Are the British Spying at EU Brexit Negotiations?

The EU official in charge of negotiations with Britain for its exit from the EU—commonly referred to as Brexit—suspects Britain is spying on the negotiations. While the British contingent has denied the allegations, it would not be surprising to learn it’s true. “The Brits have much to lose. Their economic, diplomatic, and strategic futures are on the line in this monumental shift back to independence.”

By S.T. Patrick

When the United Kingdom received sensitive documents within hours of them having been presented to EU officials last month, the EU became concerned. Soon after, the EU charged that the British secret service was spying on the continuing Brexit negotiations in Brussels.

Brexit has been the scandal du jour that has dominated recent British media in a way that Russiagate has consumed the American press. Brexit is a merging of the words “Britain” and “exit,” meaning the UK leaving the European Union. In June 2016, UK voters decided by a margin of 51.9% to 48.1% that they would leave the European Union. England and Wales supported Brexit, while Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU. The total vote favored leaving, which the UK will do on March 29, 2019.

There are issues regarding leaving, as there are in any divorce. The UK will have outstanding bills due to the EU. There is a dispute about the Northern Ireland border. It has yet to be decided how UK citizens living elsewhere in the EU and how EU citizens in the UK will be classified. The disputes have been the subject of talks in Belgium, where some of the EU’s official buildings are located.

Get Out of Cash

When Martin Selmayr, the most senior EU official in Brussels, became suspicious that British secret services were spying on the negotiations, he began demanding hard copies of documents rather than emails. The British contingent has denied the insinuation that their positions in the negotiations have been assisted by spying.

If the Brexit negotiations were subject to espionage, it would not be an unwarranted surprise.

The Brits have much to lose. Their economic, diplomatic, and strategic futures are on the line in this monumental shift back to independence.

The EU would surely like to guarantee that the United Kingdom will be an example to the other 27 nations within the European Union. If the UK brexits and thrives, it could then encourage similar considerations by other nations struggling within the confines and burdens of the EU. The EU delegation, led by chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier, is determined to ensure that the break will illustrate the need for a strong union throughout Europe.

When negotiations began, officials questioned the UK’s positions and strategies toward Brexit. Talk leaked that the Brits didn’t seem prepared for such a colossal move. Tom McTague of the Washington, D.C. news daily Politico described Britain’s perceived lack of preparedness.

“Britain is simultaneously the land of the smartest operators and a bunch of idiots being marched toward a cliff edge,” McTague wrote.

Anti-globalist commentators view the EU attitude and McTague’s assessment as metaphorically resembling the overly controlling parent who tells the 22-year-old that they should not leave home because they are destined to fail without further parenting. The parent tallies up the favors given to the child, and then stops all aid in an effort to prove that leaving equals destitution.

The British are determined to succeed on their own, as they once did mightily and proudly.

Both sides have stated that they would like to reach a Brexit agreement by the end of October. If not, a “No Deal Brexit” may occur in May. The EU, and those who oppose Brexit, have used the media to outline a laundry list of frightful consequences that would befall the UK if Brexit occurs without a beneficial deal in place.

British Labour leader Jeremy Corbin says it will be a “national disaster” if Brexit occurs without an agreement, but Prime Minister Theresa May has repeated that “no deal is better than a bad deal.”

Liberal Democrat politician Jonathan Fryer recently claimed that there was a “mole in the system” that was aiding Britain in the Brexit talks. Fryer absolutely believes that the spying allegations in Brussels are true.

“I think it’s quite a credible story,” Fryer told RT UK. “We don’t only spy on our so-called enemies; we also spy on our friends, though, of course, will deny it, and intelligence services are staying mum on this.”

While British officials have denied it, it has been rumored that British diplomats have been taking their own printers into EU buildings, fearing that house printers have been hacked to record all documents. Former Brexit Secretary David Davis was also said to have used a snoop-proof briefcase. Tensions are high on both sides, no matter how calm the public remarks have been.

Is there a 007 penetrating the gothic complexes of Europe’s most powerful offices? It seems a bit Ian Fleming, until you consider what is on the line for the UK. It is more inconceivable that they wouldn’t have every department of every government arm working toward a beneficial Brexit, the new starting line of Britain’s future.

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 STPatrickAFP@gmail.com.




Coup in Venezuela Invites Possible Global Cold War

Russia and China have a huge financial stake in Venezuela because both sell the country weapons, meaning U.S. threats of supporting a military coup in Venezuela could create a Latin American Cold War.

