


The Guardian’s report refutes Hannigan, barely a week after he left office, possibly with official connivance or approval. But why is Hannigan getting being thrown under the bus so soon? Is it fear of the impending findings of U.S. Congressional and official investigations exposing GCHQ?


Such reports in the British press on highly sensitive intelligence matters surely must have been quietly cleared by the British government as a first fallback position on GCHQ spying on Trump. Otherwise the Guardian would be in deep trouble under the UK’s Official Secrets Act and its D-Notice procedure to suppress or censor news stories on secret intelligence matters.


Finally, the British also seem to be trying to spread the blame around to a laundry list of other countries allegedly passing on intelligence about Trump-Russia contacts—Germany, Estonia, Poland, Australia, the Dutch and the French DGSE.


Still, no “smoking gun” has ever been found in any of this wiretap material, for it would already have been leaked like Lt. Gen. Flynn’s fairly benign conversations with the Russian ambassador that got him fired.


Despite the sensational news from The Washington Post that the FBI obtained a FISA warrant to wiretap ex-Trump adviser Carter Page, which may even still be in effect, his “Russian contacts” also seem to be completely ordinary and routine. Page is so confident of his innocence that he has been going on various television news programs to talk openly about his work on Russia, supplying Russian contacts with some of his New York University classroom materials.


To be sure, a certain large percentage of these kinds of business meetings with Russians will turn out to be with undercover Russian intelligence officers—unbeknownst to the Western business and academic people meeting them. The media portray them as suspicious. But this kind of Russian spy game has always been going on since the Cold War and is nothing new.


The FISA warrant, rather than proving any malfeasance by Carter Page—again no “smoking gun”—only adds to the evidence that what President Trump said from the start was true: that Trump and his associates were under electronic surveillance.


Unasked Questions


What do the wiretaps on Trump actually say? The media don’t want to know if the NSA-GCHQ wiretaps actually exonerate President Trump.


One of the advantages of the adversarial system in the courts is that advocates on the opposing side ideally get a fair chance—unlike the one-sided media with journalists who, at the rate of more than 90 percent, contributed to the Hillary Clinton campaign (see this Columbia Journalism Review study of election records).


Questions not asked of Rice or other sources by the media include whether she or other Obama officials “flagged” the unmasked Trump team names for future NSA (or British GCHQ) automatic unmasking and delivery of transcripts and summary reports.


Did the Obama people regularize the “unmasking” so that routinely a new retroactive search was automatically ordered with automatic unmaskings? That would be another way to turn “incidental collection” into an effectively ongoing wiretap order. Did President Obama or Rice or others request actual sound recordings of Trump and others to review?


Did the Obama team “unmask” other presidential candidates and associates besides Trump, such as Green Party candidate Jill Stein, who visited Moscow in December 2015 and dined with Putin? Fox is reporting that Congressional investigators are now looking into whether other presidential candidates and Members of Congress were surveilled too. In 2014, CIA director Brennan was caught red-handed lying to the Senate about the CIA’s criminal hacking of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s computer system.


We are told that many, if not most, of these wiretaps and unmaskings of Trump people were not even wiretaps about Russia or “incidental collection” on legitimate foreign intelligence subjects, though they may have begun that way.


The evidence now indicates that the information was procured for partisan political purposes—to spy on the Trump opposition to Hillary Clinton using the full weight of the U.S. government’s NSA spying apparatus (or NSA facilities used by British GCHQ).


Pompeo Must Clean Out the CIA


Trump’s CIA Director Mike Pompeo is in a position to get to the bottom of this scandal. Yet, on April 13, 2017, in his first public speech as director, he seemed to indicate that the evidence being developed in connection with the CIA’s role in the illegal surveillance of President Trump was going to be ignored or brushed aside. It was a forceful, even strident, defense of the Agency.


“I inherited an Agency that has a real appreciation for the law and for the Constitution,” he claimed. “Despite fictional depictions meant to sell books or box-office tickets, we are not an untethered or rogue agency. So yes, while we have some truly awesome capabilities at our disposal, our officers do not operate in areas or against targets that are rightfully and legally off-limits to us.”


The evidence suggests the opposite. The CIA under Obama’s CIA Director Brennan was involved in illegal surveillance, using those “truly awesome capabilities,” against political targets that should have been off-limits.


One of those targets was the President who appointed Pompeo as CIA director.

A Special Report from the Accuracy in Media Center for Investigative Journalism; Cliff Kincaid, Director.

The 5 Eyes Group

The Five Eyes

By Brian Mitchell

Fox News owes Judge Nap some back pay after this! Once again the collection of the information was incidental and the intelligence agencies gave it to the Obama administration which in turn allegedly gave it to many agencies.
Obama’s in trouble too. This is huge and all the while, CNN was trying to take down Page.

