Israel Provoking Nuclear War Between Pakistan and India?

Is Israel provoking nuclear war between Pakistan and India because of the fact that India is its main weapons-buyer? The little nation proves the effective killing power of its weaponry by using it to slaughter innocent civilians in Palestine. 

By Dave Gahary

Israel may not have much to worry about in regard to retaliation when they lob U.S.-made weaponry on innocent civilians in the open-air concentration camp of Gaza, but the dangerous game they are perilously playing in South Asia has the potential of sparking an atomic war between that region’s nuclear-armed adversaries, India and Pakistan.

As reported Feb. 28 in the UK’s Independent under the title “Israel is playing a big role in India’s escalating conflict with Pakistan,” Robert Fisk explains why it is that the little, nettlesome, bellicose state’s actions are pushing us all toward Armageddon.

At the heart of the matter is money. India, Israel’s “largest weapons market” in 2017, paid $700 million for “Israeli air defense, radar systems, and ammunition, including air-to-ground missiles—most of them tested during Israel’s military offensives against Palestinians and targets in Syria.” This information makes clearer the reason Israel slaughters humans like penned lambs: It is to test their weapons and improve their chances for a sale.

Think the IRS Never Loses Cases? Think again!

Israel, a country of 9 million (75% Jewish, 21% Arab, 4% other), is ranked No. 10 in the world’s top 10 largest arms exporters—behind the U.S., Russia, China, France, Germany, the UK, Spain, Italy, and Ukraine—no doubt helped along by the billions U.S. taxpayers are forced to fork over to the non-ally every year. This fact no doubt confounds the world’s thinking class, who are aware that the Jewish state comes in at 25 out of 174 countries ranked by median and mean wealth per adult.

With that as a backdrop, this latest imbroglio was kicked off by what’s being referred to as the 2019 India-Pakistan standoff. A Pakistan-based “terror” group conducted a suicide bombing of an Indian military convoy, slaughtering more than 40 soldiers. Two weeks later, on Feb. 26, a dozen Indian fighter jets bombed the “terrorist” camp in the Pakistan-controlled area of Kashmir, eventually leading to the downing of an Indian jet and the capture of its pilot, who has since been returned.

Tensions remain high, however, with India threatening to fire at least six missiles into Pakistan and Pakistan promising its own missile strikes “three times over.” Only via concerted efforts by D.C., Beijing, and London have the threats been ratcheted down.

Significantly, this is the first such clash in Kashmir since the last war there in 1971. Kashmir—the main cause of all major conflicts between the two countries—was hotly contested even before India and Pakistan won their independence from Britain in 1947. Kashmir was free to choose between India or Pakistan, and the local ruler’s choice of India led to a two-year war. The fact that some Indian-administered states in Kashmir are more than 60% Muslim ensures Kashmir will remain a disputed area. It has already led to the two countries going to war three times as well as experiencing several conflicts and military standoffs.

Ten Myths About Israel, Ilan Pappe
Examining the most contested ideas concerning the origins and identity of Israel, at the AFP Store.

Although violence in Kashmir has vacillated for 30 years, the death of a 22-year-old militant leader in 2016 sparked massive protests across the region. Following the funeral, attended by thousands, clashes with troops kicked off a week-long cycle of violence that resulted in the deaths of more than 30 civilians and many more injuries. The result has been a steady rise in violence in Kashmir, which saw over 500 civilians, security forces, and militants killed in 2018, “the highest such toll in a decade.”

To promote its war machines, Israel has been supporting India’s government in its battle against so-called Islamists, selling them the Israeli government-owned Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd.’s SPICE (Smart, Precise Impact, Cost-Effective) 2000—used to blow the limbs off of countless unarmed Palestinian men, women, and children to enhance its marketability—which turns 2,000-pound warheads into “smart bombs” by using the Global Positioning System, most recently utilized in the tit-for-tat Indian “terrorist” bombing.

Israel also conducts joint exercises with India in the Negev Desert, imparting to their guests all the skills they acquired in Gaza and other civilian-thronged battlefronts. So cozy have they become that “a 45-strong Indian military delegation” was stationed at several Israeli air bases.

Given its long history of displaying utter disregard for human lives—from the Lavon Affair to the USS Liberty to 9/11—Israel stoking tensions in South Asia should keep us all awake at night.

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 film about the attack on the USS Liberty. See the website or call (850) 677-0344 for more information.

Picking Candidates via ‘Victim Points’

What is “intersectionality,” and why is so important to the brainwashed left-leaning voter?

By S.T. Patrick

Trying to decipher what makes a Democratic nominee for president viable enough has become as difficult as correctly keeping the official scorebook for a slugfest in baseball. The intraparty debate over Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg has not centered on Buttigieg’s lack of political experience, being bereft of legislative accomplishments, or the near-impossibility of making a jump from the mayor’s office to the Oval Office. After all, that leap was something even “America’s Mayor” Rudy Giuliani couldn’t do after 9/11 catapulted him to political superstardom. Buttigieg’s challenge within his own party is a little-known yet perplexing labeling philosophy called “intersectionality.”

Intersectionality is the idea that the sum of a candidate’s “diversity factors” adds a maximum value to an ideal candidate, one a “New Democrat” can support. Therefore, a Hispanic male (one diversity factor, being Hispanic) isn’t as valuable or viable a candidate as a black female (two diversity factors, being black and female). A black, gay, disabled female would have a theoretical score of four. The Daily Caller’s Celine Ryan calls them “victim points.”

If this seems as politically manic as it does logically ridiculous, that’s because it is. Intersectionality is full of holes, even when argued vociferously by those who adhere to it most. High political positions have often been battles of the monied class, but Americans, in their collective hearts, still believe that voting should be a meritocracy. The positions should be earned by demonstrating a history of successful experiences. Intersectionality devalues a candidate’s literal experiences and instead judges a candidate by demographic factors.

National Coin Investments

Though being a mayor of a midwestern American college town such as South Bend (home to the University of Notre Dame) hardly seems the typical path to the presidency for a Democrat, Buttigieg is attractive to the Democratic Party as an openly homosexual candidate. The problem for some left-wing pundits is that he also has a high WASP-y factor. He is a white male who also openly professes a devotion to his Christian faith.

In a discussion at this year’s South by Southwest festival in Austin, Texas, Buttigieg admitted that he has also felt the “white male privilege.” He recalled a time when he was caught with marijuana and not arrested. The lack of arrest is something he attributes directly to his gender and his race working in harmony to produce a lack of prosecution.

Questions arise the moment the informal scoring process begins. How will the Democratic Party weigh each factor? Does a candidate’s gender weigh more or less than their race? Does a candidate’s race weigh more or less than their sexuality? Are all demographic factors equal?

In an op-ed for The Atlantic, Lucas Grindley dismissed many of Buttigieg’s personal accomplishments, such as speaking eight languages, some of which could be politically valuable. Grindley cares about one factor: “But as a gay man, I do care that Buttigieg is gay,” Grindley wrote. Grindley believes that it is demographic factors that will determine a politician’s ability to solve problems, not having some ability to work with a friendly, divided, or hostile legislature.

“These facets of their identities mean that they can understand the powerless, as victims of power, and that they can understand the alienated, having been marginalized,” Grindley wrote.

Coddling of the American Mind
New at AFP’s Online Store.

Therefore, for Grindley, Buttigieg’s sexuality is as important or more important than Sen. Cory Booker’s race, the gender of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, the confused heritage of Sen. Elizabeth Warren, or the religion of Rep. Ilhan Omar, if she were to ever seek higher office. Why? Because that’s what he personally values and because it’s the factor with which he most identifies. It’s a mindset not uncommon among millennials. “Right,” “good,” and “valuable” are determined by whatever they choose to be or believe, not by what may benefit a majority of the Americans most. The most rabid defenders of intersectionality within the Democratic Party do poll younger.

If it seems like Buttigieg’s views on public policy have not had a proper airing, they haven’t, and they may not get one. Even when debate season begins, expect the Democratic candidates to focus largely on their own niche (their intersectional “wins”). If this is the case, the door is wide open for Republican candidates to win a battle of ideas. That battle will be the high road, whereas the low road, being dragged into a fight over cultural norms, will only allow Democrats to reinforce tired stereotypes about “out-of-touch” Republicans.

Republicans should let Democrats argue over which candidate is a better recycler, or which candidate is nicer to geese, or whether a candidate empathizes enough with a self-professed victim of human nature. Intersectionality will survive because its fringe supporters care about or know little else. But with an aging American tax base watching those same debates, expect intersectional “winners” to also be exposed as corporate, pro-war Democratic emperors in new clothes.

S. T. Patrick holds degrees in both journalism and social studies education. He spent ten years as an educator and now hosts the “Midnight Writer News Show.” His email is [email protected]

Yes, There Is a Crisis at the Southern Border

American Free Press Issue 19 & 20 extensively covered the situation at America’s southern border with three articles. Together, they make clear that there is, indeed, a crisis at the border. 

Retired Texas Cop Gives AFP Firsthand Tour of the Border

By Mark Anderson

BROWNSVILLE, Texas—A retired Texas policeman recently took AMERICAN FREE PRESS on a guided tour of a key border crossing where, every day, he sees firsthand America’s border dilemma—something he has witnessed unfolding for decades.

“The border is actually a two-way street,” Rusty Monsees told AFP during an April 24 visit to his 21-acre homestead. “The criminal elements enter the U.S. to do their stuff but return to Mexico when the heat gets too hot and go back and forth several times as needed. And when the law gets too close down there, they come back to the United States. A Border Patrol agent once caught a guy with six different IDs. This is not a football game where everybody shakes hands at the end; this is dangerous stuff.”

Think the IRS Never Loses Cases? Think again!

The former San Benito, Texas cop pointed out that some of his acreage is actually south of the approximately 20-year-old border fence that runs past his house, which, oddly enough, is a good 100 yards north of the actual U.S.-Mexico boundary—the winding, murky Rio Grande River. He then started his Ford F-150 truck and led this writer through a gap in the border fence down to the river in order to show up-close what he and the Border Patrol he assists deal with on a regular basis. He keeps a rifle handy for self-defense at all times.

Asked about border differences since Donald Trump became president, Monsees said there are Mexican citizens who want a safer country and improved border security. Their attitude in the age of Trump has changed. They seem to have more resolve, especially in not wanting their own criminal elements crossing the border and “vacationing in the States,” as Monsees put it, so those elements can reorganize and head back to Mexico to continue their illicit activities.

What needs to happen, said Monsees, is a two-fence solution.

The Diversity Delusion, MacDonald
“How Race and Gender Pandering Corrupt the University and Undermine our Culture,” Brand new at AFP!

“So, let me get this straight. If I’m a cartel member or MS-13 gang member, I should first be encountering a fence before I even get to the Rio Grande River, a fence on the Mexican side?” this writer asked Monsees.

“Yes, that’s right,” he said, pointing to the river that is lined with a dense thicket of trees, especially on the Mexican side. This, he added, provides endless places for border-jumpers to hide.

Monsees contends that both the U.S. and Mexico should have an interest in border security. As a result, a truly effective fencing scheme would include non-rustable, sturdy, tall metal fencing laced with concertina wire and built on both sides of the river in key areas—with less reliance on the existing gap-ridden “tactical infrastructure” fencing, as the U.S. government calls it, which is rusting and too often can be climbed or otherwise circumvented by the more determined among the illegal aliens.

