Watergate Mysteries Remain 45 Years Later

Some researchers believe John Dean and his wife hold the key to the real reasons for the 1972 Watergate break-in. 

By S.T. Patrick

Forty-five years after the two Watergate break-ins of June 1972, researchers are still tangling over who ordered the break-ins and why. Since 1984, revisionists have researched and formulated a theory that has changed how skeptical students of Watergate view the scandal that forced the resignation of Richard Nixon.

At a Hofstra University speech in 1987, former Nixon Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman summarized the conventional wisdom among reflective Nixon-era conservatives. “To this day I still don’t know why that was done,” Haldeman said, “and I don’t know anybody who does. Why they would hit the (Democratic) National Headquarters is beyond me, because nobody in that place knows anything anyway.”

At the same symposium, Jeb Magruder, former deputy director of the Committee for the Re-Election of the President (CREEP), pushed the Hughes-Rebozo theory for the break-ins. Multimillionaire Howard Hughes, the theory states, gave $100,000 to Nixon’s close friend Bebe Rebozo. The money was then used by the Nixon family, in part for furniture and jewelry. The break-ins were executed to find out what information DNC chairman Lawrence O’Brien may have had about the Hughes-Rebozo transaction, as well as to gather damaging information that may persuade O’Brien to withhold the information throughout the 1972 campaign.

Since the 1980s, a team of revisionist historians and researchers have developed a theory that puts former White House Counsel John Dean in the crosshairs of the Watergate debacle. And though Sen. Howard Baker (R-Tenn.) famously asked Dean what Nixon knew about Watergate and when he knew it, researchers now believe that the key to understanding the break-ins themselves lies with Dean, his wife Maureen, and Magruder.

Author Phil Stanford wrote White House Call Girl: The Real Watergate Story to detail the life of Heidi Rikan, who ran a call-girl operation at the luxurious Columbia Plaza Apartments, blocks from the Watergate complex. Stanford’s work built on and expanded the research of Jim Hougan’s Secret Agenda: Watergate, Deep Throat, and the CIA and Len Colodny and Robert Gettlin’s Silent Coup: The Removal of a President.

Ms. Rikan had gathered a crop of women new to the Beltway to entertain Democrat politicians in town on business. Typical for Washington, D.C. prostitution rings of the era, the Columbia Plaza setup was an intelligence-gathering operation that would be used for potential blackmail and political advantage. Private eye Lou Russell served as security for Rikan at the apartments and has admitted tape-recording telephone conversations between Ms. Rikan’s girls and their clients at the DNC.

Hair Tissue Mineral Testing

One of the Watergate burglars was found with a key belonging to the desk of secretary Ida “Maxie” Wells, the DNC contact who historians believe allegedly instigated the liaisons and whose desk may have contained the real names of the johns that had used Ms. Rikan’s service.

Stanford found witnesses who tied Maureen (Kane) Biner to Ms. Rikan. “Mo” Biner would later date and then marry Dean. Arguably the most interesting pieces of evidence in the case are Ms. Rikan’s little black books. Unearthed by Ms. Rikan’s sister, the little black books contain the names of politicians, dignitaries, and athletes. Interestingly, one book contains home addresses and phone numbers for Maureen Kane and her mother, Irene. A later version of Ms. Rikan’s black book contains both home and office numbers for the Deans, as well as John Dean’s number at the White House.

Speculation has existed as to the nature of Maureen’s involvement with Ms. Rikan’s operation. Stanford confirmed to this writer that Ms. Rikan and Maureen were friends who partied and traveled together. In White House Call Girl he alludes to testimony from various sources that Maureen had been a high-level prostitute, but he denies having documented evidence.

According to Ms. Rikan’s attorney, Phil Bailley, Magruder was seeing “Candy Cane,” one of Ms. Rikan’s prostitutes. As Bailley was walking toward Cane’s apartment one day, he saw a dark-haired man get into a chauffeured black sedan. When Bailley asked who the man was, Cane responded, “You weren’t supposed to see that. That’s the boss of bosses.”

Bailley later identified the man with Cane as Magruder, whose home phone number was also found in Rikan’s books.

Revisionist historians were not alone in doubting Magruder’s Hughes-Rebozo theory for the Watergate motive. Charles Colson, the former presidential counsel, told The New York Times that he was almost knocked off his chair when Magruder made the accusation at Hofstra.

Colson once embraced Magruder in a hallway as they served time together in federal prison. Colson wanted real answers to the “what” and “why” questions of the break-ins.

“What were we doing at the Watergate, Jeb?” Colson asked Magruder. “(Magruder) turned white as a sheet and wouldn’t tell me. Later, on the outside, I asked him again. Still he wouldn’t say.”

Magruder did eventually tell author Len Colodny that Dean ordered the break-ins. G. Gordon Liddy had also affirmed Dean’s involvement in testimony given when Ida Wells unsuccessfully sued him for statements he had made about her involvement.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals summarized Liddy’s testimony: “Liddy stated that the burglars’ objective during the Watergate break-in was to determine whether the Democrats possessed information embarrassing to John Dean.”

Buchanan, Nixon's White House Wars
Available now from the AFP Online Store.

Magruder, like Colson, would turn to the ministry after leaving prison. He was a Presbyterian minister from 1981 through his death in 2014.

John and Maureen Dean have spent decades defending their side of the Watergate story. Most notably, they sued Colodny. The case was settled out of court and terms were not released. Both parties claim victory to this day. The Deans have denied a close relationship with Ms. Rikan, they have denied that Ms. Rikan ran a call-girl ring, and they deny that the motive for the Watergate break-ins had anything to do with their relationship.

Dean frequently writes about political scandal, predictably comparing each scandal to Watergate and each president to Nixon. Dean’s cooperation with prosecutors on Watergate aided the indictments of administration officials who had once trusted him. To revisionist historians who continue to challenge the accepted view of Watergate, both Dean and Magruder had links to Ms. Rikan’s operation that had to be extracted from the DNC offices.

The near-unanimous opinion of former Nixon appointees is that Dean is a self-serving traitor. To media outlets such as MSNBC that hire him for political commentary to this day, he is the hero who brought down Nixon.

S.T. Patrick holds degrees in both journalism and social studies education. He spent 10 years as a respected educator and now hosts the “Midnight Writer News Show.” You may email him at STPatrickAFP@gmail.com.

This article was originally published in American Free Press Issue 1 & 2, January 1 & 8, 2018.




Censorship Plague Infects America

Many are surprised to learn the true carriers of the exploding censorship plague is “Zionists hiding behind the banner of the neo-Bolshevik antifa movement.”

By Dr. Kevin Barrett

Albert Camus’s 1947 novel used The Plague as a metaphor for fascism. Today, the plague of fascist-style intolerance is once again spreading. But the carriers are not so much the paleoconservative nationalists that antifa hates as antifa itself . . . and the milieu from which it arises.

The core principle of fascism is crushing dissent. And it is antifa and its allies who are the worst censors and most fanatical enemies of free speech.

American Freedom Party Conference in Tennessee

On May 10, 1933, 40,000 pro-Nazi Germans gathered in Berlin to stage a gigantic book-burning bonfire. Exactly 85 years later, on May 10, 2018, philosopher and author Gilad Atzmon was barred from the Wil-Mar Community Center in Madison, Wisc. on the grounds that he was a supposed “Holocaust denier.”