CNN confirms:

British and other European intelligence agencies intercepted communications between associates of Donald Trump and Russian officials and other Russian individuals during the campaign and passed on those communications to their US counterparts, US congressional and law enforcement and US and European intelligence sources tell CNN.

The communications were captured during routine surveillance of Russian officials and other Russians known to western intelligence. British and European intelligence agencies, including GCHQ, the British intelligence agency responsible for communications surveillance, were not proactively targeting members of the Trump team but rather picked up these communications during what’s known as “incidental collection,” these sources tell CNN.
The European intelligence agencies detected multiple communications over several months between the Trump associates and Russian individuals — and passed on that intelligence to the US. The US and Britain are part of the so-called “Five Eyes” agreement (along with Canada, Australia and New Zealand), which calls for open sharing among member nations of a broad range of intelligence.

Five Eyes spy pact: Transparency challenge lodged at European rights court, Published time: 9 Sep, 2014 12:57, Edited time: 9 Sep, 2014 17:24

Canada halts intelligence sharing with Five Eyes after ‘accidentally’ sending over Canadians’ data

NSA Not Spying On Canadians, But The ‘Five Eyes’ Are

An exclusive club: The 5 countries that don’t spy on each other, by Margaret Warner, Chief Foreign Correspondent, October 25, 2013 at 5:45 PM EDT
It was born out of American and British intelligence collaboration in World War II, a long-private club nicknamed the “Five Eyes.” The members are five English-speaking countries who share virtually all intelligence — and pledge not to practice their craft on one another. A former top U.S. counter-terrorism official called it “the inner circle of our very closest allies, who don’t need to spy on each other.”

This is the club that German chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande say they want to join — or at least, win a similar “no-spying” pact with the U.S. themselves.

It all began with a secret 7-page agreement struck in 1946 between the U.S. and the U.K., the “British-US Communication Agreement,” later renamed UKUSA. At first their focus was the Soviet Union and its Eastern European satellites. But after Canada joined in 1948, and Australia and New Zealand in 1956, the “Five Eyes” was born, and it had global reach. They pledged to share intelligence — especially the results of electronic surveillance of communications — and not to conduct such surveillance on each other. Whiffs of the club’s existence appeared occasionally in the press, but it wasn’t officially acknowledged and declassified until 2010, when Britain’s General Communications Headquarters, or GCHQ, released some of the founding documents. The benefits of membership are immense, say intelligence experts. While the U.S. has worldwide satellite surveillance abilities, the club benefits from each member’s regional specialty, like Australia and New Zealand’s in the Far East. “We practice intelligence burden sharing,” said one former U.S. official. “We can say, ‘that’s hard for us cover, so can you?’” The ease and rapidity of information-sharing among the five “makes it quicker to connect the dots,” said another intelligence veteran. “You can’t underestimate the importance of the common language, legal system and culture,” said another. “Above all, there is total trust.”

That trust extends to not tapping the phones of one another’s leaders and officials. That’s rooted in the belief that when their leaders talk to one another, they do so in full candor. “There is very little we need to know about these countries and their leadership’s views that the leaders wouldn’t tell us themselves, with all honesty,” said a retired official familiar with the program.

A murkier question is whether they’ve also agreed never to spy on each other’s citizens. U.S. officials say that’s part of the deal. Yet there have been reports in the British press — amplified most recently by former NSA contractor and leaker Edward Snowden — that that’s not the case, that the Five Eyes spy on one another’s citizens and share the information to get around laws preventing agencies from spying on their own citizens. Former CIA deputy director John McLaughlin insisted to me that this isn’t so. “I’ve never heard of that,” he said. “You would think I would know if that were the case.”

But can we say for sure that unlike Merkel, British Prime Minister David Cameron doesn’t have to worry that his cell phone is bugged? Said a longtime spymaster, “Not by us.”

Five Eyes, One Brain – the Spy Alliance is Watching You — There are five separate “eyes” that are linked together, which observe your every moment and personal life 24 hours a day.

“Five Eyes” is the name of the joint intelligence network of five countries, which are the UK, the U.S., Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The beginning of the network dates to the UKUSA, an agreement to share intelligence signed between the UK and the U.S. in March 1946. Founded by the U.S. and the UK, UKUSA was transformed into the “Five Eyes” alliance by including the British Commonwealth members Canada, Australia and New Zealand over the following years. Thus, the foundation for a giant intelligence network which monitors the communication traffic in all continents from five different points and shares this information with the allied countries was laid.