By Richard Walker

Should President Donald Trump and prominent members of Congress continue to advocate for a military coup in Venezuela, it could see a return to a Cold War in Latin America, a region in which countries have always shared divided loyalties to East and West.

According to foreign policy expert Brian Fonseca, should the U.S. continue to push for overthrowing the Venezuelan government, the West could see a bigger Chinese and Russian footprint in Latin America. These two superpowers have close ties to the Venezuelan military and sell it weapons. They would be thrilled if Venezuela’s relations with Washington reached a point of no return because Moscow and Beijing would pursue an opportunity to purchase majority stakes in Venezuela’s oil reserves that are among the world’s largest.

Venezuela also has large deposits of natural resources that China would be keen to develop, in keeping with China’s growing economic role in the world. China has been busy for the past two decades establishing relations with nations across Latin America and Africa, especially those that have massive energy and fossil fuel reserves. A classic example is that, in 2015, in the out-of-the-way country Mozambique, China began cutting large tracts of forest for the timber it desperately needs for its ever-expanding infrastructure. When it discovered that the same area held large deposits of gemstones, it bought mining rights and began exploiting them, too.

Think the IRS Never Loses Cases? Think again!

Fonseca has warned Washington figures that flirting with the prospect of backing the overthrow of the government of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela is playing with fire, endangering America’s foreign policy in its own backyard. It could even result in a major national security blunder.

Big oil companies Chevron and Halliburton that have stakes in Venezuela’s oil industry have privately appealed to the White House to avoid plunging Venezuela into total chaos by pursuing tougher financial sanctions against the government. They have also cautioned that intervention in support of a military coup could be disastrous for Washington’s relations throughout the region.

Those warnings have not deterred Trump from floating the possibility of supporting a coup by the Venezuelan military. He received backing for his views from U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.).

There is also evidence that some former Venezuelan military figures have met members of the Trump administration.

The promotion of regime change in Congress and the White House is a dangerous trend that ignores the failed history of U.S.-led coups. After 1947, with the emergence of the CIA, Washington decided it now had the ideal tool to change regimes it did not like or that American corporations felt threatened their energy domination. The first coup the CIA launched was in Iran in 1953 when U.S. agents overthrew a democratically elected government because Iran was seeking to stop exploitation by foreign oil corporations, mostly British, by nationalizing Iran’s oil for the benefit of its people. Other coups followed in the Congo and South Vietnam, but Latin America became the major target of nine coup-led interventions by the CIA. The Agency used tactics that became all too familiar of arming and training insurgents. It encouraged assassinations, bombings, kidnapping, and the secret torture and elimination of perceived enemies.

George Bush and Dick Cheney meddled in Venezuela and in other Latin American nations, and so, too, did Barack Obama who pursued what became known as the soft power strategy. Obama advocated using less CIA paramilitary input in favor of exploiting and financing opposition groups by funneling money to them, using Washington-run aid organizations. Bribes were also paid to political figures and disgruntled military officers. At the same time, fake stories were fed into the media of the target nation.

It is a fact that Venezuela, like many Latin American nations, has existed for decades with serious levels of corruption. But of much more significance is the reality that its economy has relied for too long on oil exports. Knowing this, in 2014, the Saudis, under pressure from Israel and Washington, flooded the international oil markets with cheap oil, crushing the price of oil to the detriment of the Venezuelan economy. The effects were devastating and long term. Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Washington saw it as punishment for Venezuela’s closeness to Iran and its attacks on Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. It may well be that some oil corporations were also pushing for the Saudi move, hoping it would lead to Venezuela’s collapse, giving them control of its energy resources.

Lewis Foundation Legal Notice

Venezuela is now collapsing financially, and U.S. sanctions could push it over the edge into the arms of Beijing and Moscow. It is generally not reported that 2.3 million Venezuelans have fled the country in the past three years.

Too many figures in Congress promote regime change, ignorant of the terrible effects of failed CIA-led coups in the past. Even those regimes in Latin America that do not support the Venezuelan leadership have raw memories of past U.S. interventions in countries like Chile and the failed 2002 CIA-led coup against Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. In that coup tens of millions of dollars were secretly funneled to opposition groups and disaffected members of the country’s military. That is probably what has been happening again in the past couple of years.

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


RELATED, FROM RON PAUL . . .

D.C.’s Hypocritical Attack on Maduro

If our leaders really cared about the people of Venezuela, they would lift the sanctions.