Monsees pointed out another thing often overlooked, which is a border breach of a different sort. Mercury, lead, diazinon, and trace uranium get into the Rio Grande River via the discharges from the maquiladoras, the large factories with reportedly bad working conditions and poor wages built under the soon-to-be-replaced North American Free Trade Agreement.


This writer then visited Matamoros, just across the border in Mexico from Brownsville, where there was a small “tent community” that included three Cubans who hope to enter the United States.

A young man named Pablo, accompanied by a pregnant woman about 20 years old and another young man, said they were hoping she can give birth in the U.S., evidently for welfare assistance.

He claimed they were flown in a plane from Cuba to Brazil. Between October and now, they said they reached the Texas border mainly by bus.

Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving editor. Email him at [email protected].

Border Patrol Chief Recounts the Immigration Turmoil, Real Crisis

By Mark Anderson

McALLEN, Texas—Acting Rio Grande Valley (RGV) Sector Border Patrol Chief Hector Escamilla, speaking at the McAllen Citizens League’s luncheon April 25, outlined the daunting task carried out by the Border Patrol to reduce the overall flow of illegal immigrants and focus on the criminal element that steadily enters the U.S. While his assessment of the border crisis and some recommended solutions corroborated important matters American Free Press has reported on, Escamilla added some clarifying points to illustrate the complexity and severity of the crisis.

A 30-year Border Patrol veteran, Escamilla explained that the Border Patrol, which has 3,100 agents in the four-county RGV sector, needs to press for specific policy changes that will increase deportations and result in a “package deal” where the “wall,” helpful though it may be, is one of several coordinated measures needing to be implemented.

Kingdom Identity

Having 3,100 agents may sound impressive and adequate, but by the time sick leave, vacations, and administrative-desk duties are covered, only half of those 3,100 officers end up being “boots on the ground” at any given time—for a border sector covering “316 river miles, from the mouth of the Rio Grande all the way to the Falcon Dam; that’s a pretty daunting task,” Escamilla said.

He clarified: “A lot of the area we cover is dense brush . . . the lateral mobility is very difficult because a lot of the land that we patrol is owned by personal landowners . . . we can’t just traverse continuously along the river.” In addition, government and private wildlife refuges along the border, heavily regulated in a manner that prevents border agents from “mowing the place down” to find hidden illegal immigrants, further complicate the issue.

What’s more, Border Patrol must help guard the coastal counties. “We’re actually responsible for the entire [Gulf] shoreline, all the way to the Louisiana border,” said Escamilla. “So we do have agents in different places along the coastline.”

He added that, in the RGV sector alone, 165,000 illegal immigrants have been apprehended at the border since the start of the fiscal year (Oct. 1, 2018). During the same period there has been a 150% increase of “OTMs” (other than Mexicans) illegally entering the U.S.

He explained, “The majority of the OTMs are from the Central American countries of El Salvador, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Honduras.”

Pressing Escamilla to confirm that people from more than 40 nations, including overseas, are illegally entering the U.S, this writer interjected, “We hear about Asia, the Middle East and even Europe.”

Subscribe to AFPHis response: “Yes, we’ve got Middle Eastern folks here. We’ve got Iraqis, Iranians, a lot of Chinese— Chinese are more common than people might think . . . Pakistanis and Cubans, we’re catching Cubans. These people bring in lots of money for the cartels—$15,000 to $20,000 per person. We estimate that the cartels are making as much or more money from human trafficking than they do from the actual smuggling of narcotics.”

Asked by another audience member to explain the asylum situation, Escamilla said: “The majority of those who come here, they come from economic-hardship countries. That’s usually what they tell us as the reason they’re fleeing. . . . There is in most of those Central American countries a lot of poverty, a lot of gangs, violence, including MS-13 and so on. But . . . the reasons for asylum should be specific to the individual. Did the cartels, did the gangs in their country of origin specifically target them for political reasons, and not so much because there’s an economic crisis in the country?”

Stressing a recommended procedural change, Escamilla remarked: “We’d like to see asylum officers actually accessible at the Border Patrol stations. In fact, there’s talk of Border Patrol agents themselves having the authority to listen to asylum claims, so we can expedite the process. But, of course, that’s being met with a lot of resistance. It’s going to be met with a lot of lawsuits.”

Asked by this writer whether the Border Patrol needs another 4,000 agents in addition to the 3,100 in the RGV sector, Escamilla replied that hiring significantly more agents and obtaining the authority to assign more personnel to screen asylum requests are two steps toward developing a solution—along with hiring more immigration judges.

“We really do need a lot of different factors and one of them is policy,” he said. “Until we start returning some of these migrant families and children back to their country of origin quickly . . . to make it more difficult for them to make a second or third trip . . . then, I don’t care how many agents you give us, it’s not going to do us any good. There’s got to be a change in policy. We’ve got to communicate with the heads of these countries and ask, why can’t you take your people back quicker?”

Both Sides of the Border Need to Be Safeguarded

By John Friend

The crisis along the southern border between the United States and Mexico continues to spiral out of control as thousands of migrants attempt to illegally enter the United States on a daily basis, many with entirely fraudulent claims and documentation.

According to a recent report published by The Epoch Times, U.S. Border Patrol officials have identified over 3,000 cases in the past six months alone that involve fraudulent family unit claims made by migrants seeking asylum or permanent resettlement in America, demonstrating the increasingly difficult situation immigration officials find themselves in when screening migrants and asylum seekers.

“It’s very clear that the cartel and smugglers know the weaknesses in our laws,” acting Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan, said in an April 18 press conference while he was visiting the border near McAllen, Texas. “They know that family units and unaccompanied children will be released with no consequences for their illegal entries.”

McAleenan took over the department following the April 7 resignation of Kirstjen Nielsen, who was often criticized by President Trump.

Migrants seeking entry to the U.S. are often screened, processed, and then released into the country, especially if they have children traveling with them. By law, family units must be released upon entry rather than being turned away or detained, allowing illegal aliens, human traffickers, and cartels to exploit U.S. immigration laws.

Free Expression Foundation

“The same child is brought across the border with an adult multiple times to try and gain that release that family units are required under court order,” McAleenan stated.

According to McAleenan, 4,800 migrants attempted to illegally cross the U.S. border on April 16 alone, underscoring the seriousness of the situation. The 4,800 marked “a new record for the modern era,” he added. “Almost 1,000 of them crossed in just three large groups, 375 people in the largest of those groups.”

Last month, Border Patrol agents encountered 103,000 individuals along the southwest border, with 92,000 of those individuals being apprehended by agents, marking a 35% increase of apprehensions from the previous month. In the Rio Grande Valley region of Texas, Border Patrol agents have already surpassed the total number of apprehensions during the 2018 fiscal year.

“Last fiscal year, Border Patrol agents in the Rio Grande Valley (RGV) Sector apprehended 162,000 individuals,” Supervisory Border Patrol Agent Marcelino Medina told reporters in late April. “For the first seven months of this fiscal year, we’ve already surpassed that number.” In the RGV region alone, agents are averaging 1,100 apprehensions every single day.

Sydney Hernandez, a local news reporter for KGBT in the RGV region, interviewed a number of migrants seeking entry to the U.S. recently. Many stated that they are being told in their home countries that they will receive help and assistance from the U.S. government if they enter illegally.

New DVD at AFP Online Store: “An Artificial Reality”

“Immigrants tell me they’re coming to the U.S. because they’re seeing advertisements on their local newspapers and TV stations, about better opportunities and free help from Americans if they enter illegally,” Hernandez reported.

Illegal aliens are not supposed to receive government benefits, but many do. According to a 2017 study conducted by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), illegal immigrants consume over $100 billion in taxpayer money every year. With countless migrants now entering the U.S. daily, that amount will only increase.

“We’re talking about billions of dollars in taxpayer benefits over the next few years,” FAIR Director Dan Stein explained to Fox News recently. “The payout for the taxpayer is enormous, and income to the Treasury is miniscule.”

Overall, illegal immigrants receive more government benefits than they contribute via taxes. Many receive free public schooling, medical care, housing assistance, food stamps, and other social services.


In related news, two U.S. soldiers who were conducting surveillance along the border, south of the border fence but north of the Rio Grande River, were confronted by Mexican soldiers armed with assault rifles.

“On April 13, 2019, at approximately 2 p.m. CDT, five to six Mexican military personnel questioned two U.S. Army soldiers who were conducting border support operations in an unmarked (Customs and Border Protection) vehicle near the southwest border in the vicinity of Clint, Texas,” U.S. Northern Command (USNorthCom) explained in a statement to CNN. “The U.S. soldiers were appropriately in U.S. territory.”

During the incident, the Mexican troops pointed their weapons at the soldiers and disarmed one of them, returning the sidearm to the vehicle. According to USNorthCom, an inquiry determined the Mexican troops believed the U.S. soldiers were on the Mexican side of the border. Thus far, President Donald Trump has not commented on this potentially explosive situation.


Meanwhile, the FBI has arrested a leader of a militia group in New Mexico whose organization was attempting to stop illegal immigrants from entering the U.S., it was recently reported.

One World Agenda DVD
“A One World Agenda: The Illuminati – The Men Who Control the World” from AFP Online Store

Larry Hopkins, 69, was arrested on April 26 on a federal complaint charging him with being a felon in possession of firearms and ammunition. Hopkins’s group, the United Constitutional Patriots (UCP), has reportedly detained close to 5,600 illegal aliens in recent months in an effort to help Border Patrol agents and immigration officials deal with the increasingly lawless southern border. Hopkins and his group have been denounced and criticized by the governor of New Mexico and other left-wing, open-borders activist groups, including the Southern Poverty Law Center and the American Civil Liberties Union.

Members of the UCP are convinced Hopkins will be cleared and are proud of their righteous cause.

“We’re not worried about it,” stated Jim Benvie, a spokesperson for the group. “He’s going to be cleared.”

John Friend is a freelance author based in California.

Trump’s Yemen Blunder

President Trump’s recent veto of a congressional measure intended to pull the U.S. out of Yemen confirms the president’s seemingly unchecked power to wage war without congressional approval. Yet Congress cannot amass the the two-thirds majority votes required to overturn the presidential veto thanks to Israeli and Saudi influence via campaign contributions. In addition, French, American, and British arms companies have benefited tremendously from supplying the Saudis and their partners with an unlimited supply of weapons.

By Richard Walker

President Donald Trump’s decision to veto a congressional measure designed to pull America out of the Saudi-led war in Yemen, which has killed tens of thousands of women and children, is a striking example of the unchecked war powers Congress has given presidents since the early 1970s.

In a rare bi-partisan effort to end U.S. support for the Saudi-led war, Congress sent the president the resolution, expecting he would reject it, which he did. He justified his decision by claiming it threatened to weaken his constitutional authority. He thereby ended the matter because Congress lacked the two-thirds majority in the House and Senate to override his veto.

The reason there is not a bigger congressional majority to confront the Yemen issue—and with it the president’s seemingly unchecked power to wage war without congressional approval—is that there are many members of Congress on both sides who are influenced by Israel’s support for the Saudis, and just as many who are beholden to Saudi political donations. No country spends more money on lobbying in Washington and on Capitol Hill than Saudi Arabia and its coalition partner in the war, the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Kingdom Identity

Also in play is the Trump family business connection to the Saudis, who have spent heavily in buying Trump properties over decades, and the close personal relationship between the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner and the young, impetuous Saudi leader, Mohammed bin Salman, or MBS. Kushner, MBS, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu share a similar view of Middle East politics. They see the war in Yemen as a way of dragging Iran into a wider conflict since it supports the Houthis of Yemen.