This alliance between five Anglosphere countries is based upon the principles of sharing every kind of intelligence (primarily the signals information called SIGNIT) between each other and a vow to never spy on member countries. This 70-year-old alliance monitors, analyzes and stores the world’s communications today with its built-in global monitoring substructure.

The primary intelligence services of these five countries constitute the essential parts of this monitoring system: the U.S.’s “NSA,” the UK’s “GCHQ,” Canada’s “CSEC,” Australia’s “ASD” and New Zealand’s “GCSB” being the major ones. In addition to this, other numerous subsidiary intelligence services are the most important sources of the “Five Eyes” network.

Among these, for example, there is the RAF (Royal Air Force) of the UK, which is known as the biggest electronic monitoring center in the world. ….


VIA – THE GUARDIAN by Edward Snowden

New Zealand spying on Pacific allies for ‘Five Eyes’ and NSA, Secret papers show NZ spy agency GCSB is collecting calls and internet traffic in bulk and sending it to the US National Security Agency

EXCLUSIVE: GCSB collects phone calls, emails and internet data from NZ’s closest and most vulnerable neighbours, secret papers reveal …….


The UKUSA Community: Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States
The United Kingdom – United States of America Agreement (UKUSA) is a multilateral agreement for cooperation in signals intelligence between Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The alliance of intelligence operations is also known as the Five Eyes. In classification markings this is abbreviated as FVEY, with the individual countries being abbreviated as AUS, CAN, NZL, GBR, and USA, respectively.

Emerging from an informal agreement related to the 1941 Atlantic Charter, the secret treaty was renewed with the passage of the 1943 BRUSA Agreement, before being officially enacted on 5 March 1946 by the United Kingdom and the United States. In the following years, it was extended to encompass Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Other countries, known as “third parties”, such as West Germany, the Philippines, and several Nordic countries also joined the UKUSA community.

Much of the sharing of information is performed via the ultra-sensitive STONEGHOST network, which has been claimed to contain “some of the Western world’s most closely guarded secrets”. Besides laying down rules for intelligence sharing, the agreement formalized and cemented the “Special Relationship” between the UK and the USA.

Due to its status as a secret treaty, its existence was not known to the Prime Minister of Australia until 1973, and it was not disclosed to the public until 2005. On 25 June 2010, for the first time in history, the full text of the agreement was publicly released by the United Kingdom and the United States, and can now be viewed online. Shortly after its release, the seven-page UKUSA Agreement was recognized by Time magazine as one of the Cold War’s most important documents, with immense historical significance.

The global surveillance disclosure by Edward Snowden has shown that the intelligence-sharing activities between the First World allies of the Cold War are rapidly shifting into the digital realm of the Internet. ………
Wikipedia – UKUSA Agreement

The Five Eyes, often abbreviated as FVEY, is an intelligence alliance comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States. These countries, all Anglophone and ruled by a common law legal system, are bound by the multilateral UKUSA Agreement, a treaty for joint cooperation in signals intelligence.

The origins of the FVEY can be traced back to the post-World War II period, when the Atlantic Charter was issued by the Allies to lay out their goals for a post-war world. During the course of the Cold War, the ECHELON surveillance system was initially developed by the FVEY to monitor the communications of the former Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc, although it is now used to monitor billions of private communications worldwide.

In the late 1990s, the existence of ECHELON was disclosed to the public, triggering a major debate in the European Parliament and, to a lesser extent, the United States Congress. As part of efforts in the ongoing War on Terror since 2001, the FVEY further expanded their surveillance capabilities, with much emphasis placed on monitoring the World Wide Web. The former NSA contractor Edward Snowden described the Five Eyes as a “supra-national intelligence organisation that doesn’t answer to the known laws of its own countries”. Documents leaked by Snowden in 2013 revealed that the FVEY have been spying on one another’s citizens and sharing the collected information with each other in order to circumvent restrictive domestic regulations on surveillance of citizens.

Despite the impact of Snowden’s disclosures, some experts in the intelligence community believe that no amount of global concern or outrage will affect the Five Eyes relationship, which to this day remains one of the most comprehensive known espionage alliances in history. …….

XKeyscore: NSA tool collects ‘nearly everything a user does on the internet’
• XKeyscore gives ‘widest-reaching’ collection of online data
• NSA analysts require no prior authorization for searches
• Sweeps up emails, social media activity and browsing history
• NSA’s XKeyscore program – read one of the presentations
XKeyscore map
One presentation claims the XKeyscore program covers ‘nearly everything a typical user does on the internet’

In 2012, there were at least 41 billion total records collected and stored in XKeyscore for a single 30-day period.

No Title

No Description

Chats, browsing history and other internet activity
Beyond emails, the XKeyscore system allows analysts to monitor a virtually unlimited array of other internet activities, including those within social media.