By Dr. Ron Paul

Last week we witnessed the horrible spectacle of Nikki Haley, President Donald Trump’s ambassador to the United Nations, joining a protest outside the UN building and calling for the people of Venezuela to overthrow their government.

“We are going to fight for Venezuela,” she shouted through a megaphone. “We are going to continue doing it until [Venezuelan President Nicolas] Maduro is gone.”

This is the neocon mindset: that somehow the U.S. has the authority to tell the rest of the world how to live and who may hold political power regardless of elections.

After more than a year of Washington being crippled by evidence-free claims that the Russians have influenced our elections, we have a senior U.S. administration official openly calling for the overturning of elections overseas.

Imagine if President Vladimir Putin’s national security advisor had grabbed a megaphone in New York and called for the people of the United States to overthrow their government by force.

At the UN, Maduro accused the Western media of hyping up the crisis in his country to push the cause for another “humanitarian intervention.”

Some may laugh at such a claim, but recent history shows that interventionists lie to push regime change, and the media goes right along with the lies.

Remember the lies about Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi giving Viagra to his troops to help them rape their way through Libya? Remember the “babies thrown from incubators” and “mobile chemical labs” in Iraq? Judging from past practice, there is probably some truth in Maduro’s claims.

We know socialism does not work. It is an economic system based on the use of force rather than economic freedom of choice. But while many Americans seem to be in a panic over the failures of socialism in Venezuela, they don’t seem all that concerned that right here at home Trump just signed a massive $1.3 trillion spending bill that delivers socialism on a scale that Venezuelans couldn’t even imagine. In fact, this one spending bill is three times Venezuela’s entire gross domestic product.

Did I miss all the Americans protesting this warfare-welfare state socialism?

Why all the neocon and humanitarian-interventionist “concern” for the people of Venezuela? One clue might be the fact that Venezuela happens to be sitting on the world’s largest oil reserves. More even than Saudi Arabia. There are plenty of countries pursuing dumb economic policies that result in plenty of suffering, but Nikki and the neocons are nowhere to be found when it comes to “concern” for these people. Might it be a bit about this oil?

Don’t believe this feigned interest in helping the Venezuelan people. If Washington really cared about Venezuelans they would not be plotting regime change for the country, considering that each such “liberation” elsewhere has ended with the people being worse off than before.

No, if Washington—and the rest of us—really cared about Venezuelans we would demand an end to the terrible U.S. economic sanctions on the country—which only make a bad situation worse—and would push for far more engagement and trade.

And maybe we’d even lead by example, by opposing the real, existing socialism here at home before seeking socialist monsters to slay abroad.

Ron Paul, a former U.S. representative from Texas and medical doctor, continues to write his weekly column for the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, online at www.ronpaulinstitute.org.




World Teeters on Brink of War

Russia responded to recent Israeli attacks on Syria by accusing Israel of responsibility for the loss of 15 Russian servicemen. Philip Giraldi cautions, “The downing of the Russian plane through Israeli contrivance created a situation that could easily have escalated into a war involving Moscow and Washington.”

By John Friend

The Russian Ministry of Defense has publicly accused Israel of being culpable for the downing of a Russian military aircraft in Syria on the evening of Monday, Sept. 17, resulting in the death of 15 Russian service members. The tragic international incident has received scant media coverage in the West but has many serious observers of Middle Eastern affairs wondering if Israel—blindly supported and financed by the United States—is on the verge of provoking WWIII with its blatant military aggression, utter disdain for international law, and outrageous arrogance.

The downed Russian aircraft, a Soviet-era Ilyushin IL-20 surveillance and control plane, was on a reconnaissance mission near the Idlib de-escalation zone in Syria on the evening of Sept. 17, when four Israeli F-16 fighter jets—compliments of the Pentagon—left Israeli airspace and flew over the Mediterranean Sea to carry out an unprovoked attack on various Syrian targets, essentially using the larger Russian aircraft as cover for their assault.

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

In yet another blatant and criminal act of military aggression against her neighbors in the region, the Israeli F-16s launched several precision-guided missiles at a number of industrial and military targets in the western Syrian province of Latakia, warning their Russian counterparts less than one minute prior to launching the illegal and extremely risky attack. Russian military commanders immediately ordered the IL-20 back to the Khmeimim air base, but Syrian air defense systems mistakenly targeted the Russian aircraft and its 15 crew members, which the Russians have argued the Israelis were using as cover for their attack on Syrian targets.