It is worth noting that when the war began in 2015, there were 10 Arab nations involved, including Egypt and Jordan, but as of today that figure has been reduced to four—the Saudis, UAE, Sudan, and Bahrain. The reason for nations peeling off was international outrage and the unchecked slaughter of Yemeni civilians. In just a few years, there have been 24,000 airstrikes and, aside from the massive death toll from those, tens of thousands have died from disease and starvation, the majority of them children and the elderly.

The war has been made possible by the Saudi and UAE use of weapons provided by the U.S., France, and Britain. Democrats critical of Trump’s support for the war ignore the fact that his predecessor, Barack Obama, supplied the Saudis and the UAE with more weapons than his predecessor, George W. Bush.

In Kings and Presidents, a book on the history of U.S.-Saudi relations, former CIA officer Bruce Riedel writes that “no president since Franklin Roosevelt courted Saudi Arabia as zealously as did Obama.” Not only did Obama authorize more arms sales than any other U.S. president, he visited Saudi Arabia more frequently than any of his predecessors.”

QAnon: Great Awakening
Great Awakening or Great Fraud? You decide.

Trump’s veto override of Congress’s resolution coincided with the public leaking of French intelligence documents that exposed how the Saudis could not manage the war without French, U.S., and British weapons, as well as the constant supply of spare parts.

The leaked papers highlighted the lies French leaders had been telling their own people about the war. President Emmanuel Macron had insisted that French weapons were being used by the Saudis and their allies for purely defensive purposes. It was an outright lie. French weapons were used in the slaughter of civilians. For example, the powerful French CAESAR howitzer capable of launching shells deep into Yemen had been within range of 430,000 civilians. It was revealed that the Saudis had placed an order for another 126 CAESARs to be delivered before 2023.

The leaked intel also confirmed that French arms companies had provided the Saudis and the UAE with their most powerful tanks, helicopters, and missiles.

The French government was so embarrassed by the report that it immediately ordered an investigation to find the person who leaked it to a French journalism site.

Amnesty International was one of many organizations that responded to the leak by calling on France and other Western nations to be more transparent and to halt sales of arms that were being used in war crimes.

The French have not been alone in supplying some of the most advanced deadly weapons that have caused untold civilian casualties in Yemen. The leaked papers also pointed out that most of the planes flying over Yemen were NATO types such as F-15s, EU Tornado fighters, and British Typhoons. The majority of helicopters were Apache and Black Hawks, and many Saudi battle tanks were American Abrams.

As AFP has pointed out in previous articles about this war, the deadliest munitions used by the Saudis were acquired from U.S. companies and the Pentagon.

An incontrovertible fact is that French, American, and British arms companies have benefited tremendously from supplying the Saudis and their partners with an unlimited supply of weapons that have been used to slaughter innocent women and children.

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 Wants This War With Iran?

While the neocons are loudly banging the drums of war on Iran, Pat Buchanan points out: “The ayatollah’s analysis—a war is in neither nation’s interest—is correct. Consider the consequences of a war with the United States for his own country.”

By Patrick J. Buchanan

Speaking on state TV of the prospect of a war in the Gulf, Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei seemed to dismiss the idea.

“There won’t be any war. … We don’t seek a war, and (the Americans) don’t either. They know it’s not in their interests.”

The ayatollah’s analysis—a war is in neither nation’s interest—is correct. Consider the consequences of a war with the United States for his own country.

Iran’s hundreds of swift boats and handful of submarines would be sunk. Its ports would be mined or blockaded. Oil exports and oil revenue would halt. Air fields and missile bases would be bombed. The Iranian economy would crash. Iran would need years to recover.

And though Iran’s nuclear sites are under constant observation and regular inspection, they would be destroyed.

Tehran knows this, which is why, despite 40 years of hostility, Iran has never sought war with the “Great Satan” and does not want this war to which we seem to be edging closer every day.

Kingdom Identity

What would such a war mean for the United States?

It would not bring about “regime change” or bring down Iran’s government that survived eight years of ground war with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

If we wish to impose a regime more to our liking in Tehran, we will have to do it the way we did it with Germany and Japan after 1945, or with Iraq in 2003. We would have to invade and occupy Iran.

But in World War II, we had 12 million men under arms. And unlike Iraq in 2003, which is one-third the size and population of Iran, we do not have the hundreds of thousands of troops to call up and send to the Gulf.

Nor would Americans support such an invasion, as President Donald Trump knows from his 2016 campaign. Outside a few precincts, America has no enthusiasm for a new Mideast war, no stomach for any occupation of Iran.

Moreover, war with Iran would involve firefights in the Gulf that would cause at least a temporary shutdown in oil traffic through the Strait of Hormuz — and a worldwide recession.

How would that help the world? Or Trump in 2020?

How many allies would we have in such a war?

Spain has pulled its lone frigate out of John Bolton’s flotilla headed for the Gulf. Britain, France and Germany are staying with the nuclear pact, continuing to trade with Iran, throwing ice water on our intelligence reports that Iran is preparing to attack us.

Turkey regards Iran as a cultural and economic partner. Russia was a de facto ally in Syria’s civil war. China continues to buy Iranian oil. India just hosted Iran’s foreign minister.

The CIA in IranSo, again, Cicero’s question: “Cui bono?”

Who really wants this war? How did we reach this precipice?

A year ago, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued a MacArthurian ultimatum, making 12 demands on the Tehran regime.

Iran must abandon all its allies in the Middle East — Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, Hamas in Gaza — pull all forces under Iranian command out of Syria, and then disarm all its Shiite militia in Iraq.

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 never had a secret nuclear program and stop testing missiles. And unless she submits, Iran will be strangled with sanctions.

Pompeo’s speech at the Heritage Foundation read like the terms of some conquering Caesar dictating to some defeated tribe in Gaul, though we had yet to fight and win the war, usually a precondition for dictating terms.

Iran’s response was to disregard Pompeo’s demands.

And crushing U.S. sanctions were imposed, to brutal effect.

Yet, as one looks again at the places where Pompeo ordered Iran out—Lebanon, Yemen, Gaza, Syria, Iraq—no vital interest of ours was imperiled by any Iranian presence.

Deep State, Chaffetz
Available from the AFP Online Store.

The people who have a problem with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon are the Israelis whose occupations spawned those movements.

As for Yemen, the Houthis overthrew a Saudi puppet.

Syria’s Bashar Assad never threatened us, though we armed rebels to overthrow him. In Iraq, Iranian-backed Shiite militia helped us to defend Baghdad from the southerly advance of ISIS, which had taken Mosul.

Who wants us to plunge back into the Middle East, to fight a new and wider war than the ones we fought already this century in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Yemen?

Answer: Pompeo and Bolton, Bibi Netanyahu, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and the Sunni kings, princes, emirs, sultans, and the other assorted Jeffersonian democrats on the south shore of the Persian Gulf.

And lest we forget, the never-Trumpers and neocons in exile nursing their bruised egos, whose idea of sweet revenge is a U.S. return to the Mideast in a war with Iran, which then brings an end to the Trump presidency.

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, Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025? and Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War, all available from the AFP Online Store.


FOIA Request Results in Release of ‘Dancing Israeli’ Photographs

Photos are still the best evidence available that the Israeli Mossad was involved in the 9/11 terror attacks.

By Dave Gahary

Although the fake news media has all but erased Israel’s involvement in the 9/11 false-flag terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, a recent successful Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and eventual release of photographs of the so-called “Dancing Israelis”—who were caught celebrating while the Twin Towers burned—has reignited the discussion of the Zionist state’s central role in that event, which dramatically altered all Americans’ lives.

Not that the mainstream media will pick up this story and run with it. Many readers of this newspaper will remember Fox News’s four-part series that aired a few months after 9/11, in which Carl Cameron reported that “some 60 Israeli nationals had been detained in the antiterrorism/ immigrant sweeps in the weeks after Sept. 11, and at least 140 Israelis identified as ‘art students’ had been detained or arrested in the prior months.” Cameron “reported that federal agents were investigating the ‘art student’ phenomenon as a possible arm of Israeli espionage operations tracking al-Qaeda operatives in the United States,” where the Israelis “may have known about the preparations for the Sept. 11 attacks but failed to share this knowledge with U.S. intelligence.” Rather than expanding its investigation of Israeli involvement in 9/11, Fox executives took the unprecedented step of scrubbing the entire video report from its website.

Think the IRS Never Loses Cases? Think again!

Following Fox’s report, the only major U.S. media outlet to address the “art student” revelations was The Washington Times, whose reporting quoted a senior Department of Justice official as stating, “We think there is something quite sinister here but are unable at this time to put our finger on it,” essentially giving the Israelis a “Get Out of Jail Free” card, and ending the Times’s journalistic coverage of this topic.

The only media outlet in the world to investigate Israeli involvement in 9/11—at the expense of being labeled “anti-Semitic”—was, and still is, American Free Press. From our initial reporting a few weeks after our founding on “the connection between Israeli intelligence and the terrorist attacks,” to Victor Thorn’s groundbreaking books 911 Made in Israel and 9/11 Evil: Israel’s Central Role in the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks, to this reporter’s exclusive interview with Sgt. Scott DeCarlo, the policeman who arrested the “Dancing Israelis,” AFP has and will continue to report on all aspects of 9/11, wherever they lead.

Victor Thorn 9-11
Two-volume Offer from AFP: Victor Thorn on 9/11 and Israel.


Japan-based Ryan Dawson, a dedicated 9/11 investigator, spoke with AFP on the significance of the FOIA release. Dawson, with an encyclopedic knowledge of Israel’s connection to 9/11 as well as the “Dancing Israelis,” has been imploring those interested in 9/11 truth to continue their long history of submitting FOIA requests, which he is unable to do because of his Asian residence.

Although it’s been thoroughly documented that the “Dancing Israelis” were “hugging and high-fiving and flicking lighters and posing for photos,” explained Dawson, this vital piece of the 9/11 puzzle remains shrouded. “Even though we have the FBI admitting it,” Dawson explained, “even though [the ‘Dancing Israelis’] were in jail for 72 days, until someone sees the picture, a lot of people don’t have the ability to understand something to be true until they see it.”

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 for more information and to get the new book on which the movie will be based, Erasing the Liberty.

9/11 Truth Group Meets in San Diego

This longstanding gathering of dedicated patriots continues demanding an honest investigation of the Sept. 11 attacks.

By John Friend

Few 9/11 Truth groups in the country are as active, passionate, and dedicated as the group of citizen activists comprising the San Diegans for 9/11 Truth group based in America’s finest city.

Founded in 2005, the group is dedicated to “uncovering the truth behind the wrongful deaths that took place on Sept. 11, 2001,” according to the group’s official website. “Concerned about evidence that contradicts the official account published in The 9/11 Commission Report, the group is calling for a reopening of the case and an unbiased investigation into the events of 9/11.”

This reporter has been involved with the group since the fall of 2009 after attending one of their monthly meetings, which always takes place on the second Sunday of each month. The group rents the Joyce Beers Community Center, a modest city-owned facility in Hillcrest, a neighborhood in the heart of San Diego, the second largest city in California.

National Coin Investments

A dedicated core group of activists regularly attend the monthly meetings, as well as other interested persons from across Southern California. The monthly meetings oftentimes feature a special guest speaker or presenter, who is first introduced by a member of the San Diegans for 9/11 Truth group. In recent years, the SD 9/11 Truth group has featured a number of top 9/11 researchers and activists, including Barbara Honegger, Dylan Avery, and Christopher Bollyn, among many others.