In fact, Atzmon does not deny any facts about any of the many 20th century holocausts, but he insists that events in the past must be treated in an open, scholarly manner as opposed to as a religion. Atzmon opposes all forms of history laws. He prefers to remember his grandmother as a victim of the larger holocaust, World War II—which killed 60 million innocent people—rather than giving her special status because she, unlike more than 50 million other innocent victims of that horrific war, happened to be Jewish.

Like the 1930s German authors whose books were burned by Nazis, Atzmon is a dissident. A healthy society welcomes and embraces heretics like Atzmon. But our society is increasingly unhealthy, sickened by the plague of censorship, which festers in the stinking marshes of political correctness, then creeps out to strike down free thought.

Atzmon has been censored so many times he has lost count. When I informed him that his Madison venue had been abruptly canceled less than a week before the event, he told me, “It happens all the time.” Often the cancellations come on the very day of the event, making it difficult or impossible to find alternative locations.

Atzmon is censored because he criticizes Israel’s sacred cows and defends the rights of Palestinians. In this, he resembles the vast majority of censorship victims in America and Western Europe. Is it not odd that Americans and Europeans can critique and mock their own culture’s sacred symbols, yet are forced to kowtow to Israel’s?

I was recently banned from KBOO community radio in Portland, Ore. shortly before I was scheduled to appear. The witch-hunt that terrorized KBOO management into banning me was led by Zionists hiding behind the banner of the neo-Bolshevik antifa movement.

The previous year I was banned from the Berkeley Fellowship of Unitarians and Universalists after a hate campaign led by a “liberal Zionist” member. That was the first time I had ever had a speaking event canceled. Israel lobby groups had tried to cancel my events several times before that, but they had always failed. In 2015, they got me briefly banned from Canada, but it backfired when the ban was quickly lifted and I spoke in many Canadian cities. In several of those cities, B’nai B’rith Canada pressured the venue to cancel, but none ever did.

In Edmonton, B’nai B’rith lodged a hate speech complaint with the local police. After the first half of my talk, two plainclothes officers approached me and identified themselves as members of the Edmonton Police Department hate squad. They told me they had no problem with anything I had said. So I can now brag that my talks are “certified hate-free by the Edmonton PD hate squad.”

This book by Israeli intellectual Gilad Atzmon is an exposé of Jewish identity politics. Order now from AFP Store.

Over the past three years, it seems that the censorship plague has metastasized and spread not only through community institutions like the Berkeley Unitarian church, the Wil-Mar Center in Madison, and KBOO radio but in even more virulent forms across the Internet. Many dozens of history books have been banned by Amazon. Facebook and Google are tweaking their algorithms to hide alternative media. An Internet publication I write for, “Veterans Today”—the most-read veterans publication in America—has been completely banned from Facebook without any explanation. The most likely reason: offending Zionist sensibilities.

Academia is also affected. Professors who question Zionist propaganda, like Anthony Hall, Steven Sulaita, and Joy Karega, have been the focus of hysterical witch-hunts. I recently interviewed Alan Sabrosky about censorship. Sabrosky, an ex-Marine officer and former director of strategic studies at the U.S. Army War College, is on record stating that “9/11 was a Mossad operation, period.” He told me that the ultimate form of censorship is assassination and voiced his suspicions about the untimely deaths of two great AMERICAN FREE PRESS journalists, Michael Collins Piper and Victor Thorn.

AFP is the last print publication braving the Zionist censorship hurricane. Writing for this newspaper may be a dangerous job, but somebody’s got to do it.

Kevin Barrett, Ph.D., is an Arabist-Islamologist scholar and one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror. From 1991 through 2006, Dr. Barrett taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin. In 2006, however, he was attacked by Republican state legislators who called for him to be fired from his job at the University of Wisconsin-Madison due to his political opinions. Since 2007, Dr. Barrett has been informally blacklisted from teaching in American colleges and universities. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, public speaker, author, and talk radio host.




Congress Leaves for Memorial Break Without Deal on Immigration

By AFP Staff

Congress left to go on an 11-day vacation Thursday, May 24, before completing a deal on much-needed immigration reform—something that legislators have been promising their constituents for years now.

Despite having solid majorities in the House and the Senate in the 115th Congress—237 seats out of the 430 in the House, and 52 out of 100 in the Senate—and a Republican president, so far, legislators have been unable to produce immigration reform that funds the president’s requests for a border wall and more Border Patrol on the border.

Kingdom Identity

According to The Hill, a Capitol Hill daily, the GOP is “nearing the end game” on immigration. The problem is, the end game involves protecting hundreds of thousands of so-called “Dreamers,” the children of illegal aliens born in the United States. The Republican leadership has been able to keep most Republicans in line, but increasingly in states where Republican legislators are finding themselves in tough campaigns, a few have folded and support a Democrat-backed deal that aids Dreamers.

While the U.S. is a nation of immigrants, illegal immigration is a slap in the face of every immigrant who went through the long and often difficult process of gaining U.S. citizenship legally. Even the United States’s neighbor to the south, Mexico, takes an aggressive stance on illegal immigration. In 2015, Mexico went so far as to deport several thousand U.S. citizens who had been living in the country illegally. On average, every year, Mexican authorities deport over 100,000 illegal immigrants who come to Mexico from all over Central and South America.

There are currently several bills addressing illegal immigration that are pending in Congress. One bill that has the backing of conservatives is immigration legislation sponsored by Reps. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Michael McCaul (R-Texas).

According to a press release issued by Goodlatte’s office, the Securing America’s Future Act:

  • Ends the Diversity Program—Eliminates the visa lottery green card program;
  • Ends Chain Migration—Eliminates green card programs for relatives (other than spouses and minor children); creates a renewable temporary visa for parents of citizens to unite families at no cost to taxpayers;
  • Reduces Overall Immigration Levels—Reduces immigration levels (now averaging over 1,060,000 a year) by about 260,000 a year—a decrease of about 25%;
  • Increases Immigration Levels for Skilled Workers—Increases the number of green cards available in the three skilled worker green card categories from about 120,000 a year to about 175,000—an increase of 45%;
  • Agricultural Workers—Creates a workable agricultural guest worker program to grow our economy;
  • Visa Security—Sends additional ICE agents to more high-risk embassies overseas to vet visitors and immigrants;
  • Build the Border Wall—Authorizes border wall construction;
  • Advanced Technology—Additional technology, roads and other tactical infrastructure to secure the border;
  • Secures Ports of Entry—Improves, modernizes, and expands ports of entry along the southern border;
  • More Boots on the Ground—Adds 5,000 Border Patrol Agents and 5,000 CBP Officers;
  • Use of the National Guard—Authorizes the Guard to provide aviation and intelligence support for border security operations;
  • Biometric Entry-Exit System—Requires full implementation at all air, land, and sea ports of entry;
  • Makes E-Verify Mandatory—Employers must check to see that they are only hiring legal workers;
  • Cracks Down on Sanctuary Cities—Authorizes the Department of Justice to withhold law enforcement grants from sanctuary cities/allows victims to sue the sanctuary cities that released their attackers;
  • Facilitates Cooperation with Local Law Enforcement—Establishes probable cause standards for ICE detainers/indemnifies localities that comply/requires ICE enter into 287(g) agreements requested by localities;
  • Detaining Dangerous Individuals—Allows DHS to detain dangerous illegal immigrants who cannot be removed;
  • Kate’s Law—Enhances criminal penalties for deported criminals who illegally return;
  • Combats Asylum Fraud—Tightens the “credible fear” standard to root out frivolous claims and increases penalties for fraud/terminates asylum for individuals who voluntarily return home;
  • Keeps Out and Removes Dangerous Criminals—Makes illegal immigrants removable for being gang members/makes those with convictions for aggravated felonies, not registering as sex offenders, and multiple DUIs removable;
  • Visa Overstays—Makes illegal presence a federal misdemeanor (illegally crossing the border already is a crime);
  • Safely Returns Unaccompanied Minors—Ensures the safe and quick return of unaccompanied minors apprehended at the border; allows for the detention of minors apprehended at the border with their parents;
  • Legislatively Provides Legal Status—Individuals who received deferred action on the basis of being brought to the U.S. as minors get a 3-year renewable legal status allowing them to work and travel overseas (without advance parole). There is no special path to a green card. Recipients may only make use of existing paths to green cards;
  • No Criminals—No gang members or those with criminal convictions/convictions in juvenile court for serious crimes are eligible;
  • Combats Fraud—Strong anti-fraud measures/allows for prosecutions for fraud.