“The Israeli jets saw the Russian Ilyushin IL-20 and used it as a shield against the anti-aircraft missiles, while they carried on maneuvering in the region,” Major General Igor Konashenkov, a spokesman for the Russian Ministry of Defense, stated in the aftermath of the incident.

“We believe that the blame for the Russian IL-20 aircraft tragedy lies entirely with the Israeli Air Force,” Konashenkov continued. “The military leadership of Israel either has no appreciation for the level of relations with Russia or has no control over individual commands or commanding officers who understood that their actions would lead to tragedy.”

Ultimately the “misleading information” provided just moments before the attack on Syrian targets by the Israeli F-16s “did not allow the Russian IL-20 airplane to move timely to a safe area,” the Russians concluded.

“This is an extremely ungrateful response to all that has been done by the Russian Federation for Israel and the Israeli people recently,” Konashenkov lamented.

The incident has soured relations between Israel and Russia and has prompted the Russian government to provide upgrades to the Syrian air defense system, further strengthening military and political ties between the embattled Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad, a major nemesis in the eyes of the Israelis and their sympathizers in Washington, D.C., and Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

Lewis Foundation Legal Notice

Earlier this week, Russia announced it had transferred new anti-aircraft missiles to Syria, including four S-300 launchers, a sophisticated anti-aircraft missile system that will “significantly increase the Syrian army’s capabilities,” according to the Russian military. In a telephone conversation late last month with Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, Russian President Vladimir Putin emphasized that “the actions of the Israeli Air Force were the main cause” of the downing of the Russian aircraft, and that “Russia’s decisions to bolster the combat capabilities of Syrian air defenses are appropriate at this juncture and primarily intended to thwart any potential threat to the lives of the Russian military service members fulfilling the tasks of combating international terrorism,” the Kremlin stated.

In the wake of the tragic incident, many are concerned about a potential escalation of conflict in the region and the possibility of a broader war involving major superpowers—Russia and the United States—breaking out due to the risky and criminal actions of the Israelis.

“Israel does risky things like attacking its neighbors because it knows it will pay no price due to Washington’s support,” Philip Giraldi, executive director of the Council for the National Interest, recently argued in an op-ed released just after the tragedy. “The downing of the Russian plane through Israeli contrivance created a situation that could easily have escalated into a war involving Moscow and Washington.”

John Friend is a freelance author based in California.




With Friends Like These

Why is the U.S. still supporting the Saudi regime, which has evidently just murdered a Washington Post journalist. As Buchanan notes, “Any U.S.-backed “Arab NATO” to face down Iran, with Riyadh as central pillar, would appear dead.”

By Patrick J. Buchanan

Was Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi murdered inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, and then his body cut up with a bone saw and flown to Riyadh in Gulfstream jets owned by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman?

So contend the Turks, who have video from the consulate, photos of 15 Saudi agents who flew into Istanbul that day, Oct. 2, and the identity numbers of the planes.

Supporting the thesis of either a murder in the consulate or a “rendition,” a kidnaping gone horribly bad, is a Post story that U.S. intel intercepted Saudi planning, ordered by the prince, to lure Khashoggi from his suburban D.C. home back to Saudi Arabia. And for what beneficent purpose?

If these charges are not refuted by Riyadh, there will likely be, and should be, as John Bolton said in another context, “hell to pay.”

And the collateral diplomatic damage looks to be massive.

Kingdom Identity

Any U.S.-backed “Arab NATO” to face down Iran, with Riyadh as central pillar, would appear dead. Continued U.S. support for the Saudi war in Yemen would now be in question.

The special relationship the crown prince and President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, have established could be history.

Congress could cancel U.S. arms sales to the kingdom that keep thousands of U.S. defense workers employed, and impose sanctions on the prince who is heir apparent to the throne of his 82-year-old father, King Salman.

Today, the Saudi prince has become toxic, and his ascension to the Saudi throne seems less inevitable than two weeks ago. Yet, well before Khashoggi’s disappearance in the consulate, Crown Prince Mohammed’s behavior had seemed wildly erratic.

Along with the UAE, he charged Qatar with supporting terrorism, severed relations, and threatened to build a ditch to sever Qatar from the Arabian Peninsula. To protest criticism of his country’s human rights record by Canada’s foreign minister, he cut all ties to Ottawa.