9/11 Truth documentaries are also often screened at monthly meetings, and an open discussion or question and answer session follows, which is always lively. Members of the SD 9/11 Truth group are extremely knowledgeable about the events of 9/11, as well as other political and historical topics, making the open discussion period a fast-moving and informative experience.

Franklin Stiles, a key organizer and activist for the SD 9/11 Truth group and a subscriber to this newspaper, spoke with this reporter about the importance of 9/11 Truth and the work the local group does.

“There are many reasons 9/11 is still important and relevant, even now after almost 20 years,” Stiles explained. “This manufactured, uninvestigated, unsolved, heinous crime serves as the pretext and the catalyst for the global war on terror and the control of humanity. We’ve lost civil rights, our privacy, and many other rights, plus we have these unending wars overseas, all based on lies.”

Brainwashed for War, Chang
FROM AFP Publishing: Mathias Chang on the Zionist Global War Agenda

Stiles, like other SD 9/11 Truth activists, has dedicated significant time to researching 9/11 and related topics, as well as engaging in activism and outreach in the community in an attempt to bring the truth to more people.

“The most tragic aspect, as I see it, is a great many people don’t realize that 9/11 represents a genuine existential threat to their and our lives, our society, our country,” Stiles continued. “And now with a greater understanding of the event it becomes apparent that this engineered attack is part of a Jewish, Zionist agenda intended to lead to total global control, loss of national sovereignty, and ultimately the enslavement of humanity. It doesn’t take a lot of research to reach these disturbing and dramatic conclusions.”

Rob Baldwin, another long-time member and activist with the SD 9/11 Truth group who also subscribes to this paper, described the purpose of the 9/11 attack, which he views as instrumental in the advancement of the New World Order agenda.

“The 9/11 event was a major kickoff in regard to moving the New World Order agenda to another level of completion,” Baldwin told this reporter. “As such, we need to watch all that follows. We got to see how important the role of the media was in controlling the fallout from the 9/11 event and stuffing the false-flag exposure before the truth was able to gain traction. We have been fighting an uphill battle ever since.”

In addition to organizing monthly public meetings, the group also engages in activism and public outreach on a regular basis. The SD 9/11 Truth group has had a presence at the annual Earth Day Festival in Balboa Park for years, after having successfully booked a spot at the festival, allowing them to set up a booth with information about 9/11. The group also attends other public events, such as the Martin Luther King Jr. Day parade, and regularly conducts outreach efforts near the USS Midway, a major tourist attraction in the heart of downtown San Diego.

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

“We in the SD 9/11 Truth group feel that since this event was a major push to install the next level of the New World Order, we are a critical component in the defense of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights,” Baldwin noted. “We are committed to continue our efforts in exposing the crimes of our government and associated NWO players. If not us, who else is going to raise awareness of these issues?”

Engaging in public outreach about 9/11 can be a difficult task, given the controversial and emotional nature of the information. Mike Chickey and his wife, Ann, both regular 9/11 Truth activists, try to be as non-confrontational and respectful as possible when interacting with the public.

“My style of public outreach is to try and remain non-confrontational, plant some seeds, so to speak, and let them do their own research,” Mike explained to this reporter. “I never want to pressure them or insult them for not knowing this material.”

Truth Jihad, Kevin Barrett
9/11 Truth on sale now at the AFP Online Store.

Ann is equally as cautious when inter acting with the public and recognizes the importance and gravity of 9/11 Truth.

“It is imperative that people understand what really happened in order to lift this veil of deception that so many of us live under,” she noted. “So many of the folks we interact with have some inherent understanding that something about the official story is not right, but they haven’t looked into it. These are the folks who stop by to check out the boards but end up walking away, shaking their heads in disbelief saying it is too much to absorb. Deception causes inner conflict, it rots the soul, and that is what has happened to the soul of our nation. It is frightening to confront the truth, but once you do, it is the most liberating thing on the planet.”

Despite the challenges, the SD 9/11 Truth group presses on, with yet another monthly meeting scheduled for June and other plans for activism and public outreach in the near future.

John Friend is a freelance author based in California.

Sheriff Joe Is Back, Still Swinging

Did the FBI spy on Sheriff Joe Arpaio just like they spied on Trump? In this interview, published in the most recent American Free Press the 57-year veteran lawman has choice words for mainstream media, leftists, and the FBI. If you’re an AFP Online subscriber, log in here to read the PDF of Issue 21&22. Not yet a subscriber? Consider a $25/year digital subscription now, or one of the other options here.

On May 8, American Free Press writer Dave Gahary had the opportunity to catch up with former Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio to discuss, among other things, his run for Maricopa County sheriff, his support for President Donald Trump, the smear campaign that targeted him, and his belief that the FBI spied on him as he campaigned around the Copper State. Here is Sheriff Joe in his own words.

AFP Podcast

AFP: It’s great to talk to you, Sheriff. Let’s start at the beginning. Can you tell us about yourself, for those who don’t know you already?

Sheriff Joe: I was born on Flag Day, June 14, same day as President Trump. Not the same year, 1932, so you can figure out that I’m a senior citizen [chuckles]. I was born in Springfield, Mass. My mother gave her life for me. She refused an abortion and died in childbirth. So I bounced around from one Italian family to another. My mother and father came from Italy, legally, and I worked in the grocery store. I played all the sports in high school. I joined the U.S. Army when the Korean War broke out and I turned 18 and I graduated from high school, all within one month. I did my three years and came home. I always wanted to be a cop. I went to Vegas for a short time as a police officer. I actually locked up Elvis Presley, since I took him to the police station. But I did let him go.

Then I started my other big career—it was the DEA: federal Drug Enforcement Administration. In 1957, I was sworn in, in Chicago, and was involved in a lot of investigations and a lot of arrests. So they sent me to Turkey, the only agent in that area to stop the French Connection and all the drugs that were being run out of there.

I then went to San Antonio. I held a lot of top positions, especially [related to work in and around] Mexico, South America, Central America, Turkey, the Middle East, and also Texas and Arizona, fighting the drug problem.

So when you add up my 57 years in law enforcement, you’d have to say I have 35 years as a high official or a top official with the DEA in Mexico, on that side of the border, where I lived, and also on this side. I retired in 1982 as head of the DEA in Arizona, joined my wife in the travel business, and then I decided to run for sheriff in 1992. And I guess the rest is history.

AFP: Can you talk a bit about your time as a sheriff in Arizona?

Sheriff Joe: For 24 years I was a sheriff, which is the longest-serving sheriff in the history of Maricopa County, which I’m pretty proud of because I’ve been able to survive 24 years. Sometimes I wonder how I did it. I was re-elected six times. I lost the election in 2016. I just could not win the battles for the contempt of court charges, where the courts went after me. President Donald Trump pardoned me on that charge, which nobody even really knew what it was about. Now I find out it’s not even a crime.

I didn’t survive the smear campaign, because you may recall that [President Barack] Obama’s prosecutors in the contempt of court trial said they were going to get me for contempt of court and [they] wanted me to do six months in prison. They were saying that when the people were voting. Then I had [George] Soros come after me with that law firm Perkins Coie. [Soros] pumped $3 million into the general election, and I’m still wondering—a lot of people are wondering—how I lost to a liberal police sergeant. [Now we know.]

National Coin Investments

AFP: What can you tell us about your time with the president?

Sheriff Joe: I was with President Trump from day one, when I introduced him in July at his first rally, here in Phoenix. I was the only one who would stand next to him. I introduced him and made a few predictions. I said he would be our next president, and I was right. So, I have a lot of respect for our president. I do know that NBC asked me last year if John McCain was my hero. I paused and I said, “No.” I woke up one morning, about four months prior to my declaration, and I said, “I finally found a hero,” after all my [86] years in life, everywhere in the world, and that was President Trump. I’m proud of that.

I don’t back down. I’m not a flip-flopper that will say I am now President Trump’s ally because he was doing good in the polls. I’ve been with him from day one, and I’ll be with him till the end. I don’t care if people like it or not.

I’m 86 years old. I work 14 hours a day. What’s really tough . . . [is that] nobody knows my background. I could never, never get it out. They only know me as the sheriff, but I have a lot of interesting experiences fighting drug trafficking around the world. They called me a racist. I’m suing The New York Times about [that] situation. But I am also suing CNN, The Huffington Post and Rolling Stone, for calling me a convicted criminal. So they’re gonna have a little problem with me. Those are the same people going after President Trump.

AFP: What can you tell us about your work on Barack Obama’s purported birth certificate?

Sheriff Joe: I went after Obama on his birth certificate, and, being in law enforcement all those years, I’m not stupid [about the law]. I agreed to launch that investigation because the tea party came to me in 2011 and said, “You’re an elected sheriff. You’re the only one who will touch it.” And they won’t touch it. Nobody in the universe will even look at my investigation. I’m a law-enforcement guy, and I [discover] probable cause on a fake government document, and all they do is blast me and say that I’m crazy. So that makes me a little frustrated. But I’m not giving up on that. Maybe somebody will look at what we have. I’m convinced, 100% [that the birth certificate in a compiled phony], and I have the evidence of forensic people that I had to go to Italy to find, plus all the rest from our investigation.

Someone has to answer the question: Why doesn’t any law enforcement agency—it really should be federal—look into what we have on a person who has a fake government document that happens to be a birth certificate? So that’s a question that I will never forget. I’ll go to my grave and always wonder why nobody will look at the evidence we have.

When I launched this, I went public and I said I don’t care where Obama was born. I don’t care about anything regarding that. I’m going after a person who has a fake birth certificate. That’s it. And if it was you, you’d be in jail tomorrow. Is that fair?

I just talked to three Republican groups around the country. They all loved the fight against the birth certificate, but politically you’re not supposed to talk about it. Why not? Is Obama someone special?

Just before I left office, we got a lucky hit, and we found a birth certificate [that was issued at the] same time as Obama was born. And it was very simple: They took parts of that birth certificate and transplanted it on this phony one. My Italian forensics experts showed that.

The irony of all this, if I’m still living in 10 years from now—which I probably won’t be—is the fact that I’m the guy with the reputation of being the top guy fighting illegal immigration. We arrested more illegals than anybody. Now, the irony would be if [former President Obama] was here illegally—that’s an immigration issue. I never talked about him being here illegally or from somewhere else. I said I’m investigating a fake Hawaiian government official document. And I can’t get anywhere with this. If it wasn’t him, I’m sure somebody would come to me and investigate it.

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

AFP: Can you talk about how the media has portrayed you in the past few years?

Sheriff Joe: They call me a racist—everybody in the media, every day. [But] even the judge who went after me never said that I racially profiled. He said that I used race as a [criterion]. When I signed the contract with the ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] director, that was one of their criteria, that you could use race. So they got me on that, on the contempt of court, that I didn’t obey the judge.

That’s one reason I don’t get on TV. You notice that Fox, in a whole year, has blocked me out? I’ve been on Fox for 24 years. Why don’t they call me anymore? They put all these other guys on to talk about the border. I have more experience than all of them put together, on fighting drug trafficking and illegal immigration. I think they’re afraid that I might talk about the birth certificate.

I don’t care. I’ve got my Facebook with a million followers. I go through social media. I go through people like [AFP], your paper that has the guts to speak out. So, I have all the means to get my story across.

AFP: Recently you said the FBI was spying on you. Can you talk about that?

Sheriff Joe: Actually, I had this information last year and nobody printed it, and now I see what’s happening here in Washington. This happened [to me] years ago. You talk about the FBI today, infiltrating the president and his campaign, and I’m saying, “Wait a minute. I remember when that happened to me.”