Feds Betray America’s Vets Yet Again

An Air Force veteran is fighting the VA for reimbursement of his unpaid emergency room bills, denied due to a “coding error.” Fortunately for the estimated 98,000 other vets who’ve also been denied benefits, he’s determined to win the battle.

By Dave Gahary

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), called the Veterans Administration (established 1930) until it became a cabinet-level department in 1989, has been playing dirty tricks on the men and women who have sacrificed for this once-great nation, by regularly refusing to pay for emergency room (ER) visits. But this time, they picked on the wrong veteran.

Minnesota-based U.S. Air Force (USAF) veteran Benjamin Krause—who has been interviewed by this newspaper several times—is a lawyer, investigative reporter, and award-winning veterans advocate, running the website “DisabledVeterans.org.” He’s also the author of a benefits guide for veterans that shows how to maximize what they have earned from serving their country. An authority on VA policy, Krause is featured regularly on Fox, CBS, and NBC as well as in the pages of Bloomberg, The Washington Times, Minnesota’s largest newspaper the Star Tribune, and many others.

Veterans across the U.S. were served a heaping helping of good fortune when the VA denied Krause’s $6,066.91 ER bill. And although Krause’s visit to the ER occurred last year, the 2.4 million-member American Legion just recognized this nationwide “ER billing denial scandal” as worthy of exposure.

Drowning in IRS debt? The MacPherson Group could be a lifesaver!

Krause’s nine-hour visit to the ER had its roots in the loss of a loved one, as he explained on his website:

My chest pains immediately followed the untimely death of my ex-wife, Amie Muller, from pancreatic cancer believed linked to her burn pit exposures at Balad, AB, Iraq. The stress of her passing most certainly triggered my chest pains, and we swiftly went to the nearest emergency room to be safe.

“I felt like my chest was about to pop,” he told Minneapolis-based KARE 11 News.

Thankfully, he said, doctors eventually determined that it was not a heart attack but instead an extreme form of stress, exacerbated by a recent death in the family.

“The technical term for it is malignant hypertension with neurological and cardiovascular complications,” Krause explained. “I couldn’t dial back the stress.”

As a USAF veteran, Krause was sure he’d be covered, especially since he followed the procedure for ER visits required by the VA. “I followed the rules,” Krause explained. “I notified the [VA] within 72 hours of the hospitalization.”

He was mistaken when he thought the VA would cover his visit, however. “I received a denial three weeks later asserting my decision to seek emergency care when I did was not what a ‘prudent layperson’ would do,” Krause explained.

It was then he reached out to KARE 11 to see if they might be interested in his story.

According to the VA’s own “Prudent Layperson Fact Sheet,” a “prudent layperson” is someone who possesses:

. . . an average knowledge of medicine and health, to believe that his or her condition, sickness, or injury is of such a nature that failure to obtain immediate medical care could result in placing the patient’s health in serious jeopardy, cause serious impairment to bodily functions, serious dysfunction of any bodily organ or part, or in the case of a behavioral condition placing the health of such person or others in serious jeopardy.

In fact, the fact sheet’s first example of when an ER visit is covered seems as if it was written for Krause’s visit:

A patient presents to the emergency department with a complaint of chest pain. The patient is examined and evaluated and discharged with a diagnosis of mild gastric irritation. Retrospective analysis by a Fee Basis Unit may determine that gastro-intestinal upset is not an appropriate use of an emergency department and deny the claim as non-emergent. However, the patient’s initial judgment seeking emergency treatment regarding his/her chest pain, a potentially serious problem, is appropriate. This type of visit clearly falls into the category of what any prudent layperson would consider an appropriate use of an emergency department.

Coincidentally, the same day KARE emailed the Minneapolis VA for an interview to discuss Krause’s case, he received a call from a VA official “saying a mistake had been made and his claim should not have been denied.”

They blamed Krause’s denial on a “coding error” and some other matters.

“If it happened to me,” Krause told KARE, “I guarantee it’s happening to thousands of veterans nationwide.”

Turns out he’s right.

In a 2017 congressional hearing, VA official Dr. Baligh Yehia addressed the scandal of veterans being denied payment for ER visits in a statement detailing that “between the beginning of fiscal year 2014 and August of 2015, approximately 98,000 claims were denied because the condition was determined not to be an emergency.” He further admitted, “Many of these denials are the result of inconsistent application of the ‘prudent layperson’ standard. . . .”

Dave Gahary, a former submariner in the U.S. Navy, prevailed in a suit brought by the New York Stock Exchange in an attempt to silence him. Dave is the producer of an upcoming full-length feature film about the attack on the USS Liberty. See erasingtheliberty.com for more information and to get the new book on which the movie will be based, Erasing the Liberty.




#GoSilent Strives to Put Memory Back In Memorial Day

By AFP Staff

A campaign headed up again this year by Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA) is encouraging Americans to remember the reason we celebrate Memorial Day. IAVA asks people to pledge to go silent for one minute at 3 p.m. to “honor, remember, and reflect.”

A pledge page is set up at IAVA.org where people can publicly or privately commit to this minute of silence, and to name the individual(s) being honored if so desired. “This Memorial Day, IAVA will lay a wreath before the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington National Cemetery, and later pause for a moment of silence at 3 p.m. EST. Gather your friends and family across the country and pause with us for a national moment of silence to honor those who have made the ultimate sacrifice.”

Think the IRS Never Loses Cases? Think again!

IAVA, a non-partisan advocacy organization, was founded and is led by veterans, calling itself “the modern-day veterans hall for the current generation with over 400,000 members worldwide.” It strives to “connect, unite and empower post-9/11 veterans.” The group offers one-on-one case management help to assist veterans in finding needed services in addition to its advocacy work.

“This year, as a part of an ongoing campaign to elevate the voices of veterans and combat the unprecedented politicization of our military and veterans, #GoSilent is more important than it has ever been before,” Paul Rieckhoff, IAVA founder and CEO, told ConnectingVets.com.