Last year, he summoned Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri to Riyadh, held him for a week, and forced him to resign his office and blame it on Iranian interference in Lebanon. Released, Hariri returned home to reclaim his office.

A professed reformer, Crown Prince Mohammed opened movie theaters to women and allowed them to drive, and then jailed the social activists who had called for these reforms.

Three years ago, he initiated the war on the Houthis, after the rebels ousted a pro-Saudi president and took over most of the country.

And, since 2015, the crown prince has conducted a savage air war that has brought Houthi missiles down on his own country and capital.

Yemen has become Saudi Arabia’s Vietnam.

That our principal Arab ally in our confrontation with Iran, which could lead to yet another U.S. war, is a regime headed by so unstable a character should raise serious concerns about where it is we are going in the Middle East.

Have we not wars already?

Do we not have enough enemies in the region—Taliban, al Qaida, ISIS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria, Iran—to be starting another war?

As for our regional allies, consider.

NATO ally Turkey, which is pressing the case against our Saudi allies, leads the world in the number of journalists jailed. Our Egyptian ally, Gen. al-Sissi, came to power in a military coup, and has imprisoned thousands of dissidents of the Muslim Brotherhood.

While we have proclaimed Iran the “world’s greatest state sponsor of terror,” it is Yemen, where Saudi Arabia intervened in 2015, that is regarded as the world’s great human rights catastrophe.

Moreover, Iran is itself suffering from terrorism.

Last month, a military parade in the city of Ahvaz in the southwest was attacked by gunmen who massacred 25 soldiers and civilians in the deadliest terror attack in Iran in a decade.

And like Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya, Iran suffers, too, from tribalism, with Arab secessionists in its southwest, Baloch secessionists in its southeast, and Kurd secessionists in its northwest.

The U.S. cannot look aside at a royal Saudi hand in the murder of a U.S.-based journalist in its consulate in Istanbul. But before we separate ourselves from the Riyadh regime, we should ask what is the alternative if the House of Saud should be destabilized or fall?

When Egypt’s King Farouk was overthrown in 1952, we got Nasser.

Lewis Foundation Legal Notice

When young King Faisal was overthrown in Baghdad in 1958, we eventually got Saddam Hussein. When King Idris in Libya was ousted in 1969, we got Qaddafi. When Haile Selassie was overthrown and murdered in Ethiopia in 1974, we got Col. Mengistu and mass murder. When the Shah was overthrown in Iran in 1979, we got the Ayatollah.

As World War I, when four empires fell, testifies, wars are hell on monarchies. And if a new and larger Middle East war, with Iran, should break out in the Gulf, some of the Arab kings, emirs, and sultans will likely fall.

And when they do, history shows, it is not usually democrats who rise to replace them.

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.

COPYRIGHT 2017 CREATORS.COM



Somebody Tell the President: Israel, U.S. the Rogue Nations

American and Israeli hubris have made enemies across the globe. In his speech to the UN General Assembly in September, President Trump thumbed his nose at international organizations and bashed Iran as if that nation, rather than Israel and the U.S., has fueled the humanitarian crisis in Syria. 

By Philip Giraldi

President Donald Trump’s speech before the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 25 made it very clear that the United States would no longer recognize the authority of international organizations when they conflict with American interests. If there had been a clear understanding that he meant that Washington would respond unilaterally if necessary to threats to vital interests, there would have been considerable support from a number of nations that have begun to believe that globalism has made many countries less secure while also having a centrifugal tendency to weaken and eventually destroy national cultures and values. But Trump did not necessarily go down that road, clearly suggesting that he would leave it up to the White House to become the “decider” regarding what the United States would or would not regard as an interest.

Trump’s 35-minute speech featured a long section on Iran. He said: “Every solution to the humanitarian crisis in Syria must also include a strategy to address the brutal regime that has fueled and financed it: the corrupt dictatorship in Iran. . . . Iran’s leaders sow chaos, death, and destruction.

They do not respect their neighbors or borders, or the sovereign rights of nations. Instead, Iran’s leaders plunder the nation’s resources to enrich themselves and to spread mayhem across the Middle East and far beyond. . . . We cannot allow the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism to possess the planet’s most dangerous weapons. We cannot allow a regime that chants ‘Death to America,’ and that threatens Israel with annihilation, to possess the means to deliver a nuclear warhead to any city on Earth. Just can’t do it.”

Think the IRS Never Loses Cases? Think again!