I have information that two or three FBI agents found out that I was going to be mentioned in a candidate’s forum at a police union hall. So two FBI agents go in there posing as journalists, of course, to get information about me. That’s a no-no. First of all, you shouldn’t be posing as reporters, and you should not be going into these forums to gather information on someone who’s involved in politics.

Now, let me say this: American Free Press is the only one to call me about this, and I sent this information to 300 news outlets. In fact, I sent something like this out last year. So why is this is not a story?

I sent a 26-page report to the former attorney general of the United States, asking for an investigation over this contempt of court and everything revolving around it. I heard back from them finally when [former Attorney General Jeff] Sessions left. They had sent it to their Office of Inspector General or somebody. Being an ex-federal guy, I’m a little disappointed that this type of situation is occurring. I do have a lot more sensitive information I’m not ready to talk about, and I think that may scare some people. But I don’t care. I’ve had a lot of threats from [drug] cartels and that doesn’t bother me. I’ve been around a long time. I don’t go around making allegations unless I can back them up. I have the evidence that it happened.

AFP: Can you explain the contempt of court issue?

Sheriff Joe: Here I am, in my waning years, sitting at a criminal defense table . . . for six days, with a stacked deck, on a contempt of court charge, where the judge—they wouldn’t even give me a jury trial—charged me with the wrong charge, over a contempt charge, because I was doing my job. I had the authority to do it under the feds, because I had 100 of my deputies sworn in, trained for six months as immigration officers. They went after me because I was very active. When I do something in my life, maybe I do it one step more than normal, but it’s not illegal.

Conspireality, Victor Thorn
Victor Thorn takes on Obama’s birth certificate, 9/11, and a lot more.

AFP: Can you elaborate on the presidential pardon you received?

Sheriff Joe: You know, another thing about the border—I’m not criticizing the president on his selections. I feel sorry for him, and I think he’ll admit it, too: There’s a lot of garbage out there. A lot of people say they like him. They like him because they’re making money. But where is their heart? There’s a difference, being a bureaucrat.

Another difference is, does it come from your heart? My support of him comes from my heart. It has nothing to do with a big position. I don’t do anything to get a job. Now, if he ever calls me, I would probably have to help him out, because I love the guy, and if he needs me, I’ll have to do it.

He pardoned me before I even went to court to be sentenced. But you know what? He did the right thing. I didn’t ask for it, but he did the right thing. It had nothing to do with politics.

AFP: Would you like to see President Trump elected again?

Sheriff Joe: If we don’t get the current president reelected, we’re gonna be in deep trouble. We’re in a little trouble now, but just think if the Democrats come back in, with all their stupid policies. You wouldn’t mind if you got a really good guy, a patriot, that type of person, to run on the Democratic side, but we don’t have that. We don’t have that now, and if they win the election, this country is going to be in poor shape.

By the way, I love [how the president uses] Twitter. I hope he tweets forever and gets the word out his way. He’s not afraid to speak out. He’s maybe different, but, boy, he’s the one we need today. When he gets reelected, I guarantee you he’ll be a little different. He’ll be tougher, when he’s reelected. So we only have another, what, five-and-a-half years to straighten this country out.

Subscribe to AFP

AFP: You read the newspaper, American Free Press, right?

Sheriff Joe: Yeah, I love your paper.

AFP: And of course, like you, all the things they call us—racist, anti-Semitic—it’s just how the left (and groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center) smears patriotic conservatives these days who have the courage to speak the truth about important topics. Thanks for having the courage to speak with us, Sheriff. We hope we’ve helped you get the word out.

Sheriff Joe: Thank you.

This partial interview transcript was edited to fit into the print paper space allowed. Click the podcast image above to hear the full, unedited version of Dave Gahary’s interview with Sheriff Arpaio.

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 film about the attack on the USS Liberty. See the website or call (850) 677-0344 for more information.

How Obama Colluded With Ukraine to Help Hillary Beat Donald Trump

Now that the Mueller investigation has finally ended, one would expect the mainstream media to be giving the same endless coverage to Obama’s apparent collusion with Ukraine to swing the presidential election in Hillary’s favor. Don’t hold your breath … . 

By Donald Jeffries

While a two-year investigation into President Donald Trump’s alleged ties to Russian officials has produced no evidence of any “collusion,” the mainstream media continues to ignore troubling connections between the Obama administration and foreign governments.

The most recent example involves former Obama White House counsel Greg Craig and how he allegedly misled the U.S. Justice Department about his law firm’s work in Ukraine. Craig is charged with providing false and misleading information to the Foreign Agent Registration Act office regarding the trial of Yulia Tymoshenko, a political rival of the country’s then-president, Viktor Yanukovych. Former Trump campaign head Paul Manafort was seemingly held to a different standard under the same act during Robert Mueller’s investigation.

A recent story in The Hill described how the Obama White House attempted to use Ukraine to give an early boost to the whole Russian “collusion” narrative. A January 2016 meeting in the Oval Office between some of the top Ukrainian prosecutors and investigators and representatives of the National Security Council, FBI, State Department, and Department of Justice has been documented by contemporary memos and testimony of multiple participants. Ukrainians who were at the meeting have stated that it quickly became apparent the meeting’s purported agenda of training and cooperation was a front. Instead, U.S. officials were clearly interested in two hot political controversies.

Subscribe to AFP

One of these involved Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter’s affiliation with Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings. Bank records revealed that more than $3 million went from the Ukraine to an American firm tied to Hunter Biden during 2014-2015. U.S. officials asked the Ukrainians if they would drop the Burisma probe and turn it over to the FBI. The Ukrainians refused, but Biden went on to pressure Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to fire the country’s chief prosecutor in March 2016. This resulted in the Burisma case being transferred and eventually shut down.

According to Andrii Telizhenko, a political official in the Ukrainian embassy in Washington, who organized the meeting, U.S. officials “kept talking about how important it was that all of our anti-corruption efforts be united.” The Americans stated that they had no interest in reviving a 2014 investigation into then-GOP lobbyist Manafort and others in the U.S. receiving payments from Ukraine’s Russia-backed Party of Regions. At that time, the FBI had questioned Manafort about any improper foreign lobbying but stopped the investigation without charging him. Telizhenko was unable to recall if Manafort’s name was mentioned at the meeting, but other Ukrainian attendees remembered that Department of Justice representatives had asked investigators from Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau about finding new evidence regarding the Party of Regions’ payments and associations with Americans.

Deep State Target, Papadopoulos
Brand new at the AFP Online Story – the inside story from Papadopoulos!

“It was definitely the case that led to the charges against Manafort and the leak to U.S. media during the 2016 election,” Telizhenko declared. Spokespersons in the Department of Justice, National Security Council, and FBI declined to comment on The Hill’s article, and a representative for former Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice did not return their emails.

Nazar Kholodnytsky, Ukraine’s chief anti-corruption prosecutor, told The Hill that he attended some of the January 2016 meetings in Washington. He described seeing a ledger showing payments from the Party of Regions to Manafort and said that Ukrainian authorities had known about it since 2014.

Commenting on the sudden release of this evidence by the U.S.-friendly National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) in May 2016, right after Manafort was named Trump’s campaign chairman, Kholodnytsky declared: “Somebody kept this black ledger secret for two years and then showed it to the public and the U.S. media. It was extremely suspicious. . . . I ordered the detectives to give nothing to the mass media considering this case. Instead, they had broken my order and published themselves these one or two pages of this black ledger regarding Paul Manafort. . . . For me it was the first call that something was going wrong and that there is some external influence in this case.”

Hidden History, Jeffries
Exposing modern crimes, conspiracies and political coverups at the AFP Online Store!

Kostiantyn Kulyk, deputy head of the Ukraine prosecutor general’s international affairs office, corroborated this, noting, “Yes, there was a lot of talking about needing help and then the ledger just appeared in public.” Kulyk also said that Ukrainian authorities had evidence that others, like former Obama White House Counsel Gregory Craig, had also received money from Yanukovych’s party. But the Americans weren’t interested in any of that. “They just discussed Manafort. This was all and only what they wanted. Nobody else,” Kulyk said.

A Ukrainian court concluded, in December 2018, that NABU’s release of the ledger was an illegal attempt to influence the U.S. election. A member of Ukraine’s parliament even released a recording of a NABU official commenting that the agency released the ledger to help Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

In an April 25 appearance on Fox News, President Donald Trump chimed in: “It sounds like big stuff. It sounds very interesting with Ukraine. . . . I’m not surprised.”

Donald Jeffries is a highly respected author and researcher whose work on the JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations and other high crimes of the Deep State has been read by millions of people across the world. Jeffries is also the author of two books currently being sold by the AFP Online Store.

Michigan Falls for SPLC Trap: Labels Good Groups ‘Haters’

The hate crimes witch hunt continues throughout the nation. Now, Michigan’s governor has joined the part relying on the utterly discredited SPLC to tell her what “hate groups” she should most fear in her state.

By Mark Anderson

Elected in 2018, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel (D) has put together a “hate crimes unit” that compiles data and mainly targets those accused of committing so-called hate crimes against “the LGBTQ [Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer] community.” She’s heavily relying on the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) to help her office define which groups are “hate” groups. The intent, according to both government and media sources, is to increase the documentation and prosecution of hate crimes while also targeting “incidents” of hate.

Ms. Nessel is a married lesbian and former Wayne County assistant prosecutor who’s working with the Michigan Department of Civil Rights in this crusade. She is using SPLC data to focus on a particular region of Michigan where, it’s alleged, there’s a stronger-than-usual concentration of “hate” organizations.

Kingdom Identity

“These groups range in the ideological extremes from anti-Muslim, to anti-LGBT, to black nationalist and white nationalists,” Michigan Department of Civil Rights Director Agustin Arbulu said in an official statement, which added that the lower peninsula’s “thumb” area is seen as a hotbed of supposed hate.

“Particularly of concern, over one half of the [31] identified groups are located east of U.S.-23 between Flint and Ann Arbor,” Arbulu specified. Yet, this crusade goes even further. Arbulu’s department, in coordination with the attorney general’s office, is going so far as to create “a process to document hate and bias incidents that don’t rise to the level of a crime or civil infraction,” as noted in The Detroit News.

In other words, something as harmless as philosophically or politically disagreeing with certain “minority” groups deemed worthy of extra protection by the state is being monitored and logged. This means that Michigan is trying to discredit, pathologize, and potentially criminalize certain beliefs, primarily if not solely conservative, constitutionalist, or Christian beliefs. In due course, this could result in a “thought crimes” dragnet.

The SPLC—whose scandal-ridden founder, Morris Dees, was recently fired and whose overall leadership is mired in corruption, as detailed in AFP’s last two editions—claims Michigan is home to 31 hate and extremist organizations—which is “an uptick from the 28 [the SPLC] reported in 2017,” according to The Detroit News.

Ms. Nessel’s office announced that “active hate and extremist groups in Michigan” from 2017 to 2018 had increased “by more than 6%.” Two of the 31 accused Michigan groups are the American Freedom Law Center in Ann Arbor, accused of being anti-Muslim, and the Church Militant/ St. Michael’s Media in Ferndale, labeled as being “hateful” of LGBTQ people.

Hate Crime Hoax
How the Left is selling a FAKE race war, now at AFP’s Online Store

In correspondence with this writer, St. Michael’s Media spokesperson Christine Niles responded: “Church Militant categorically rejects the label of ‘hate group’ imposed by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a radical leftist outfit whose aim seems to have morphed into attacking prolife, pro-family organizations. We are deeply concerned that the Michigan attorney general’s office is launching its hate crimes task force using the SPLC’s list to investigate groups like ours.”