An NSA tool called DNI Presenter, used to read the content of stored emails, also enables an analyst using XKeyscore to read the content of Facebook chats or private messages. ….

No Title

No Description

An analyst can monitor such Facebook chats by entering the Facebook user name and a date range into a simple search screen….

No Title

No Description

The names NZ targeted using NSA’s XKeyscore system.

Govt Communications Security Bureau … New Zealand and the Snowden files, Solomon Islands
Why did the GCSB intercept emails to and from Solomon Island officials? …….


SYSTEMS: XKeyscore PRISM ECHELON Carnivore DISHFIRE STONEGHOST Tempora Frenchelon Fairview MYSTIC DCSN Boundless Informant BULLRUN PINWALE Stingray SORM
Agencies, Five Eyes BND DGSE FSB MSS
PEOPLE: Michael S. Rogers Keith Alexander James Bamford James Clapper Duncan Campbell Edward Snowden Russ Tice Barack Obama Julian Assange
PLACES: The Doughnut Fort Meade Menwith Hill Pine Gap Southern Cross Cable Utah Data Center Bad Aibling Station Dagger Complex
LAWS: Five Eyes UKUSA Agreement Lustre U.S. USA Freedom Act FISA amendments EU Data Retention Directive Data Protection Directive
PROPOSED CHANGES: U.S. FISA Improvements Act Other proposals
CONCEPTS: Mass surveillance Culture of fear Secure communication SIGINT Call detail record Surveillance issues in smart cities
RELATED TOPICS: Espionage Intelligence agency Cryptography Tor VPNs Human rights Privacy Liberty Satellites Stop Watching Us

Wikipedia: Intelligence porta Mass surveillance portal

A radome at RAF MENWITH HILL, a site with satellite uplink capabilities believed to be used by ECHELON.
RAF Menwith Hill, North Yorkshire, England

The National Security Agency (NSA) is an intelligence organization of the United States federal government responsible for global monitoring, collection, and processing of information and data for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes, a discipline known as signals intelligence (SIGINT). NSA is concurrently charged with protection of U.S. government communications and information systems against penetration and network warfare.[8][9] Although many of NSA’s programs rely on “passive” electronic collection, the agency is authorized to accomplish its mission through active clandestine means, among which are physically bugging electronic systems and allegedly engaging in sabotage through subversive software. Moreover, NSA maintains physical presence in a large number of countries across the globe, where its Special Collection Service (SCS) inserts eavesdropping devices in difficult-to-reach places. SCS collection tactics allegedly encompass “close surveillance, burglary, wiretapping, breaking and entering”.

Pine Gap ‘Spy base’ Alice Springs: What you never knew about top-secret facility — FROM employing hundreds of Aussies to playing a key role in the US defence missile shield. Pine Gap’s secrets are slowly starting to emerge

PINE GAP, AUSTRALIA — This Google Earth image (below) taken last year reveals the extent of the antenna systems at Pine Gap. Picture: NautilusSource:Supplied
As research and knowledge into the facility grows, we are starting to learn more about what goes on here, including:
Run by both Australia and the United States, its official name is the Joint Defence Facility Pine Gap.
Located about 20km from Alice Springs, the site is considered strategically vital by both the US and Australian governments.
It collects a wide range of signals intelligence as well as providing information on early warning of ballistic missile launches.

No Title

No Description

MENWITH HILL, UK …. Menwith Hill
Royal Air Force Menwith Hill or more simply RAF Menwith Hill is a Royal Air Force station near Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England which provides communications and intelligence support services to the United Kingdom and the United States. …..

Part of USAF Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Agency (AFISR), Near Harrogate, North Yorkshire in England …..

Site information

Owner – Ministry of Defence, Operator – Royal Air Force and United States Air Force
Site history: Built – 1954; In use – 1958-Present
Battles/wars Cold War
Garrison information: Garrison 451st Intelligence Squadron

SOUTHERN CROSS – CALIFORNIA …. Southern Cross is a private company providing fast, high capacity dedicated connectivity from Australia, New Zealand, Fiji and Hawaii to the heart of the internet on the US West Coast, via our redundant and diverse fibre-optic submarine cable network.

VIA – EQUINIX — January 18, 2016 — Equinix Data Centers Anchor Southern Cross Cable Network between Australia and North America

New access points provide high-capacity connectivity to one of the longest digital routes in the world

REDWOOD CITY, Calif., Jan. 18, 2016 /PRNewswire/ — Equinix, Inc. (Nasdaq: EQIX), the global interconnection and data center company, today announced the Southern Cross Cable Network has expanded its data center presence and now directly connects between Equinix’s International Business Exchange (IBX®) data centers in Los Angeles (LA1) and Silicon Valley (SV1 and SV8) to its existing deployment in Sydney (SY1). The fiber optic submarine cable provides a high-capacity fiber route between Sydney, Australia and the West Coast of the United States, with up to 100G end-to-end connectivity for increased performance. …

The Utah Data Center, also known as the Intelligence Community Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative Data Center, is a data storage facility for the United States Intelligence Community that is designed to store data estimated to be on the order of exabytes or larger. …..