“As veterans and our military are being used as political props and shields by special interest groups and politicians across the aisle, it has never been more important to come together as a nation to remember what this day is really about, and to honor the men and women who have made the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of our freedoms.”




And Washington Is Worried About Russian Trolls?

By AFP Staff

While Washington works itself into a lather over Russians supposedly trolling Americans and “ruining democracy,” a new poll from Pew Research Center found that less than 25% of American adults actually reads books. The percentage of non-readers is even higher among those over age 50.

It’s even worse than that. Television is normally a wasteland, but occasionally it shines a mirror on us and can reflect our flaws. A new video by late-night comedian Jimmy Kimmel does exactly that when he sends staff out to interview the man-in-the-street with the simplest of questions: “Can you name a book?”

You can watch the video here:

For those who don’t want to patronize YouTube, here is the gist of the video: The comedian sent a team into the streets to ask average Americans if they could just name one book. They didn’t even ask for the last book they read—only to name the title to one single book. How did most people respond? Most couldn’t, but some went to so far as to name movies.

It’s painful to watch but worth a moment of your time.

And Washington is worried about Russian trolls?




Lebanon Threatened With Genocide

Hezbollah has become a major power broker in Lebanon, explains Richard Walker, after winning big in the recent election—prompting immediate threats of genocide by an Israeli politician called “more dangerous than Hezbollah.”

By Richard Walker

Despite a well-funded and devious Saudi campaign to put its favorites in power in Lebanon’s recent parliamentary elections, Hezbollah and several smaller parties won more than half the seats, making Hezbollah a major power broker.

Hezbollah’s victory led to threats of genocide against Lebanon by Israeli religious right-wing politician Naftali Bennett, who has been described by some Israelis as more dangerous than Hezbollah. As the “Middle East Monitor” put it, had Russia made such a threat against any of its neighbors the condemnation in the West would have been widespread. The Israeli threat was somewhat ironic, given President Donald Trump’s letter to Lebanon’s President Michel Aoun in November 2017, thanking him for Lebanon’s role in the war against terrorism and assuring him of American support. A month later, Aoun described as dangerous Trump’s decision to move the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Kingdom Identity

The Saudis had placed their electoral hopes on the Sunni Arab Future Movement, which lost 13 seats to Hezbollah. The result upset the Israelis and neocons in Washington, all of whom had been hoping for a Hezbollah defeat. The outcome indicated that Hezbollah continues to attract the support of Lebanese Christians who have felt for some time that the Islamic organization protected them from ISIS and al Qaeda. Hezbollah had the backing of the country’s largest Christian party, the Free Patriotic Movement. Hezbollah has been a major supporter of that group.

In the wake of the election, a document came to light exposing how the Saudis plotted to undermine Hezbollah in the polls. Their plan was to funnel large sums of money to Hezbollah’s opposition, the Future Movement, and to encourage a bigger inflow of Syrian refugees into Lebanon, which could be blamed on Hezbollah’s support of the Assad government. The plan backfired badly for the House of Saud and its favored Lebanese politicians.

The New Jerusalem, Michael Collins Piper
Michael Collins Piper on Zionist Power in America. Available from the AFP Online Store.

Ever since Israel got a bloody nose in its last war with Hezbollah in 2006, there has been a drumbeat in Tel Aviv to find a pretext for a new war with Hezbollah, something that would please Saudi Arabia, its Sunni allies, and U.S. neocons like John Bolton, who now dominate the Trump administration’s national security and Middle East policies.

It was hardly a coincidence that within hours of Trump exiting the internationally approved Iran nuclear deal that Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu launched air strikes against targets, including Iranian ones, in Syria. It was a sure sign he was hoping to goad Iran and Hezbollah into a shooting war designed to drag the United States into war. His move was praised by the Trump White House.

Israeli meddling in Syria and Lebanon is nothing new. Netanyahu has been supporting extreme Sunni militias like the al-Nusra Front that have been funded by Saudi Arabia and other Arab states. Wounded al-Nusra fighters have been treated at Israeli military hospitals in the Golan Heights, a part of the region that Israel claims to be its own, in contravention of international law.

The Golan belongs to Syria, but Israel wants to keep it because of the oil and gas it holds. It would suit Israel if the Syrian government were destroyed so that it could not continue to lay claim to the Golan Heights. Netanyahu has given Genie Energy Ltd., a New Jersey-based company with leading neocons like Dick Cheney on its board, gas and oil exploration rights to parts of the Golan Heights. In September 2017, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke met with a former Israeli politician, who runs an Israeli subsidiary of Genie Energy.

The Lebanese know all about Israel’s political and military interference in the affairs of its neighbors. Israel first invaded Lebanon in 1979 and then later in 1982, withdrawing in 1985 while maintaining a 12-mile security border inside Lebanon. Israel has not forgotten that it was Hezbollah that mostly forced it to pull out of Lebanon in 1985. After it did so, Hezbollah instigated a policy of seizing Israeli soldiers and using them to bargain for the exchange of Lebanese men held in Israeli prisons. The seizure of two soldiers in 2004 was the precursor to Israel’s invasion of southern Lebanon in 2006.

Ever since the Bush-Cheney era, there has been a growing nexus of Israel and Sunni Arab states like Saudi Arabia plotting a war with Shiite Iran that would also result in attacks on Hezbollah and the Assad government in Syria. Russia has made it clear its military will not sit idly by if there are any moves to remove Assad, but that leaves Israel with the option of drawing America into a war with Hezbollah and Iran. To that end, it is more than likely there will be a growing drumbeat from Tel Aviv, Washington, and Riyadh insisting that Iran has resumed its nuclear program and that Hezbollah is an increasing threat to Israel.

What is missing in many of the assessments of such a war is that even if America, Israel, and the Saudis won an air war, the war that would be fought on the ground across the region, including in Iraq, would be long and bloody. Israel and Saudi Arabia would not remain unscathed, and the U.S. military would not be able to protect all purported U.S. allies across the region.

Richard Walker is the nom de plume of a former New York mainstream news producer who grew tired of seeing his articles censored by his bosses.




Who Is this MS-13 Gang the Media and Democrats Are Defending?

As part of the efforts by President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions to reduce violence on America’s streets, they must clean up and clear out the rapidly growing Central American MS-13 gang, many members of which are illegal immigrants.

By Natalia Castro

Since the 2016 election, President Donald Trump has waged war on gangs within the U.S., most notably the violent MS-13. For nearly 40 years, MS-13 has grown across the United States and Central America to become one of the deadliest gangs in the world. To understand the best method of combatting their continued rise, we must first understand who these people are and how they have grown to take over American cities.

What began in the 1970s as a group of low-level drug users in Los Angeles emerged into a violent and satanic group in the early 1980s. Dara Lind of Vox Media explains, the LAPD’s first reference to the group was of the “Mara Salvatrucha Stoners,” but as civil war in El Salvador and conflict with Nicaragua intensified, it brought waves of illegal immigrants hardened from escaping violence in their home country.

Immigrants from El Salvador flooded areas dominated by Mexican-American gangs and used brutal tactics, such as machete killings, to take control over the area and expand.

Hair Tissue Mineral Testing

The BBC reported in April 2017 that U.S. intelligence data suggested the gang had by then spread to 46 states and maintained an international presence of at least 60,000 members. The group operates on the motto “Kill, rape, control” and has an annual revenue of about $31 million—garnered mainly from drug sales and extortion.