In a news release, the American Freedom Law Center announced it has filed a civil rights lawsuit “accusing Michigan of roundabout discrimination” in this matter. The law center is “going after Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel and state Department of Civil Rights Director Agustin Arbulu” because they are “waging an unjust crusade against the law center.”

Michigan, adds the complaint, “is unfairly targeting the law center due to its inclusion on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of local hate groups.”

The American Freedom Law Center says its mission “is to fight for faith and freedom through litigation, education, and public policy programs. The strength of our nation lies in its commitment to a Judeo-Christian heritage and moral foundation and to an enduring faith and trust in God and His Providence.”

Other groups among the 31 named by the SPLC are: American Guard (statewide, “general hate”), The Creativity Movement (statewide, “Neo Nazi”), the Daily Stormer (statewide, “Neo-Nazi”), and the Foundation for the Marketplace of Ideas (Clinton Township, “White Nationalist”).

Bill Mohr, chairman of the U.S. Taxpayer’s Party (a.k.a. Constitution Party), remarked that the attorney general’s crusade “is not receiving the kind of news coverage that it deserves.” He added that newly elected Governor Gretchen Whitmer (D) “issued an executive order forbidding any discrimination against the LGBTQ crowd.”

Mohr told this writer he has been contacting state Sen. Eric Nesbitt (R), among others, “to try and get even one senator to disavow or counteract the executive order,” but to no avail, as of this writing.

Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving editor. Email him at [email protected]

Smeared Kentucky Teen Continues Quest for Justice, Adds NBC to Massive Lawsuit

Smeared Teen’s Legal Team Adds NBC to Massive Lawsuit

By Donald Jeffries

Lawyers for Nicholas Sandmann, the courageous Covington, Ky. teenager who was smeared so unfairly a few months back by mainstream media and reckless celebrities, have filed another lawsuit. In early May, Sandmann’s attorneys sued NBC/Universal and MSNBC for $275 million. “Washington Post, CNN, and now NBC/MSNBC. The journey for justice for Nicholas Sandmann and for media accountability continues,” lead attorney L. Lin Wood tweeted. “More to follow. False accusers should not rest easy.”

In addition to filing earlier lawsuits against The Washington Post and CNN, Sandmann’s legal team has sent out dozens of letters to national media outlets and public figures, requesting that evidence such as internal emails be preserved for their potential value.

“In short, the false and defamatory gist of NBCUniversal’s collective reporting conveyed to its viewers and readers that Nicholas was the face of an unruly hate mob of hundreds of white racist high school students who physically assaulted, harassed, and taunted two different minority groups engaged in peaceful demonstrations, preaching, song, and prayer,” a complaint provided to the press by Sandmann’s attorneys stated. Wood’s associate, attorney Todd McMurtry, tweeted “The facts of the suit show the anti-Trump narrative NBC pushed so hard.”

“NBCUniversal created a false narrative by portraying the ‘confrontation’ as a ‘hate crime’ committed by Nicholas,” the newest lawsuit reads, and refers to Sandmann as “an easy target for NBCUniversal to advance its anti-Trump agenda because he was a 16-year-old white, Catholic student who had attended the Right to Life March that day and was wearing a MAGA cap at the time of the incident, which he had purchased earlier in the day as a souvenir.”

McMurtry has hinted that the Associated Press and HBO could be the next to be sued.

National Coin Investments

Last month, The Washington Post filed to dismiss the Sandmanns’ $250 million lawsuit lodged against them. CNN was hardly contrite in its response to being sued.

Attorney Lin Wood tweeted, “CNN does not apologize to Nicholas Sandmann, does not acknowledge its violations of journalistic standards, does not admit its sources lied, and does not acknowledge its bias. Much more is required to begin to right the wrong.”

In one of its first stories about the incident, The Washington Post quoted native American Nathan Phillips as saying that he felt “threatened by the teens,” that they “swarmed around him,” and one of them “blocked my way and wouldn’t allow me to retreat.” The paper stood by its coverage, and its lawyers stated, “Newspapers are often unable to publish a complete account of events when they first come to light. Stories often develop over time, as more witnesses emerge.” Laughably, they went on to claim, “Indeed, the Post’s overall coverage—including the articles that the complaint fails to mention—was not only accurate; it was ultimately favorable to him. Why … bring this lawsuit accusing the Post of engaging in ‘a modern-day form of McCarthyism,’ and demanding $250 million in damages— a number chosen, the complaint explains, because it is the price Jeff Bezos paid for the Post in 2013? The inflammatory rhetoric of the Complaint . . . suggests one motive: to strike a blow against the Post’s allegedly ‘biased agenda against President Donald J. Trump.’ ”

Hate Crime Hoax
How the Left is selling a FAKE race war, now at AFP’s Online Store

The new lawsuit against NBC continues: “NBCUniversal’s attacks on Nicholas included at least fifteen (15) defamatory television broadcasts, six (6) defamatory online articles, and many tweets falsely accusing Nicholas and his Covington Catholic High School (‘CovCath’) classmates of racist acts. NBCUniversal continued to promote its false narrative that Nicholas had instigated a racist confrontation with Phillips long after Phillips was exposed as a fraud whose version of events was not entitled to any credibility by responsible members of the media.”

The new lawsuit against NBC continues: “NBCUniversal’s attacks on Nicholas included at least fifteen (15) defamatory television broadcasts, six (6) defamatory online articles, and many tweets falsely accusing Nicholas and his Covington Catholic High School (‘CovCath’) classmates of racist acts. NBCUniversal continued to promote its false narrative that Nicholas had instigated a racist confrontation with Phillips long after Phillips was exposed as a fraud whose version of events was not entitled to any credibility by responsible members of the media.”

The lawsuit adds: “Between Jan. 19 and Jan. 27, NBCUniversal unleashed its vast corporate wealth, influence, and power against Nicholas to falsely attack him despite the fact that, at the time, he was a 16-year-old high-school student. Throughout its coverage, NBCUniversal refused to admit the truth that incontrovertible video evidence established that Nicholas, a minor child, did nothing wrong and was instead the victim of two separate groups of adult political activists before becoming the victim of NBCUniversal and the mainstream media.”

NBC recently promoted this demonstrably false narrative again, on an episode of “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit,” casting some Covington-style teens as bad guys, and a politician clearly based on Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) in a heroic role.

These lawsuits come at an especially germane moment, given the alarming increase in online censorship, especially on social media. If Sandmann is able to win under our legal system, it would strike a powerful blow against the irresponsible propaganda being issued incessantly by virtually every organ in the mainstream media, as well as its clueless sycophants in the celebrity world.

More on Nicholas Sandmann, from AFP Issue 19 & 20, April May 6 & 13:

Kentucky Teen Continues Quest for Justice

Catholic student Nicholas Sandmann is unafraid to challenge the world’s biggest fake news outlets!

By Donald Jeffries

The impending legal battle between a Catholic teenager from Kentucky and the most powerful mainstream media outlets in the country is about to heat up. Attorneys Lin Wood and Todd McMurtry have already filed lawsuits for $250 million against The Washington Post and for $275 million against CNN. Other establishment press outlets, hateful celebrities, and Native American elder Nathan Phillips will face legal repercussions as well.

The lawyers for Nick Sandmann, the teen who was confronted by Phillips and maligned as a “racist” in the national media, have posted a powerful new two-minute video, “Nick Sandmann vs Media Giants,” under the hashtag #ReformOurMedia. It begins, “The Washington Post, owned by the richest man in the world, led the print media’s false attacks against Nicholas’s reputation. CNN led the broadcast media’s charge. . . . Both recklessly spread lies about a minor to advance their own financial and political agendas.”

The video accuses the Post and CNN of having “doubled down on their reckless lies” in spite of the clear evidence revealed by raw video footage of the incident. In the new video, the state-run media is accused of propagating “lies that will forever haunt and endanger the life of an innocent young man, lies that further divided our nation. How long will we allow these media giants to tear at the fabric of our lives to further their own agendas? Will they ever be held accountable?” The video closes by declaring that the embattled 16- year-old from Covington High School “has taken a stand for himself and for you,” and vows that his attorneys “will not be stopped until these goliath corporations are held accountable for their lack of journalistic integrity. Until then, no one’s reputation is safe.”

Attorney Wood points out that his young client “did absolutely nothing wrong. If they can get away with this against a 16-year-old boy then we’re all at risk.”

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

McMurtry recently told Fox Radio that next to be sued are NBC, the Associated Press, HBO and its obnoxious talk show host Bill Maher, who smarmily declared on a Jan. 27 broadcast, “I don’t blame the kid, the smirking kid. I blame lead poisoning and bad parenting. And, oh yeah, I blame the f**king kid. What a little p**ck. Smirk-face! Like that’s not a d**k move at any age to stick your face in this elderly man’s. . . .”

Wood tweeted out in response, “Bill Maher falsely accused Nick Sandmann of sticking his face in ‘this elderly man’s face.’ He vilified Nick by using obscene profanities to describe a 16-year-old. HBO counsel wrote, ‘Any effort to pursue a claim against HBO or Mr. Maher would be frivolous.’ I disagree. Do you?”

McMurtry continued, “But right now we’re looking very carefully at NBC, AP, HBO. And again, HBO is primarily because they carry Bill Maher’s disgusting comments about Nicholas Sandmann. So those probably are the next three defendants.”

This writer interviewed McMurtry on the March 15 “I Protest” radio program. McMurtry explained how he became involved in the case after watching the outrageously biased and inaccurate mainstream media coverage and horrifying personal attacks on the underage Sandmann.

McMurty said that they chose to sue The Washington Post first because, “They were really the first news organization to go from Twitter into the media realm. They went from social media to media.” Regarding CNN, McMurtry stated, “We sued them second because they are, in our view, the largest media organization that did the most damage . . . there’s up to 450 million households worldwide that have CNN.”

Deep State Target, Papadopoulos
Brand new at the AFP Online Store – the inside story from Papadopoulos!

McMurtry stood by Sandmann, explaining that “he was put in a difficult situation and I think he behaved perfectly.”

In terms of the media blasting the teenager for his “smirk,” which evokes comparisons to George Orwell’s “facecrime” from 1984, McMurtry maintained that “he was vilified for that. I think that is the definition of Orwellian.”

To date, those who defamed Sandmann and his fellow classmates at Covington Catholic High School have been reticent to apologize or accept responsibility for their inaccurate reporting. The Washington Post reluctantly acknowledged, in terms of its initial coverage, that “Subsequent reporting, a student’s statement, and additional video allow for a more complete assessment of what occurred, either contradicting or failing to confirm accounts provided in that story.”

Attorneys Wood and McMurtry called the response “arrogant” and said that the newspaper “did not have the integrity to unequivocally admit its negligent and reckless violations of fundamental journalistic standards documented by its complete failure to investigate the incident at the National Mall before publishing lies about a child.”

CNN’s tepid response noted it had “reported on a newsworthy event and public discussion about it, taking care to report on additional facts as they developed. . . .”

President Donald Trump, as always busy on Twitter, tweeted out his support for the lawsuits with “Go get them, Nick. Fake News!”

Donald Jeffries is a highly respected author and researcher whose work on the JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations and other high crimes of the Deep State has been read by millions of people across the world. Jeffries is also the author of two books currently being sold by the AFP Online Store.

Trump Risks War Over Iran Oil Embargo

President Trump’s Israeli petroleum gambit imperils his re-election chances and invites war.