Utah Data Center – Wikipedia

The Utah Data Center, also known as the Intelligence Community Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative Data Center, is a data storage facility for the United States Intelligence Community that is designed to store data estimated to be on the order of exabytes or larger.

UTAH DATA CENTER … Part of a series on Global surveillance
DISCLOSURES: Origins Pre-2013 2013–present Reactions
SYSTEMS: XKeyscore PRISM ECHELON Carnivore DISHFIRE STONEGHOST Tempora Frenchelon Fairview MYSTIC DCSN Boundless Informant BULLRUN PINWALE Stingray SORM
PEOPLE: Michael S. Rogers, Keith Alexander, James Bamford, James Clapper, Duncan Campbell, Edward Snowden, Russ Tice, Barack Obama, Julian Assange
PLACES: The Doughnut Fort Meade Menwith Hill Pine Gap Southern Cross Cable Utah Data Center Bad Aibling Station Dagger Complex
LAWS: Five Eyes UKUSA Agreement Lustre U.S. USA Freedom Act FISA amendments EU Data Retention Directive Data Protection Directive
PROPOSED CHANGES: U.S. FISA Improvements Act Other proposals
CONCEPTS: Mass surveillance Culture of fear Secure communication SIGINT Call detail record Surveillance issues in smart cities
RELATED TOPICS: Espionage Intelligence agency Cryptography Tor VPNs Human rights Privacy Liberty Satellites Stop Watching Us

Nothing is Beyond Our Reach…FVEY Alliance..Truth and Cover Up by Merit System Protection Board and Federal Government  a must read

Michael Holt — Federal Government Veterans Administration IT Cybersecurity Whistleblower, Not a Extremist ,Terrorist or Radical
US Army Disabled Veteran Michael L. Holt’s Life Ruined to Cover up America and FEVY Global Spying programs use on all Telecommunications, Satelite’s, Computer Networks, Hardware/Software, Malware, Viruses, IoT’s. global ISP Providers and Cable company’s. “Granted Whistleblower Protection by Honorable Chief Judge Amy V. Dunning in 2011”. winning MSPB Reinstatement only to be terminated again without cause, never allowed to return to work…..


Ally and Target – US Intelligence Watches Germany Closely
German intelligence services cooperate closely with the NSA, but the country is also a target of US surveillance, as a document seen by SPIEGEL makes clear. The spy software XKeyscore is operated from a facility in Hesse, with some of the results landing on President Obama’s desk, By Laura Poitras, Marcel Rosenbach and Holger Stark — The US military compound in Griesheim, near Frankfurt, is secured with a tall wire fence topped with barbed wire. The buildings are relatively modest and surrounded by large areas of green space, which has long led local residents to suspect that many of those working at the facility spend much of their time underground — and that they are engaged in espionage.
The so-called “Dagger Complex” is one of the best protected sites in the German state of Hesse. Griesheim…

NOTE: GERMANY is not noted in FIVE EYES (United States, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada {NOTE: article above that Canada “halted” its participation, January 2016 – current status ???]) …. but Bad Aibling Station Dagger Complex is one of the Five Eyes/FVEY/Echelon places given.

Condition Red in North Korea? Kim Jong-Un Orders ‘IMMEDIATE EVACUATION of Pyongyang’ – PRAVDA

Russia and Asian media are reporting that the North Korean capital of Pyongyang is being evacuated ahead of a “big surprise” on Saturday.

Nearly everyone is interpreting that to mean North Korean leader Kim Jong-un is planning to do something that will spark war with the United States.

According to South Korean media, residents in the kingdom have said goodbye to each other, sparking concerns the tyrannical leader could be about to act after months of nuclear weapon testing.

From Pravda (translated):

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un gave the order, according to which, 25% of North Korea’s capital Pyongyang must urgently leave.

That is 600 thousand people need to be evacuated. Experts note that it is likely this is due to the extremely heightened tensions with the United States. There is information that the bomb shelter Pyongyang will not be able to accommodate the entire population of the capital. As a result, 600,000 people urgently need to leave the city – first of all people to break the law, tried.

Receive information and that a grouping of the US Navy, unfolding off the coast of Korea, joined at least one modified missile like “Ohio” bearing type “Tomahawk” missiles 154. According to media reports, the missile is expected to arrive in the port of registry for 18 of April.