MS-13 has been able to grow due to our lax immigration enforcement. The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) notes in a February 2018 report, while most data on MS-13 suspects does not include immigration status, the center could conclude nearly a quarter of all gang members are illegal immigrants. They prey on low-income, minority youth to join the gang for protection.

The CIS also found that areas with high rates of MS-13 crime correspond with locations having a large number of Unaccompanied Alien Children who have been resettled by the federal government.

In a roundtable discussion with members of law enforcement, experts, and elected officials in Long Island, New York, President Trump also blamed “catch and release” policies for keeping violent gang members on the streets.

The CIS found in an April 2018 report: “According to ICE statistics provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee, over a nine-month period in FY2017, 142 gang members that ICE was seeking to deport were released by the local law enforcement agency instead of transferred to ICE custody.  Two-thirds of the releases occurred in California, which has had a strict sanctuary policy in effect since January 2014. Fifteen of the aliens were members of the MS-13 gang and 127 were members of other gangs.”

The poor enforcement of our immigration laws has allowed the gang to thrive. Today, MS-13 does not only maintain control in large cities like Los Angeles; it has spread across suburban America.

Suburban centers such as Fairfax, Va., Annapolis, Md., and Long Island, N.Y. have never experienced the levels of violent crime they are now facing at the hands of greater MS-13 presence. Additionally, these suburban areas lack the resources of large cities to combat violent crime, making them easy targets for gang abuse.

RoadToAmericanSocialism
Now on sale at the AFP Store

In Long Island, the gang is connected to at least 17 murders that have taken place within 18 months. As law enforcement attempts to combat rising crime, they have also been placed on high alert following direct threats from MS-13 members against police, according to Charlotte Cuthbertson of the Epoch Times.

As MS-13 has grown, the gang has transitioned from a small immigrant group of casual drug users to a violent, ruthless, and international organization. Violence throughout Central America and failures in our immigration system have fueled the gang’s rise. Today, MS-13 is not just an urban dilemma; the gang’s presence is truly a national crisis. As President Donald Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions attempt to combat violence in this country, they must start with combatting the rise of MS-13.

Natalia Castro is a contributing editor at Americans for Limited Government.




Is U.S. Bellicosity Backfiring?

With the Singapore summit now scuttled, North Korea issuing vaguely threatening references to nuclear war in response to VP Mike Pence’s incendiary remarks, and Mike Pompeo issuing outrageous “demands” of Iran, it’s looking more and more like the neocon warmongers’ complete victory over Donald Trump’s grand America-first goals is imminent.  

By Patrick J. Buchanan

U.S. threats to crush Iran and North Korea may yet work, but as of now neither Tehran nor Pyongyang appears to be intimidated.

Repeated references by NSC adviser John Bolton and Vice President Mike Pence to the “Libya model” for denuclearization of North Korea just helped sink the Singapore summit of President Trump and Kim Jong Un. To North Korea, the Libya model means the overthrow and murder of Libya strongman Col. Gadhafi, after he surrendered his WMD.

Wednesday, North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Choe Son Hui exploded at Pence’s invocation of Libya: “Vice-President Pence has made unbridled and impudent remarks that North Korea might end like Libya. . . . I cannot suppress my surprise at such ignorant and stupid remarks.

“Whether the U.S. will meet us at a meeting room or encounter us at nuclear-to-nuclear showdown is entirely dependent upon the decision and behavior of the United States.”

Think the IRS Never Loses Cases? Think again!

Yesterday, Trump canceled the Singapore summit.

Earlier this week at the Heritage Foundation, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo laid out our Plan B for Iran in a speech that called to mind Prussian Field Marshal Karl Von Moltke.

Among Pompeo’s demands: Iran must end all support for Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthi rebels in Yemen, and Hamas in Gaza, withdraw all forces under Iranian command in Syria, and disarm its Shiite militia in Iraq.

Iran must confess its past lies about a nuclear weapons program and account publicly for all such activity back into the 20th century.

Iran must halt all enrichment of uranium, swear never to produce plutonium, shut down its heavy water reactor, open up its military bases to inspection to prove it has no secret nuclear program, and stop testing ballistic missiles.

And unless Iran submits, she will be strangled economically.

What Pompeo delivered was an ultimatum: Iran is to abandon all its allies in all Mideast wars, or face ruin and possible war with the USA.

It is hard to recall a secretary of state using the language Pompeo deployed: “We will track down Iranian operatives and their Hezbollah proxies operating around the world and crush them. Iran will never again have carte blanche to dominate the Middle East.”

But how can Iran “dominate” a Mideast that is home to Turkey, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Israel, and Egypt, as well as U.S. forces in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Sea, and Syria?

To Iran’s east is a nuclear-armed Pakistan. To its west is a nuclear-armed U.S. Fifth Fleet and a nuclear-armed Israel. Iran has no nukes, no warships to rival ours, and a 1970s air force.

Yet, this U.S.-Iran confrontation, triggered by Trump’s trashing of the nuclear deal and Pompeo’s ultimatum, is likely to end one of three ways:

First, Tehran capitulates, which is unlikely, as President Hassan Rouhani retorted to Pompeo: “Who are you to decide for Iran and the world? We will continue our path with the support of our nation.” Added Ayatollah Khamenei, “Iran’s presence in the region is our strategic depth.”

Second, Iran defies U.S. sanctions and continues to support its allies in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen. This would seem likely to lead to collisions and war.

Third, the U.S. could back off its maximalist demands, as Trump backed off Bolton’s demand that Kim Jong Un accept the Libyan model of total and verifiable disarmament before any sanctions are lifted.

All Out War, Klein
Available from AFP’s Online Store.

Where, then, are we headed?

While our NATO allies are incensed by Trump’s threat to impose secondary sanctions if they do not re-impose sanctions on Tehran, the Europeans are likely to cave in to America’s demands. For Europe to choose Iran over a U.S. that has protected Europe since the Cold War began and is an indispensable market for Europe’s goods would be madness.

Vladimir Putin appears to want no part of an Iran-Israel or U.S.-Iran war and has told Bashar Assad that Russia will not be selling Damascus his S-300 air defense system. Putin has secured his bases in Syria and wants to keep them.

As for the Chinese, she will take advantage of the West’s ostracism of Iran by drawing Iran closer to her own orbit.

Is there a compromise to be had?

Perhaps, for some of Pompeo’s demands accord with the interests of Iran, which cannot want a war with the United States, or with Israel, which would likely lead to war with the United States.

Iran could agree to release Western prisoners, move Shiite militia in Syria away from the Golan Heights, accept verifiable restrictions on tests of longer-range missiles, and establish deconfliction rules for U.S. and Iranian warships in the Persian Gulf.

Reward: aid from the West and renewed diplomatic relations with the United States.

Surely, a partial, verifiable nuclear disarmament of North Korea is preferable to war on the peninsula. And, surely, a new nuclear deal with Iran with restrictions on missiles is preferable to war in the Gulf.

Again, we cannot make the perfect the enemy of the good.

Pat Buchanan is a writer, political commentator and presidential candidate. He is the author of Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever and previous titles including The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority. His books are available at the AFP Online Store.