By Dr. Kevin Barrett

Has the White House gone insane? On April 21 The Washington Post reported that the Trump administration is ending its waivers exempting Iran’s biggest oil customers from Israeli- instigated U.S. sanctions.

Over a year ago the Trump administration, demonstrating its subservience to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, announced it would “drive Iran’s oil exports to zero.” That was supposed to have happened by the end of the first week of November 2018. But shortly before the “most biting sanctions ever imposed” were scheduled to come online, Trump exempted Iran’s leading oil customers. The list of nations that buy Iranian oil begins with China, India, and Korea, which together purchase almost half of the total output. Next are Turkey, Italy, and Japan. All six nations were exempted.

Why did Trump tear up his own sanctions last November? Because none of Iran’s customers were going to respect them. As Bloomberg reported on Aug. 2, China—by far Iran’s largest oil recipient—rejected Trump’s request to forego Iranian crude. Tehran’s second-biggest oil customer is India. In early October, one month before Iran’s oil trade was supposed to be driven “to zero,” India said it would ignore U.S. sanctions.

National Coin Investments

In July, even before China and India rebuffed Trump, Turkey had led the way in rejecting the Israeli-American plan to sanction Iran. Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu called the planned sanctions “inappropriate”—and was seconded by President Recep Erdogan, who made it clear that Turkey would continue purchasing Iranian oil.

Trump’s November 2018 decision to back off from the sanctions was wise. His April 2019 decision to reverse himself and try to enforce the unenforceable was a monumental blunder.

Will China, Iran’s biggest oil customer, obey Trump? Hardly.

“We think that China can’t and won’t back down this time, and we could easily see an increase of Chinese oil imports from Iran up towards maybe 1 million barrels per day,” said Bjarne Schieldrop, chief commodities analyst at SEB Group. “There will also be an increasing amount of oil exports out of Iran which will go ‘under the sanctions radar’. . . . It will drive Iran closer to China and enable China to settle yet more oil in renminbi.”

As China and other countries thumb their noses at the U.S., it is American prestige and credibility—not Iranian oil exports—that will be driven to zero. And as the world finds ways to trade outside of U.S. dollars, the U.S. dollar will be driven, if not to zero, at least toward a valuation closer to that of toilet paper than gold.

But even though everyone expects near-universal noncompliance with the sanctions, oil prices are soaring. Why is that? If Iran will keep selling its oil, maybe even in larger amounts, shouldn’t oil prices remain stable or decline? The answer is that sanctions, no matter how toothless, signal hostility, increase the odds of trade wars or even shooting wars, and spook the futures markets. If there is even a 20% probability of a huge trade war, and a 5% probability of a major U.S. attack on Iran, which Iran would respond to by shutting down the Persian Gulf, the oil futures markets turn bullish as high-rollers gamble on the long-shot possibility that oil prices might shoot through the roof.

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

Once it becomes clear that nobody is respecting the sanctions and American consumers find themselves paying higher energy prices in a stagnating economy, Trump will face a tough choice: either back off once again, thereby shredding what little credibility the U.S. may still have, or double down by “enforcing” the sanctions, thereby eliciting a tit-for-tat response from China, India, and Iran’s other customers. That’s a recipe for an all-out trade war that would cripple economies around the globe just in time to ruin Trump’s re-election chances in 2020.

The real architect of U.S. anti-Iran sanctions is Netanyahu, though. The Israeli prime minister is gambling that Trump will be forced into a corner and will have no choice but to start a shooting war with Iran—a war that would likely be set off by yet another Israeli false flag. Such a war would be disastrous for the U.S. Like the Iraq war it would help destroy the Middle East in service to Israeli expansionism, while sapping America’s blood, treasure, and prestige.

Trump probably doesn’t understand how he is being played. He has so much to think about that he doesn’t have time to analyze such issues in depth. Instead, he relies on advice from his financial backers—casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, the Kushner family, and the rest of the Kosher Nostra—and their hired guns—Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Advisor John Bolton.

By listening to people who hope to benefit from another disastrous Middle Eastern war, Trump is dooming his own presidency—and leading his country toward the abyss.

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.

Related, from American Free Press Issue 17 & 18:

Israeli Prime Minister Dictating American Foreign Policy on Iran

By Richard Walker

Washington’s policy of pleasing Israel has continued unabated with a State Department decision to sanction Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps by declaring it a terrorist organization.

It was an unprecedented move, representing the first time the U.S. applied a foreign terrorist organization tag to another country’s army. The decision was not considered a wise one by some senior U.S. military figures. It was opposed by Russia, China, and many of America’s NATO allies, especially Turkey. It may well complicate and place at risk American forces in the region after Iran retaliated by branding the U.S. Central Command a terrorist group, similar to ISIS.

The State Department announcement was applauded by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other hawks, including National Security Adviser John Bolton. It had the characteristics of yet another gift to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, coming as it did at the time of his re-election victory. It also followed a recent decision by President Donald Trump to approve Israel’s illegal occupation of the Golan Heights, which is rightfully Syrian territory according to international law.

While this latest move was clearly designed to satisfy Israeli demands by piling even more sanctions on Iran, it stood in stark contrast to Washington’s diplomatic love affair with North Korea, a nuclear state that poses a significant risk to South Korea and the large U.S. military contingent stationed there.

Turkish President Recep Erdogan, who has been a vocal critic of Israel’s interference in the affairs of the Middle East, condemned the U.S., saying it risked destabilizing the region. It is not the first time he has taken issue with Washington’s Middle East interventions. In 2018, Erdogan described U.S. sanctions against Iran as illegal, a position supported by the UN, and made it clear he would not abide by them.

Turkey happens to be a major trading partner with Iran and imports a lot of its oil. It is likely Erdogan will not recognize the latest Washington penalties, nor will Russia, China, and the EU, all of which have been opposed to Washington’s increasing determination to punish Iran since Trump took office. Most European nations believe the developing U.S. strategy was demanded by Netanyahu and the warmongers in his cabinet that favor a war with Iran. Some experts have hinted that the anti-Iran posture of the State Department was the outcome of a secret pact between Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner and his close friend, Saudi leader Mohammed bin Salman.

Kingdom Identity

Sanctions against Iran have never proved effective and have only hurt the Iranian people, whom Washington claims to care about it. They have become deeply resentful of a U.S. policy that risks conflict, seeing it as one influenced directly by Washington neocons linked to Tel Aviv.

George Galloway, a former British parliamentarian for 30 years, described the State Department’s decision as a “dangerous escalation” that will further sour relations between the Trump White House and our allies, especially in Europe.

“It is the equivalent of declaring the U.S. Marine Corps a terrorist organization, though with much less justification given that Iran hasn’t invaded another country for centuries. Washington’s description of Iran as ‘expansionist’ is enough to make a horse laugh given the worldwide projection of U.S. bases and military hardware around the world—and around Iran,” Galloway added.

Think the IRS Never Loses Cases? Think again!

The bottom line is that Iran does not pose an existential threat to the United States or to a nuclear- armed Israel, which has one of the most formidable arsenals in the world. Instead, it has a young, vibrant population that most surveys have shown would like better relations with America. That cannot happen while Netanyahu uses Iran as a political punching bag and the Saudis promote anti-Iran sentiment through lobbyists who purchase support in Congress. Sanctions do not hurt the Iranian military. The latest ones will embolden religious hardliners in Tehran and in the upper ranks of the Revolutionary Guard Corps.

For those of us who have watched Trump try to fulfill his campaign promises to withdraw America from Middle East conflicts, it is puzzling that he keeps being dragged back into the region by allies, especially the Saudis and the Israelis. It should be clear to him that a war with Iran is something both those allies in particular would like, but it would be disastrous for the region and for America. It could create a firestorm across the Middle East and drag in Russia, which is an Iran ally.

Trump has handed off a lot of Middle East policymaking to Kushner, a family friend of Netanyahu and bin Salman. The Saudi-Israel nexus has also been promoted by neocons from both parties in Congress and especially by National Security Advisor John Bolton. It may be time for Trump to seize the reins of Mideast policymaking and talk personally and directly with Iran, as he has done with the North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

Richard Walker is the pen name of a former N.Y. news producer.

Hillary’s Missing Emails Found in Obama Oval Office, Says FBI

Thanks to the perseverance of Judicial Watch, a high-level FBI official has admitted, under oath, that the agency found Hillary Clinton emails hiding in President Barack Obama’s Oval Office. 

By Donald Jeffries

Judicial Watch has reported the bombshell information that an FBI official has admitted under oath that the agency found Hillary Clinton’s notorious emails in the Executive Office of the then-president—Barack Obama.

In court-ordered discovery the same senior FBI official, Assistant Director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division Bill Priestap, also said that the agency had reviewed nearly 49,000 emails from Clinton’s server as a result of the search warrant for her material on the laptop belonging to former Rep. Anthony Weiner (DN. Y.). At the time, Weiner was married to Clinton’s top aide, Huma Abedin.

U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ordered senior State Department officials, lawyers in the Obama administration, aides to Clinton, and Priestap to be deposed or answer written questions under oath. In approving the discovery plan submitted by Judicial Watch, the court referred to the Clinton email system as “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”

Priestap had testified in a separate lawsuit that Clinton was the subject of a grand jury investigation related to her BlackBerry email accounts.


“This astonishing confirmation, made under oath by the FBI, shows that the Obama FBI had to go to President Obama’s White House office to find emails that Hillary Clinton tried to destroy or hide from the American people,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton stated. “No wonder Hillary Clinton has thus far skated—Barack Obama is implicated in her email scheme.”

Judicial Watch’s discovery is specifically seeking answers to “whether Clinton intentionally attempted to evade the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by using a non-government email system, whether the State Department’s efforts to settle this case beginning in late 2014 amounted to bad faith, and whether the State Department adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request.”

In an April 25 interview with Newsmax TV, Fitton accused the Department of Justice of conducting a “sham investigation to protect Clinton and Obama and target Trump.” On the same day, Fitton leveled that identical accusation in an appearance on “Lou Dobbs Tonight” on the Fox Business Network. Fitton has also suggested that President Donald Trump should file a criminal complaint with the Department of Justice over being illicitly targeted.

Earlier this year, Judicial Watch examined 186 pages of Justice Department records, which included emails documenting a coverup of potential violations of law by Clinton when she was secretary of state. Judicial Watch obtained the records under a January 2018 FOIA lawsuit, which was filed after the Justice Department failed to respond to their initial December 2017 FOIA request.

The watchdog group is also attempting to obtain all communications between former FBI official Peter Strzok and his ex-lover, FBI attorney Lisa Page. A July 8, 2016 email chain reveals that just three days after then-FBI Director James Comey’s press conference, in which he announced that he would not be recommending prosecution of Clinton, the special counsel to the FBI’s executive assistant director of the National Security Branch, whose name is redacted, wrote to Strzok and others that he was producing a “chart of the statutory violations considered during the investigation [of Clinton’s server], and the reasons for the recommendation not to prosecute. . . .” This individual further stated: “I am still working on an additional page for these [talking points] that consist of a chart of the statutory violations considered during the investigation, and the reasons for the recommendation not to prosecute, hopefully in non-lawyer friendly terms. . . .”

It is sobering to compare this secrecy to all that was made of the emails of private citizens like Jerome Corsi and Roger Stone, in a convoluted effort to associate them in some way with Julian Assange, who was just as dubiously tied to Russian officials.

Meanwhile, the admitted destruction of servers containing the former secretary of state’s emails has been forgotten.

Donald Jeffries is a highly respected author and researcher whose work on the JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations and other high crimes of the Deep State has been read by millions of people across the world. Jeffries is also the author of two books currently being sold by the AFP Online Store.