There are a number of things wrong with Trump’s description of Iran and the conclusions he draws. The Middle East is in the state it is in because the United States destroyed Iraq in 2003, allowing the rise of ISIS and giving local al Qaeda affiliates a new lease on life, before turning on Syria with the Syria Accountability Act later in the same year. These were, not coincidentally, policies promoted by Israel and that received, as a result, bipartisan support in Congress.

The description of disrespecting “neighbors, borders, and sovereign rights” fits the U.S. and Israel perfectly rather than Iran. The U.S. has soldiers stationed illegally in Syria while Israel bombs the country on an almost daily basis, so who is doing the disrespecting?

As for the “most dangerous weapons,” Iran doesn’t have any, and is a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which Israel has not signed. Nor would Iran have any such weapons in the future but for the fact that Trump has backed out of the agreement to monitor and inspect Iranian nuclear research and development, which will, if anything, motivate Tehran to develop weapons to protect itself.

On sale now at AFP’s Online Store.

Trump also elaborated the following day in the context of Iran’s alleged but demonstrably nonexistent nuclear program when he indicated to the UN Security Council that Washington would go after countries that violate the rules on nuclear proliferation. The comment was ironic in the extreme, as Israel is the world’s leading nuclear rogue nation, having stolen the uranium and key elements of the technology from the United States in the 1960s. It now has a secret arsenal of at least 200 nuclear weapons.

The reality is, of course, that Trump’s protecting Israel is a bit like nurturing a viper in one’s bosom, as the old saying goes. Leading leftist Noam Chomsky has finally seen the light on Israel’s “brazenly” interfering in U.S. elections far outweighing any efforts that may have been carried out by Russia.

Chomsky explained: “First of all, if you’re interested in foreign interference in our elections, whatever the Russians may have done barely counts or weighs in the balance as compared with what another state does, openly, brazenly and with enormous support. Israeli intervention in U.S. elections vastly overwhelms anything the Russians may have done, I mean, even to the point where the prime minister of Israel, Netanyahu, goes directly to Congress, without even informing the president, and speaks to Congress, with overwhelming applause, to try to undermine the president’s policies—what happened with Obama and Netanyahu in 2015.”

Like the United States under Trump, the Israeli government acting through a private attorney named Harel Arnon has recently declared it is not subject to international law, claiming that “the Knesset has no limitation which prevents it from legislating extra-territorially anywhere in the world.” It is also “entitled to violate the sovereignty of foreign countries” and “is allowed to ignore the directives of international law in any field it desires.” This language appeared in an official Netanyahu government response letter to Israel’s Supreme Court last month.

The claims made by Netanyahu’s attorney are intended to validate a new Israeli law from last year, which legalized the outright theft of Palestinian land. The Settlement Regularization Law retroactively legalized the thousands of settler homes and buildings constructed on what once was Palestinian private land on the West Bank. Before the law was passed, Israeli law still technically regarded the new settlement construction to be illegal.

Under international law including the Geneva Conventions, however, all the settlements continue to be illegal and still are considered to be such, even by the United States. Israel consequently fears the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, which its leadership and Donald Trump are doing their best to delegitimize.

Lewis Foundation Legal Notice

One might well argue that Israel and the United States share a point of conceit about their place in the world, which might actually be unique. Other regimes that flout international law and claim extra-territoriality for their own laws do not openly advertise that is what they are doing. Only Washington and Tel Aviv have the hubris to act shamefully while thumbing their noses and defying the rest of the international community to do something about it.

The most shameful aspect of the truly incestuous bilateral relationship is not that both countries arrived at the same destination at more or less the same time based on their own interests. What we have witnessed is something quite different.

It is the United States that has become more like Israel, not the other way around, as Israel’s norms of behavior have been both accepted and frequently adopted by the American political class, the media, and by many institutions of government, to include the police and armed forces, which now undergo training provided by Israel. The United States of America has in many ways become Israel.

Philip Giraldi is a former CIA counter-terrorism specialist and military intelligence officer and a columnist and television commentator. He is also the executive director of the Council for the National Interest. His other articles appear on the website of “The Unz Review.”




Israel, Saudis Continue Slaughter

Bloodthirsty Saudi leader Mohammad bin Salman matches Israel for arrogance and disregard for life, as his regime kills 25 Iranians and Israel kills 15 Russians. Both blame everyone but themselves.