COPYRIGHT 2017 CREATORS.COM



FBI Mole Cried About Russia Collusion in the Past

And the beat goes on. . . . As special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation continues, so does the stream of questionable “evidence” and lack of significant indictments. 

By AFP Staff

Stephen Halper, the Cambridge University professor who was recently outed as a paid federal informant in the Trump presidential campaign, has made accusations in the past about Russians infiltrating the university, reports online news and commentary website “The Daily Caller.” According to the report, the targets of Halper’s charges responded to the claims, saying his allegations were “absurd.”

Several years before Halper had infiltrated the Trump campaign and met with some of Donald Trump’s top advisors, Halper claimed that a female Russian academic attending a seminar in 2014 was actually a spy and that the event sponsor, Cambridge Intelligence Seminar (CIS), was influenced by Russia.

American Freedom Party Conference in Tennessee

Interviewed by The Financial Times in 2016, Christopher Andrew, the official historian for MI5 and head of CIS, told the newspaper that Halper’s charges were without merit.

Last week it was reported that Halper was a paid FBI informant when he approached top Trump campaign advisors Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, and Sam Clovis.

At this time, no one knows what Halper has told Robert Mueller, the special counsel tasked with investigating possible Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, but it has been disclosed that Halper met with Page several times over the course of 14 months through September 2017. Halper and Papadopoulos met “several times in mid-September 2016,” according to “The Daily Caller.” Halper and Clovis reportedly met only once, on Sept. 1, 2016.

Mueller has issued 23 indictments since the creation of his office a year ago this month. These include four former Trump advisers, 13 Russian nationals, three Russian companies, one California man, and one London-based lawyer. It is worth noting that not one of the Trump officials has been charged with illegally colluding with Russians. Most have centered on lying to federal law enforcement officials, money laundering, and failure to register as a lobbyist.

Most of the Russians have ignored the indictments, but two Russian companies have hired attorneys to contest the charges. It was reported on May 24 that one of the Russian companies has requested a speedy trial date be set so that the company’s name can be cleared. Mueller’s attorneys have sought to delay the request, but a judge ruled against them, saying the trial should commence within 70 days as per law.




Radical Leftists Spend Big on Local Elections

By AFP Staff

A new report by The Los Angeles Times sheds light on why globalist slash-and-burn speculator George Soros along with a half-dozen leftist groups is spending millions of dollars on candidates running for district attorneys up and down the state of California. According to the Times, the wealthy left-wing activists want to undercut average voters when it comes to issues like illegal immigration and crime.

Here’s what the Times reported earlier today:

The effort is part of a years-long campaign by liberal groups to reshape the nation’s criminal justice system. New York billionaire George Soros headlines a consortium of private funders, the American Civil Liberties Union and other social justice groups and Democratic activists targeting four of the 56 district attorney positions up for election on June 5. Five other California candidates are receiving lesser support.

Soros-Not Easy Being God
The REAL George Soros – new at the AFP Store!

The Times reported that the donations from the leftist groups, in most cases, surpassed by a significant margin donations coming from local police and citizen groups and businesses that would prefer law and order over policies touted by so-called social justice warriors.

“These people who want to create their own social policy are not worthy of the office,” former Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley told the Times. “If they win in San Diego or Sacramento, L.A. is next.”

Soros, who lives in New York and is not a U.S. citizen, has given $1.5 million of his own money to a political action committee in California to fund the campaign of Geneviéve Jones-Wright, who is running for San Diego district attorney. If Ms. Jones-Wright wins, as the city’s top prosecutor she would be more worried about creating a “police misconduct unit” to police the police than in dealing with the illegal immigration problem southern California is facing or gang violence.




Israel Owns U.S. Foreign Policy

President Trump’s “emotional” decision to denounce the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action involving Iran, based on known falsehoods fed to him by Bibi Netanyahu, is not making America great again in the Middle East. Who is really making the decisions on U.S. foreign policy?

By Philip Giraldi

There should be no remaining doubt over whether Israel and its Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu working through their billionaire proxies in the U.S. own President Donald Trump. Last Tuesday’s [May 8, 2018] presidential full-bore denunciation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) that limits Iran’s nuclear program followed a script that could have easily been written by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs or by National Security Advisor John Bolton, which amounts to the same thing. A truly American foreign policy, which is supposed to be designed to support genuine national interests, was nowhere to be seen.

Perhaps the most absurd segment in what was an emotional rather than rational call to arms was Trump’s citation of “definitive proof” that Iran has a secret nuclear weapons program.

It went like this:

At the heart of the Iran deal was a giant fiction: that a murderous regime desired only a peaceful nuclear energy program. Today, we have definitive proof that this Iranian promise was a lie. Last week, Israel published intelligence documents—long concealed by Iran—conclusively showing the Iranian regime and its history of pursuing nuclear weapons.

Drowning in IRS debt? The MacPherson Group could be a lifesaver!

Trump was referring to the previous week’s theatrical performance by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, complete with PowerPoint slides, delivered in English to reach the desired audience, which was the “decider” in the White House. It was not Netanyahu’s first attempt to employ simple graphics to make his point about the alleged Iranian threat. His famous ticking-bomb montage presented at a meeting of the United Nations General Assembly is still recalled fondly in diplomatic circles.

The provenance and meaning of the documents that Netanyahu produced have been debunked almost everywhere in the media, even in outlets that are normally strongly supportive of Israel and all its works. Investigative journalist Gareth Porter has written a book entitled Manufactured Crisis: the Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare. In it he describes how many of the documents on Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program were forged by Israel’s Mossad intelligence service before being placed on a laptop and delivered by the terrorist group Mujaheddin e-Khalq, which the Israelis use to carry out assassinations inside Iran. The latest batch of documents mostly date back 15 years, and many of them were already known to the International Atomic Energy Agency as forgeries. Only the president of the United States was seemingly unaware of what kind of material he was actually endorsing.

In truth, Bibi is a serial liar who has been beating on the Iran-nuclear drum since 1996 if not earlier in an attempt to get the United States involved in a program to use its own military resources to take out Iran’s government.

Netanyahu is aware that his own military does not have the capability to destroy Iran singlehandedly unless it uses its secret nukes. It has therefore taken on the task of convincing the Americans to do the heavy lifting and to also suffer the casualties and other costs.

Ironically, in spite of Bibi’s bleating, even his own intelligence chiefs have gone on record recently saying that keeping the JCPOA is good for Israel. Here in the U.S. the verdict has been somewhat the same, with Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats and also then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo, a hardliner on Iran, both stating recently that Tehran is in compliance with all the restrictions placed on it by the agreement. Opinion polls also indicate that two out of three Americans support sticking with the JCPOA because it is clearly working and avoids American entanglement in yet another quagmire in the Middle East.

Trump, who attracted many voters due to his campaign promises to avoid unnecessary military interventions, coupled with his pledge to get out of foreign wars, has become Israel’s poodle. He has surrounded himself with Zionist Jewish advisers David Friedman, Jason Greenblatt, and his own son-in-law Jared Kushner to craft some kind of plan for the Middle East region, the details of which remain notably obscure.

The recent move of the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem and the recognition of the city as Israel’s capital was a typical gesture to satisfy an impossible to satisfy Netanyahu. There was no gain for the United States and the American people; quite the contrary, as it will inspire numerous terrorists and make U.S. travelers targets. And Israel has inevitably taken advantage of the opportunity to make more demands, recently expanding the size of Jerusalem to include large chunks of the West Bank while also considering obtaining U.S. consent to the full annexation of the Golan Heights.