Meanwhile, according to the South Korean newspaper, prewar farewell began in North Korea. North Korean residents say goodbye “to each other, the house, the native plant or enterprise, forest, field, sky, river and the sea, the mountains.” But say goodbye to the security forces, party or mentioned in the Word farewell leadership of the country is prohibited.

Recall that at the weekend through Chinese social media circulated reports that the auxiliaries and doctors sent to the border of North Korea.

Widespread picture, which shows the chain of military trains moving around Shenyana– city, located about 200 miles from the North Korean border.

About 150,000 Chinese military were mobilized in anticipation of North Korean refugees escape from the country in case of a US airstrike.

Lieutenant General H. R. McMaster, in turn, said that his commander in chief ordered the direction of the US carrier strike group to the region. McMaster said the decision to move US Navy ships in the Sea of Japan, “reasonable”, given North Korea’s “provocative behavior model.”

Speaking to Fox News, McMaster said: “The president has asked (us) to be prepared and to provide him with a full range of options to eliminate this threat.”

Recall that North Korea has condemned the attack Trump in Syria, calling it an act of “intolerable aggression”.

By the way, the news of the transfer of Chinese troops have managed to scatter on the media. RIA “News”, for example, it denied. China also denied information on the transfer of 150 thousand soldiers to the border of North Korea.

Earlier expert Aydin Mehdiyev said next aggravation of the situation may occur on April 15, when North Korea could conduct another test an intercontinental ballistic missile.”

However, a well-known Russian orientalist , Professor Andrei Lankov, who for many years worked in Seoul, warns that if the United States will cause a military attack on the facilities of North Korea, back Pyongyang could directly endanger the lives of 25 million residents of Seoul, which is located on the border of North and south. “In this case, a new Korean war is inevitable,” – he warns.

Source: Translated publication from

Russia and Asian media are reporting that the North Korean capital of Pyongyang is being evacuated ahead of a “big surprise” on Saturday.

Nearly everyone is interpreting that to mean North Korean leader Kim Jong-un is planning to do something that will spark war with the United States.

According to South Korean media, residents in the kingdom have said goodbye to each other, sparking concerns the tyrannical leader could be about to act after months of nuclear weapon testing.
A tweet from Channel NewsAsia’s Beijing Correspondent Jeremy Koh said: “We’ve been told to be ready to move out at 6.20am, but no idea why. Also, no cell phones allowed.”

More than 200 foreign journalists are in Pyongyang as the country marks the 105th birthday of its founding president Kim Il Sung on April 15.

Foreign reporters have been told to prepare for a “big and important event” on North Korea’s biggest national celebration, called ‘Day of the Sun’.

Hundreds of journalists from around the world are in Pyongyang at present, and they have been told to get ready for a MAJOR event this weekend.

Folks, it looks like this is really happening. The North Korean leadership is just that INSANE.

Thank God we have a REAL leader in charge to handle the situation.

by Les Roediger

BOMBSHELL: Inside Canada-USA “Refugee” Trafficking Ring

Image result for “Refugee” Trafficking Ring
by Faith Goldy

Canada and the United States are not separated by walls or fences but rather, the longest undefended border in the world. And, up until very recently, no one on either side gave our shared border much thought — until Prime Minister Justin Trudeau invited the world to Canada over Twitter.

Now the word is out and fake refugees are flooding in.

After the RCMP announced it would no longer provide weekly reports on the numbers of refugees crossing into Canada from various illegal entry points, Rebel Media decided to investigate for ourselves by travelling to a nearby crossing between Quebec and New York State.

Within moments of our arrival, a young, single, well-dressed male arrived for the sole purpose of illegally crossing into Canada, claiming he hailed from Syria. He arrived by taxi and then crossed the last few metres into Canada by foot despite RCMP officers’ warnings from the other side.

Then, shy of one hour thereafter, a Muslim couple and their child arrived, describing themselves as “tourists” in America from Turkey who were seeking refugee status in Canada via the illegal crossing of the border.

And then, another single male illegally entered Canada without saying a word to our cameras.

After witnessing Canada’s RCMP officers treated as bellhops at the border, The Rebel wanted to get a clearer picture of what types of people are illegally crossing into Canada:

Who are they? Where are they from? How frequently is this illegal activity occurring at this one crossing alone?

And so, we went to the front lines:

Taxis and bus drivers who have become the chosen method of transport for the law-breaking migrants.

I travelled 30 minutes south of the border to Plattsburgh, New York, where Greyhound busses shuttle the migrants to a terminal where cabs wait in line to bring them to the border.

When we asked drivers for details on migrants based on their first-hand experience, we received a clear and consistent account:

The majority of the the illegals are single men from the Middle East, while drivers reported diving anywhere between 10 to 30 each week.