By Dr. Kevin Barrett

In the second half of September 2018, two closely allied Middle Eastern nations—Israel and Saudi Arabia—committed thinly veiled mass slaughters . . . and dug their own graves.

On Sept. 17, Israel, through reckless negligence or worse, knocked a Russian Il-20 out of the sky. Violating their “advance notification” agreement with Russia, Israeli F-16s attacked Syria, drew anti-aircraft fire while scurrying to hide behind the unsuspecting Il-20, then escaped unscathed as 15 Russians met their deaths.

The following week, 25 people were killed and more than 60 wounded in a terrorist attack in Ahvaz, Iran. Foreign Minister Javad Zarif blamed the carnage on “a foreign regime backed by the United States.” He was referring to Saudi Arabia, a close Israeli ally.

Both Israel and Saudi Arabia arrogantly refused to accept responsibility for their bloodthirsty acts. Israel blamed its murder of 15 Russians on Syria’s air defenses. Putin called Israel’s bluff by saying: Okay, you’re right. Syria needs better air defenses, so we’re going to sell them our S-300 system and deny you the ability to continue to operate in Syrian airspace.

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

Saudi Arabia likewise disavowed responsibility for the terror attack on Ahvaz. This is the same Saudi Arabia whose absolute dictator, Mohammad bin Salman, threatened last year to “take the fight inside Iran,” meaning increase its sponsorship of terror groups like those that carried out the Ahvaz massacre.

The arrogant, murderous liars in Tel Aviv and Riyadh will be getting their comeuppance. Israel is facing strategic disaster thanks to its idiotic murder of the 15 Russian airmen and its even more idiotic refusal to apologize. As Russia installs its S-300 system in Syria, Israel will no longer be able to strike at Hezbollah and Iranian forces in that beleaguered nation.

Today, Hezbollah is already armed with a missile force orders of magnitude beyond what it defeated Israel with in 2006. Hezbollah’s missiles are increasing in quantity (around 130,000) and quality (bigger payload, accuracy, and ability to evade air defenses). They may already be capable of leveling Tel Aviv and the Dimona nuclear facility.

Iraq & Politics of Oil, VoglerBy alienating Russia and giving Hezbollah and Iran free rein in Syria, Israel has shot itself in the foot. All the Zionists had to do was feign sincerity and apologize profusely for causing the deaths of the 15 Russians. Putin would have accepted the apology and taken relatively mild retaliatory measures. But the arrogant Zionists simply cannot accept moral responsibility for their actions—ever. Everything they do, every crime they commit, always has to somehow be somebody else’s fault.

The Saudis are as arrogant as the Zionists and even more inept. The megalomaniacal bin Salman is madly abusing key sectors of Saudi society. He has kidnapped, tortured, and robbed his billionaire cousins. He has imprisoned, brutalized, or bullied much of the Saudi religious establishment. He has also imprisoned and abused the female activists who won Saudi women the right to drive. The crown prince has even planned the beheadings of peaceful activist women. When Canada’s foreign ministry protested, bin Salman’s spokesmen threatened to hit Canada with a 9/11-style attack.

It is one thing to threaten to send planes into Canadian skyscrapers. It is quite another to commit actual mass murders. But that is what the Saudis have done in Ahvaz.

Like the Israelis, the Saudis are going out of their way to make enemies—very angry enemies. Take Iran, a huge nation three times the size of Iraq with advanced homegrown technology, a formidable military, and a population including tens of millions who are eager to lay down their lives for their country if it comes under attack.

The Saudis have also made an arch-enemy of gas-rich, media-savvy Qatar. By blockading and plotting to invade and occupy Qatar—a plan that was blocked when Turkey quickly built a military base there—the Saudis suddenly had two enemies for the price of one.

Lewis Foundation Legal NoticeTurkey, of course, has never thought highly of the British decision to break off the Arabian Peninsula from the Ottoman Empire and hand it to the Ibn Saud crime family, so an intensified Turkish dislike of “Saudi” Arabia could eventually have existential consequences for that artificial and malignant entity.

The Saudis even managed to alienate their handful of bought-and-paid-for Lebanese stooges when they briefly kidnapped Lebanese Prime  Minister Hariri. The kidnapping failed abysmally, like everything else bin Salman does.

And then there is the biggest debacle of all: the Saudi genocide of Yemen, an atrocity comparable to the slow-motion genocide of Palestine.

The Saudis, like the Israelis, are courting catastrophe. When it comes, they will blame everyone but themselves.