So far the game plan, if there is one, has been to allow Israel to do everything it wants in a bid to make the Palestinians so desperate that they will leave or surrender completely to become Israel’s serfs, thereby allowing the creation of a Greater Israel stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean. It would be an Israel ethnically cleansed of Arabs if some of Netanyahu’s ministers have their way. Conceding all to Israel has also meant an ominous silence as Israeli war criminals continue to use army snipers to shoot dead unarmed protesting Gazans. The death toll is currently close to 50 with as many as 5,000 more injured by gunshots and tear gas.

Others who marvel at the ability of Israeli interests to preempt American interests in the White House have come to believe that it is all about money. Tying large dollops of Jewish money to political power is often cited as some kind of “libel,” but there should be no question that Jews have been the money men for the candidates of both major parties in the last electoral cycle. And their money has been provided conditionally based on what the candidates were willing to do to make Israel happy. Both Hillary Clinton and Trump understood the deal and were prepared to deliver.

In the upcoming midterm electoral cycle, control of the Senate is up for grabs and the Democrats are also eyeing major gains in the House. Key to the Republican maintenance of the status quo of control of both legislative bodies is money. Casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, Home Depot’s Bernard Marcus, and hedge fund manager Paul Singer are all reportedly prepared to hand over whatever it will take to the party making the most promises. And it will all be for Israel.

Philip Giraldi is a former CIA counter-terrorism specialist and military intelligence officer and a columnist and television commentator. He is also the executive director of the Council for the National Interest. Other articles by Giraldi can be found on the website of the Unz Review.




Were JFK, RFK, MLK Killings Linked?

Multiple researchers are examining the similarities of the assassination operations that took out  President John F. Kennedy, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, and Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. These researchers, explains S. T. Patrick, “are not fringe theorists. In many ways, they are human encyclopedias of assassination and conspiracy.” Listen to his interview with author Carmine Savastano.

By S. T. Patrick

The assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, and Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. have for decades been taught and written about in isolation. While the Kennedy brothers shared familial, political, and relational ties, the murders are still viewed as separate events. Though the deaths of RFK and MLK are separated by only two months, the means, motives, and opportunities that dictate criminal and legal investigations have never been woven together by the historical and educational establishment.

The tendency of the educational theorists and textbook conglomerates to isolate characters and events in history is understood—if not excused. By avoiding patterns and minimizing links, history can be taught as a series of spontaneous events that create patriotic heroes, ignite societal changes, and provide government-based solutions.

If the shared players, government agencies, behavioral patterns, and deep politics behind these seminal assassinations were highlighted, students as well as casual observers would begin questioning the structure of power that exists in America today. The survival of the richest would then be questioned with historical ferocity, the likes of which would be unparalleled.

In 2003, Jim DiEugenio and Lisa Pease coauthored and co-edited an anthology entitled The Assassinations: Probe Magazine on JFK, MLK, RFK, and Malcolm X. DiEugenio wrote that he and Pease “thought it was wrong to survey them only as individual incidents. They were related to each other, especially in their cumulative impact.”

DiEugenio, writing for “KennedysandKing.com,” noted that the impact of the assassinations was two-fold. First, the relative success of the JFK assassins buoyed the confidence of the perpetrators and encouraged them to carry out the other assassinations. Second, it was the literal death of the liberal left in the country.

Obvious in the three assassinations is the identification of a “lone nut” archetype, a killer who had been taken past his emotional peak by an ideological issue. For Lee Harvey Oswald, we were taught to believe it was Oswald’s hatred of an American way of life and a devotion to communism. For James Earl Ray, it was the weight of his criminal background and stereotypical Southern racism. Sirhan Sirhan, we were told, was motivated by his devotion to the allegedly anti-Semitic pro-Palestinian movement. He assassinated Bobby Kennedy because RFK had promised fighter jets to Israel, if elected. Critical researchers now contest all of these motives, most of which have been proven false by documents and interviews after the official reports were released.

We now know that Oswald had surrounded himself with rabid anti-communists in both New Orleans and Dallas. In New Orleans, he worked out of the same Camp Street office as the communist-hating Guy Bannister and in Dallas was befriended by a White (anti-communist) Russian, George De Mohrenschildt. Ray has a sparse history of racism and very few actions that can be tied to an innate, inescapable criminal personality. Sirhan was not an anti-Semitic follower of Islam. He was a Greek Orthodox Christian who had been brought to America by Christian missionaries. When Sirhan’s home was searched immediately after the assassination, no library of pro-Palestinian information was found.

Rep. Allard K. Lowenstein (D-N.Y.) once said, “What is odd is not that some people thought [the Kennedy brothers’ assassinations were] random, but that so many intelligent people refused to believe that it might be anything else.”

The newest attempt at understanding these assassinations in tandem as a foundational and structural problem is Carmine Savastano’s Two Princes and a King: A Concise Review of Three Political Assassinations. Savastano looks at the errors, incompetence, and inaction of each investigation, as well as the generalized groups that may bear some responsibility.

Savastano examines potential culprits in the categories of underworld arm (criminal elements, including mob involvement), official arm (elected and appointed officials), military intelligence arm (including CIA), and the conspirators (those actually involved at ground level). In doing so, Savastano is identifying uniquely different patterns of operation and cover-up that exist within each element.

DiEugenio, Pease, and Savastano are not fringe theorists. In many ways, they are human encyclopedias of assassination and conspiracy. They do not agree on every source, nor do they agree on the importance of every revelation, but that is the norm for research communities. They have all, however, brought forth information and conclusions that are vital in understanding the assassinations of three transformative leaders of the 1960s. Most importantly, all three are replacing what Americans were told they must believe with what actually was, one detail, one interview, and one document at a time.

At the 50th anniversary of the MLK and RFK assassinations, it is more important and more possible than ever to look at patterns and connections in a more cogent, identifiable way. Independent researchers, authors, and content providers will continue to do what the historical aristocrats of academia and a failed educational system have not done. They will dredge through the mounds of bad historiography and ineffectual government reports in search of meaning and in search of truth.

S.T. Patrick holds degrees in both journalism and social studies education. He spent 10 years as a respected educator and now hosts the “Midnight Writer News Show.” You may email him at STPatrickAFP@gmail.com.

Ed. Note: This article was originally published in American Free Press Issue 11 & 12, March 12 & 19, 2018.




A Trump Doctrine for Singapore and Beyond

The upcoming Singapore Summit offers an opportunity to significantly decrease the world’s threat of nuclear disaster and end decades of “frozen conflict” on the Korean Peninsula. Buchanan suggests President Trump would do best to have a backup plan to include some concessions, as will be expected by Kim, and to not push the typical John Bolton war mongering “all-or-nothing” mantra if he wishes to succeed. 

By Patrick J. Buchanan

After Pyongyang railed this week that the U.S.-South Korean Max Thunder military drills were a rehearsal for an invasion of the North, and imperiled the Singapore summit, the Pentagon dialed them back.

The B-52 exercises alongside F-22 stealth fighters were canceled.

But Pyongyang had other objections.