Deep State Conditions Public for War

News flash: It’s America, not Russia, that is the real danger to world peace.

By Paul Craig Roberts

The Russian embassy in Washington has prepared an accurate 121-page report, “The Russiagate Hysteria: A Case of Severe Russophobia.” Everyone should read this report. It documents the fake news, lies, violations of diplomatic standards and international law, and gratuitous aggressive actions taken against Russia during the period beginning May 18, 2016 and continuing through the issuance of the Mueller report.

Without explicitly saying so, the report shows that neither the U.S. government nor the American media has a nanoparticle of integrity. Both are criminal organizations that are willing to risk war with Russia in their pursuit of narrow politicized agendas.

This is important information for Americans and the rest of the world to have. Every person, every government, and every private organization that supports Washington’s Russophobic policies is contributing to the growing threat of nuclear war.

Kingdom Identity

One hopes also that the entirety of the Russian government, media, and population also read the report, as it has equally powerful messages for Russia. The messages are no doubt unintended, but they nevertheless emerge from the embassy’s report.

The Russian government should marvel at its naivete in trusting Washington, U.S. institutions such as Citibank, and U.S. adherence to international law. For 121 pages the report lists transgression against Russia followed by transgression and lie followed by lie, yet the Russian government continues to send diplomatic notes that are never answered, requests for meetings that are never answered, requests for evidence that are never answered. One would think that month after month of abuse would have caused the Russian government to wonder, where was the intelligence, “cooperative spirit,” reason, and “common interest in global security” that Russia’s responses to Washington assumed were present in Russia’s “partner”?

The Russian government’s naive and gullible response to Washington played into Washington’s hands. By responding to Washington’s orchestrated Russophobia as if it were some kind of mistake based on bad information, the Russian government allowed Washington to keep the process of demonization alive and thereby contributed to the ongoing demonization of Russia. If, instead, the Russian government had denounced the demonization of Russia as Washington’s act of preparing Americans for war with Russia and had taken a belligerent rather than a complaining stance, the realization that Washington’s policy had serious cost would have spread throughout the U.S. and Europe, and voices would have arisen against Washington’s dangerous and reckless policy. Today, in place of the uniformity of voice against Russia, there would be dissent opposing Washington’s irresponsible provocations.

The danger of Russian self-delusion is not over. The embassy’s report expresses the hope that now that special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of President Donald Trump and his campaign has concluded that the much-heralded collusion has no basis in fact, relations between Washington and Russia can be normalized and cooperation achieved.

Is there a plan to confront Russia in Iran? More at the AFP Online Store.

There is no such possibility. The Democrats are screaming “coverup” and demanding the resignation of Attorney General Barr and Trump’s impeachment. The presstitutes are claiming that the Mueller report vindicates their reporting.

In addition, Trump continues to use U.S. foreign policy to commit criminal acts. He has declared that the president of Venezuela is the person he picked, not the one Venezuelans elected. He has given to Israel part of Syria as if Syrian territory is his to give. He threatens Iran with war as Israel requires. In other words, American arrogance rises to ever higher heights.

At some point the Russian government and Russian people are going to have to accept the fact that to reach an understanding with Washington Russia must either surrender her sovereignty or become as belligerent as Washington and replace Russia’s useless refutations of Washington’s accusations with accusations of her own. Otherwise, Washington is going to keep pushing until war is the only possible outcome.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury under President Ronald Reagan and was associate editor and columnist at The Wall Street Journal. He has been a professor of economics in six universities and is the author of numerous books available at AFP’s Online Store.

Impeachment Only Way to Beat Trump?

Now that the Mueller report has failed in its mission of derailing the president, Democrats, the fake news media, and GOP insiders are colluding on an impeachment strategy. Is this the only way for them to get rid of President Trump?

By Donald Jeffries

The report by special counsel Robert Mueller concluded that there is no evidence that Donald Trump “colluded” with Russian figures to rig the 2016 presidential election. This hasn’t even slightly deterred those who want him impeached. The New York Times, flagship newspaper of the Deep State, ran an April 25 story headlined, “The Danger in Not Impeaching Trump.” Written by veteran establishment toady Elizabeth Drew, it advised Congress that despite being politically risky, it “has a responsibility to act.”

Never has the mainstream media called for the impeachment of a president so openly. Last month, The Atlantic proclaimed, “Impeach Donald Trump.” CBS News is all in on this effort, having run a recent in-depth analysis of what it would take to get an impeachment. Even seemingly friendly Fox News is asking, “Is Trump Trying to Get Impeached?”

Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) tweeted, after the release of the Mueller report, that “the House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the president of the United States.” Fellow senator and presidential contender, Kamala Harris (Calif.), advocates impeachment as well. Former Trump transition team member J.W. Verret and establishment Republican William Weld also believe Trump should be impeached.

Democratic Party leaders like Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) are more cautious, almost certainly aware of the fact that a recent poll from Trump-friendly Politico found that only 34% of Americans support impeaching Trump. Trump, confident as always, maintains that he is “not even a little bit” worried about the prospect of impeachment.

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

Those who want Trump impeached are remarkably vague about exactly what he’s done that warrants it. Some have floated out the notion that while Trump didn’t commit any tangible obstruction of justice, he is nevertheless guilty of “impeachable obstruction,” whatever that is. Trump’s most vociferous opponents seem to simply want him to “go away,” and they aren’t very particular about how this might be accomplished. Much as they hate him primarily because of his volatile personality, they irrationally believe he should be impeached because they find him offensive, “hateful,” a “racist” etc.

Hillary And Bill, Sex Volume
From the late Victor Thorn, the most comprehensive collection of hard facts ever compiled on Hillary (and Bill) Clinton.

In 1998, President Bill Clinton became only the second chief executive in the history of the United States to be impeached by the House of Representatives. He was impeached on two charges, perjury and obstruction of justice, relating to his illicit affair with young White House intern Monica Lewinsky. The establishment press had a remarkably different perspective on Clinton’s impeachment, consistently portraying it as a partisan Republican sideshow. In fact, they even refused to televise the live proceedings from the impeachment trial in the Senate, an incredibly rare and historical event. Unlike Richard Nixon, who resigned before he could be impeached, Clinton has been treated with near reverence since completing his two terms in office.

While any potential impeachment charges against Trump are nebulous at best, in the recent past other presidents have committed far more tangible, potentially impeachable offenses. Former populist Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) strongly advocated impeaching President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for the “weapons of mass destruction” lie that led to the pointless and disastrous Iraq War. Kucinich leveled 35 charges in all against Bush and Cheney, including the capture and treatment of prisoners of war, domestic spying and wiretapping, and even questions about 9/11.

There were persistent threats of impeachment against Barack Obama, with no less than The Washington Post headlining a 2014 article, “How President Obama Will Be Impeached.” Most of these efforts, which were spearheaded by groups like Lyndon Larouche’s political action committee, revolved around the questionable circumstances of Obama’s birth and the Benghazi scandal. Compared to the identity politics-driven campaign to impeach Trump, the cases against both Bush and Obama certainly seem to have had far more validity.

Deep State Target, Papadopoulos
Brand new at the AFP Online Story – the inside story from Papadopoulos!

While Nixon is still regularly equated with using the powers of his office to target political opponents, the reality is quite different. The mainstream media and court historians still trot out Nixon’s anemic “enemies list,” while ignoring Obama’s far more lengthy “kill list” of his opponents. As writer Monica Crowley said, “Article II of the articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon was just the simple fact that he talked about and suggested the potential use of the IRS against one or two political opponents.” In reality, presidents starting with Franklin D. Roosevelt have routinely used the IRS to target their political opposition.

Democrats have subpoenaed the full Mueller report, thinking it will somehow bolster their impeachment campaign. Apparently unaware of the conclusions of the Mueller report, wildly overhyped young Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (DN. Y.) tweeted in response to it, “Mueller’s report is clear in pointing to Congress’s responsibility in investigating obstruction of justice by the president.”

Considering the perpetual corruption within our executive branch, it would be laughable to impeach Trump over so many other worthy contenders.

Donald Jeffries is a highly respected author and researcher whose work on the JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations and other high crimes of the Deep State has been read by millions of people across the world. Jeffries is also the author of two books currently being sold by the AFP Online Store.

Globalists Lie Low

The front-page story of AFP Issue 19 & 20 (available here for AFP Online subscribers; click here to review subscription options) asks, has Europe become too hot for the elite Bilderberg meeting? Where will they meet this year?

By Mark Anderson

Europe has become too inhospitable for Bilderberg, at least for the time being, according to Tony Gosling, a former colleague of AFP Bilderberg hound Jim Tucker, who worked with Tucker for several years exposing Bilderberg.

Gosling, an investigative journalist from Bristol, UK, points out that “euroskeptics,” who oppose the eurozone and the European Union itself—the very creation of which was nurtured by Bilderberg—said that candidates and politicians who want the national sovereignty of their nations restored are making headway, getting into political office. This includes Germany.

As a result, news of a Bilderberg meeting in Europe at a time of such strong anti-globalist sentiment and developments could prove damaging for the group, especially in terms of bringing back unwanted, widespread publicity about the secretive gathering—something the group has labored to control and reduce as much as possible in its more than six decades of existence.

National Coin Investments

“They could cause a lot of trouble for themselves meeting in Europe,” Gosling said, as Bilderberg prepares for its 67th meeting in 65 years. “They could end up on a lot of front pages, which they don’t want.”

That kind of publicity was seen last year when Italian populist politicos in the Five Star Movement and other parties made noise against Bilderberg’s meeting in Turin, Italy. While the coverage was not “deafening,” to Bilderberg—a transnational planning and networking outfit that brings together the best, the brightest, and the wealthiest from carefully selected fields in the public and private sectors—any sustained or meaningful coverage that doesn’t dismiss Bilderberg’s opponents is darkly frowned upon.

The UK’s Daily Mail newspaper did manage to briefly infiltrate the 2018 Bilderberg meeting in Italy. While the infiltration was limited and the resulting article was not up to AFP’s or Gosling’s standards, the development was another pushback against Bilderberg’s secrecy in Europe—the cradle of its birth in 1954 via Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands and obscure European Movement organizer Josef Retinger. CIA money helped fund the first Bilderberg meeting in the Netherlands at the Hotel de Bilderberg, hence the group’s name.

Since Europe may prove too “hot” for Bilderberg for now, and Bilderberg met too recently (2017) in the U.S. to return to the States, where might they meet this year?

The strong belief is Canada will host the next gathering. The Bilderbergers last met there in 2006 at the Brookstreet Hotel in the national capital of Ottawa. A return there appeared possible at press time, since Bilderberg rather frequently returns to past venues. The group has met at the Westfields Marriott in Chantilly, Va., several times, including in 2008, 2012, and 2017.

Subscribe to AFP

Another august hotel in Ottawa where the group could conceivably meet is the Hotel Fairmont Chateau Laurier, where even the cheapest rooms book for more than $600 per night.

“It’s always a guessing game,” said Gosling, who warmly remembers working with Tucker—something this writer did three times in 2010 through 2012. “The group always puts out a lot of bum steers to mislead the Bilderberg watchers.”

Author Daniel Estulin, another longtime Bilderberg watcher who in 2017 released a movie about Bilderberg, told AFP that even he did not know where the group will meet in 2019, indicating perhaps that the Bilderbergers are trying to put the proverbial “publicity genie” back in the bottle and avoid hostile environments whenever possible.

Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving editor. Email him at [email protected].