One of the cab drivers we met in Plattsburgh agreed to take us to the border for a ride-along with his migrant fare, someone he coordinated to pick up in advance of his Greyhound’s arrival. The man was a Muslim travelling alone from Eritrea who cited draft-dodging as the reason why he left his wife and children to come illegally to Canada.

While on the ground in Champlain, New York one cab driver divulged that the company for which he worked, Town Taxi, has been offering “special services” to border-jumpers.

And so, The Rebel followed up.

We paid Town Taxi headquarters a visit where a man claiming to own the business gave us a description of what was meant by “special services”:

Guaranteed illegal entry into Canada.

The details of what we found next will shock you! So-called runner and brokers (“human brokers,” as our source refers to them) who have created an elaborate network across the United States with one goal:

Ensure illegal entry to Canada for a fee.

A flood of fake refugees — the vast majority of whom are single men from the Middle East — illegally entering Canada from the United States. And a wide network now established to traffic humans to Canada — all at the prime minister’s invitation.

This is a story you have to see to believe.

Sweden trying to track down over 10,000 rejected refugees who are in hiding


Sweden seems suddenly to have shifted gears, both on its immigration policy and now in hunting for refugees who are hiding. The drive to be “tolerant” has now been apparently replaced by the drive for survival, but it took a bloody jihad attack to force change, and it isn’t clear yet how sincere or thoroughgoing the change really is. What are other Western countries waiting for before they decide to implement responsible immigration policies? Jihad attacks are imminent in Europe; the jihadis have been invited in by their infidel hosts.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Sweden also has only 200 police officers working on finding the missing migrants. Police have suffered brutality from Muslim gangs in no-go zones, and most are ready to quit. Sweden has also not indicated what it will do once it finds the hidden refugees. The worst jihadis among them are likely hiding in the no-go zones, and are further radicalizing the community.

The force of 200 officers tasked with tracking down the thousands of migrants that have gone into hiding in Sweden needs to be substantially boosted, the country’s border police chief said after a rejected refugee carried out a terrorist attack in Stockholm.

“We certainly need more resources. We need a few hundred employees, maybe more,” Patrik Engstrom, head of Sweden’s national border police, told Dagens Nyheter newspaper, noting that “above all” the country needs more police officers to “take part in immigration control [operations]”

Approximately 1,200 Swedish police officers are currently involved in border control at their national operative department (NOA) and seven police regions, but the majority is assigned to operations securing the country’s external borders, such as passport control, he said.

Engstrom stressed that only around 200 police officers are currently assigned to searching for illegal migrants already in Sweden. Meanwhile, the number of rejected asylum seekers illegally hiding in Sweden after having their applications rejected has reached 10,000, Dagens Nyheter reports.

Police should also be able to do their jobs searching or checking illegal migrants without “fear that someone will yell ‘R.I.P. to them [police],” the border police chief added. According to Engstrom, a modern computer system that controls the influx of asylum seekers should be installed in police stations.

Sweden has been on high alert since last Friday, when a truck ploughed through a crowd of people before crashing into a department store and catching fire in Drottninggatan, one of Stockholm’s main pedestrian areas.

The terrorist attack left at least four people dead, including an 11-year-old girl, and over a dozen injured. The main suspect, who was allegedly driving the truck, managed to flee the scene, but was later arrested.

Swedish media have reported that the suspected perpetrator is a 39-year-old from Uzbekistan named Rakhmat Akilov.

Sweden’s Expressen newspaper reported that the attacker told investigators that he was “pleased with what he had done” and had “accomplished what he set out to do.”

It was later revealed that Akilov’s asylum application was rejected in summer of 2016 and he had been illegally hiding in Sweden ever since. The authorities had been seeking to find and deport him since February of 2017.

On Wednesday, the Swedish government asked Supreme Court Judge Stefan Johansson if it would be legally possible to introduce a new law that would make taking part in a terrorist group a criminal offense.

“Financing a terrorist organization is already prohibited, and that has been seen as compatible with freedom of association. Freedom of association has never been aimed at making it possible to be active in a terrorist organization,” Swedish Justice Minister Morgan Johansson said at a press conference.

He added that, currently, “it’s the case that you have to be tie

Fox Commentator in Bed with Kim Jong-un


The Epoch Times newspaper is currently running an editorial series called “The Dead End of Communism” that includes a detailed discussion of the diabolical, even Satanic, roots of Karl Marx, the father of communism. Looking at his writings in detail, the authors document how his goal was “to enact a sort of vengeance against heaven.” Contrary to his “progressive” profile, Marx hated humanity and life on earth. His appeal was that he promised a heaven on earth. But it turned out to be hell for those living under it.