Sunday, NSC adviser John Bolton spoke of a “Libyan model” for the North’s disarmament, referring to Moammar Gadhafi’s surrender of all his weapons of mass destruction in 2004. The U.S. was invited into Libya to pick them up and cart them off, whereupon sanctions were lifted.

As Libya was subsequently attacked by NATO and Gadhafi lynched, North Korea denounced Bolton and all this talk of the “Libyan model” of unilateral disarmament.

North Korea wants a step-by-step approach, each concession by Pyongyang to be met by a U.S. concession. And Bolton sitting beside Trump, and across the table from Kim Jong Un in Singapore, may be inhibiting.

What was predictable and predicted has come to pass.

Kingdom Identity

If we expected Kim to commit at Singapore to Bolton’s demand for “complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization,” and a swift follow-through, we were deluding ourselves.

At Singapore, both sides will have demands, and both will have to offer concessions, if there is to be a deal.

What does Kim Jong Un want?

An end to U.S. and South Korean military exercises and sanctions on the North, trade and investment, U.S. recognition of his regime, a peace treaty, and the eventual removal of U.S. bases and troops.

He is likely to offer an end to the testing of nuclear weapons and long-range missiles, no transfer of nuclear weapons or strategic missiles to third powers, a drawdown of troops on the DMZ, and the opening of North Korea’s borders to trade and travel.

As for his nuclear weapons and the facilities to produce them, these are Kim’s crown jewels. These brought him to the attention of the world and the Americans to the table. These are why President Trump is flying 10,000 miles to meet and talk with him.

And, unlike Gadhafi, Kim is not going to give them up.

Assuming the summit comes off June 12, this is the reality Trump will face in Singapore: a North Korea willing to halt the testing of nukes and ICBMs and to engage diplomatically and economically.

As for having Americans come into his country, pick up his nuclear weapons, remove them, and begin intrusive inspections to ensure he has neither nuclear bombs nor the means to produce, deliver or hide them, that would be tantamount to a surrender by Kim.

Trump is not going to get that. And if he adopts a Bolton policy of “all or nothing,” he is likely to get nothing at all.

Yet, thanks to Trump’s threats and refusal to accept a “frozen conflict” on the Korean peninsula, the makings of a real deal are present, if Trump does not make the perfect the enemy of the good.

For there is nothing North Korea is likely to demand that cannot be granted, as long as the security of South Korea is assured to the degree that it can be assured, while living alongside a nuclear-armed North.

Hence, when Kim cavils or balks in Singapore, as he almost surely will, at any demand for a pre-emptive surrender of his nuclear arsenal, Trump should have a fallback position.

If we cannot have everything we want, what can we live with?

Moreover, while we are running a risk today, an intransigent North Korea that walks out would be running a risk as well.

A collapse in talks between Kim and the United States and Kim and South Korea would raise the possibility that he and his Chinese patrons could face an East Asia Cold War where South Korea and Japan also have acquired nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them.

In the last analysis, the United States should be willing to accept both the concessions to the North that the South is willing to make and the risks from the North that the South is willing to take.

For, ultimately, they are the one who are going to have to live on the same peninsula with Kim and his nukes.

Trump ran on a foreign policy that may fairly be described as a Trump Doctrine: In the post-post-Cold War era, the United States will start looking out for America first.

This does not mean isolationism or the abandonment of our allies. It does mean a review and reassessment of all the guarantees we have issued to go to war on behalf of other countries, and the eventual transfer of responsibility for the defense of our friends over to our friends.

In the future, the U.S. will stop futilely imploring allies to do more for their own defense and will begin telling them that their defense is primarily their own responsibility. Our allies must cease to be our dependents.

Pat Buchanan is a writer, political commentator and presidential candidate. He is the author of Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever and previous titles including The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority. Both are available from the AFP Online Store.

COPYRIGHT 2017 CREATORS.COM



Meet Me on the Dark Web

Given the modern-day requirement of remaining politically correct at all costs, philosophers, free thinkers, and others are retreating to a little-known Internet fringe area to have politically incorrect debates.

By John Friend

A burgeoning political and intellectual dissident movement known as the Intellectual Dark Web is gaining traction and popularity as the thought police and enforcers of political correctness that are attempting to control the prevailing political, social, and cultural discourse continue their tyrannical overreach into the lives of not only public intellectuals, journalists, and other outspoken thinkers, but also average Americans holding views that challenge the prevailing political orthodoxy.

The Intellectual Dark Web, or IDW, is comprised of a number of popular, yet politically incorrect and controversial, thinkers, academics, journalists, and independent political and cultural commentators that have openly rebelled from “the establishment”—major academic institutions, mainstream media platforms and outlets, and other avenues and venues promoting politically correct narratives and ideas. Many of these individuals began their careers operating in established institutions before rebelling and venturing out on their own in order to pursue their unique intellectual passions and challenge many of the pillars of mainstream, politically correct narratives shaping our political discourse today.

Hair Tissue Mineral TestingAt its heart, the IDW is a movement of independent thinkers who are determined to buck the shackles of political correctness and champion free speech, free thought, and free intellectual and political inquiry, at least on many topics. A recent profile of the IDW published by The New York Times describes the group as “a collection of iconoclastic thinkers, academic renegades, and media personalities who are having a rolling conversation—on podcasts, YouTube, and Twitter, and in sold-out auditoriums—that sounds unlike anything else happening, at least publicly, in the culture right now.”

Many of its members have either been forced out, shunned, or otherwise ostracized from establishment circles and organizations, and have developed and founded their own media platforms, using YouTube, social media outlets like Twitter, and personal websites and blogs to express themselves and gain an extraordinary following.

Notable names openly identifying with the IDW include, among others: Sam Harris, the popular podcaster, neuroscientist, and atheist; Ben Shapiro, a conservative pundit, writer, and podcaster who formerly worked at Breitbart News; Jordan Peterson, one of the most important—and controversial— public intellectuals in Canada; Dave Rubin, a popular comedian and commentator who has made his name on the Internet; and Joe Rogan, a podcaster and commentator in the martial arts world.

Members of the IDW often disagree politically and have a wide range of opinions and views on the political spectrum. But one thing they all agree on is that free speech and free intellectual inquiry are under direct assault in America and the wider Western world, where political correctness and intellectual tyranny prevail. Virtually all of them have been purged from major institutions and establishment-serving organizations, which are increasingly hostile to persons expressing politically incorrect opinions, for their intellectual and political pursuits.

“People are starved for controversial opinions,” Rogan, the popular podcast host and commentator, explained to the Times. “And they are starved for an actual conversation.” That’s where the IDW comes in. Rogan, like other members of the IDW, has seen a dramatic increase in this audience in recent years, and now his podcast reaches millions of listeners every month. Other members of the IDW draw enormous crowds for their public speeches and presentations, while others generate millions of views on their YouTube channels.

The rise of the IDW and other independent media outlets and venues is certainly a welcome development in the eyes of critical thinkers, free speech activists, and those of us concerned about the future of intellectual inquiry in the West.

As the controlled corporate mass media and other establishment-serving organizations continue to be exposed as the deceptive, manipulative, and freedom-crushing entities they truly are, the flourishing of the IDW and other independent thinkers brings hope and light to a potentially dark future of political correctness, censorship, and intellectual tyranny.

John Friend is a freelance writer who lives in California.