Communism has killed more than 100 million people, and millions more are at risk of death. The people of South Korea and other countries are currently in the crosshairs of Communist North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. The communist ruler, Kim Jong-un, has even threatened America with a nuclear attack.


The North Korean nuclear weapons program was assisted by President Bill Clinton’s administration, in the name of stopping it, and the Obama administration did little to contain it. It’s likely that former President Barack Obama informed President Donald Trump about this growing problem, and that this helps explain why Trump has been so concerned, even preoccupied, with the North Korean nuclear threat since he took office.


Of course, the North Korean regime could not survive without the assistance of its communist neighbor, China. So communism is not itself dead. It is very much alive and a real threat. Trump understands this, but continues to be assaulted by the media and their Democratic Party allies about his so-called Russian connection, for which there is no evidence.


A serious examination of the real Russia problem can be found in The Epoch Times series marking the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution. President Trump recognized that Russia has not changed significantly from the old Soviet days when he authorized a U.S. military strike on Russian client state Syria in response to its alleged chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians.  Russia’s relationship with Syria and Iran represents the “Red Jihad” that has existed since the days of Lenin, when the founder of the Soviet state urged the “oppressed” Muslims to join in a global campaign against the West.


Meanwhile, communism is very much alive and doing well in Latin America. The communist rulers of Venezuela are in the news for totally mismanaging their once-healthy economy and persecuting their own citizens. And Washington Times investigative journalist Martin Arostegui writes about how Colombia’s FARC communist guerrillas are still in the business of dealing drugs and spreading terrorism.


It was supposed to be a “peace process,” but the serious flaws in the agreement made between the terrorists and the government will have to be fixed if Colombia is going to survive as a free and independent country. “Three months into the agreement’s implementation, the guerrillas have surrendered what critics say is a token number of weapons while the production of coca has skyrocketed from 63,000 hectares in 2013 to 188,000 last year,” writes Arostegui. “Analysts attribute the rise to concessions that the FARC has obtained through the peace process.”


Like the mess in Syria, Obama’s fingerprints are all over this. As the author notes, “President Obama backed the peace process by trying to delist the FARC as a terrorist group to facilitate an agreement. He earmarked $450 million for fiscal 2017 to underwrite the deal, and his secretary of state, John F. Kerry, publicly met with FARC leaders.”


It looks like “peace” in Colombia is similar to the “100 percent” elimination of chemical weapons in Syria.


As President Trump attempts to rally the nation in the face of the North Korean threat, we can see how communism is also very much alive on the streets of America. Communist groups have organized a tour covering nine U.S. cities, from April 4 through the 16th, to mobilize against the deployment of the U.S. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system in South Korea. THAAD is designed to deter a North Korean nuclear attack. It’s the one thing Obama set in motion to help defend South Korea.


The main sponsor of the anti-THAAD tour is the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL), a self-described “revolutionary Marxist party in the United States,” and its front, Act Now to Stop War & End Racism (ANSWER). 


Individual endorsers of this campaign include Marxist academic Noam Chomsky and former Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich, who is now a Fox News contributor


Remember Kucinich? His Fox News bio notes that he “conducted an exclusive interview with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to discuss the allegations of the use of chemical weapons alongside FNC’s Senior Foreign Affairs Correspondent Greg Palkot.” That was aired on Special Report with Bret Baier back in 2013. After the recent allegations of a chemical attack, Kucinich was back on Fox News saying he didn’t think Assad was behind it.


It’s fascinating that Kucinich is now a leader of the campaign against defending South Korea from a communist attack.


His “message of solidarity to the Korean people in the struggle to oppose the THAAD missile ‘defense’ system” reads like something written by a North Korean propagandist. “THAAD is not a technology for peace,” Kucinich says. “It is for war.”


Kucinich says, “It could be argued that the installation of such a system, whether it works or not, is a provocation (‘first the shield, then the sword’). Added to the joint U.S./South Korean military exercises, it places an additional burden of tension to already strained relations with the North. I would instead urge greater reliance upon the wonderful capacity of the Korean people to engage in diplomacy with the brothers and sisters in the North, to avert conflict.”


It is signed by Kucinich with the biographical information, “Member of the United States Congress, 1997-2013. Democratic Candidate for President 2004 and 2008.”


It certainly looks like a major figure in the Democratic Party is acting like a foreign agent for the North Korean regime. There seems to be more evidence of his work on behalf of Kim Jung-un than there is for Trump being a Russian agent.


Is there any likelihood that his fellow Democrats will raise any alarm by this kind of behavior? Will they call for hearings and investigations?


Perhaps his employer Fox News should look into it.