Kevin Barrett, Ph.D., is an Arabist-Islamologist scholar and one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror.His book, Truth Jihad: My Epic Struggle Against the 9/11 Big Lie, is on sale now at the AFP Online Store. From 1991 through 2006, Dr. Barrett taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin. In 2006, however, he was attacked by Republican state legislators who called for him to be fired from his job at the University of Wisconsin-Madison due to his political opinions. Since 2007, Dr. Barrett has been informally blacklisted from teaching in American colleges and universities. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, public speaker, author, and talk radio host. He lives in rural western Wisconsin. 




Casualty Lists From the Kavanaugh Battle

The confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court “was a huge victory for conservatism and for the Republican Party,” says Pat Buchanan. In doing so, President Trump has ensured the restoration and survival of at least one constitutionalist voice in the nation’s highest court. The GOP is more united than ever in recent history, and the left is raging and wailing over the end of liberalism’s reign.

By Patrick J. Buchanan

After a 50-year siege, the great strategic fortress of liberalism has fallen. With the elevation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, the Supreme Court seems secure for constitutionalism—perhaps for decades.
The shrieks from the gallery of the Senate chamber as the vote came in on Saturday, and the sight of that bawling mob clawing at the doors of the Supreme Court as the new justice took his oath, confirm it.

The Democratic Party has sustained a historic defeat.

And the triumph is President Trump’s.

To unite the party whose nomination he had won, Donald Trump pledged to select his high court nominees from lists prepared by such judicial conservatives as the Federalist Society. He kept his word and, in the battle for Kavanaugh, he led from the front, even mocking the credibility of the primary accuser, Christine Blasey Ford.

Trump has achieved what every GOP president has hoped to do since the summer of ’68, when a small group of GOP senators, led by Bob Griffin of Michigan, frustrated and then foiled a LBJ-Earl Warren plot to elevate LBJ crony Abe Fortas to chief justice in order to keep a future President Nixon from naming Warren’s successor.

Sharing the honors with Trump is Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Throughout 2016, McConnell took heat for refusing to hold a hearing on Barack Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, to fill the chair of Justice Antonin Scalia, who had died earlier that year.

In 2017, McConnell used Harry Reid’s “nuclear option” to end filibusters for Supreme Court nominations, and then got Judge Neil Gorsuch confirmed 54-45.

Last week, in one of the closest and most brutal court battles in Senate history, McConnell kept his troops united, losing only Sen. Lisa Murkowski, to put Kavanaugh on the court by 50-48. McConnell will enter the history books as the Senate architect of the recapture of the Supreme Court for constitutionalism.

This was a huge victory for conservatism and for the Republican Party. And the presence on the court of octogenarian liberals Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, both appointed by Bill Clinton, suggests that McConnell may have an opportunity to ensure the endurance of his great achievement.

The ferocity and ugliness of the attacks on Kavanaugh united Republicans to stand as one against what a savage Senate minority was trying to do to kill the nomination. And at battle’s end, the GOP is more energized than it has been all year for this fall’s election.

How united is the GOP? Conservatives are hailing the contributions of Sens. Jeff Flake, Lindsey Graham, and Susan Collins, who delivered a masterful summation of the Kavanaugh case Saturday afternoon.

For the Democratic Party, the Kavanaugh battle was the Little Bighorn, as seen from General Custer’s point of view.

Unable to derail the judge during the regular confirmation process, they lay in the weeds until it was over, and then sandbagged the judge by leaking to The Washington Post a confidential letter Dr. Ford did not want released.

They thus forced a public hearing of charges of attempted rape against a nominee, demanded the FBI investigate all charges of sexual misconduct when Kavanaugh was a teenager, and ended up losing anyway.

Then the Dems watched protesters dishonor the Senate in which they serve by screaming from the gallery. It was among the lowest moments in the modern history of the Senate, and it was the Democratic minority that took it down to that depth.

Understandably, they are a bitter lot today.

And the #MeToo movement has been set back. For many of its champions were, in Kavanaugh’s case, demanding a suspension of the principle of “innocent until proven guilty,” and calling for the judge’s rejection in disgrace, based solely on their belief in a wholly uncorroborated 36-year-old story.

Lewis Foundation Legal Notice

So where are we going now?

While Republicans are united and celebrating a great victory, the left and its media auxiliary are seething with rage and doubly determined to deliver payback in the elections four weeks away, where Democrats could pick up the two dozen seats needed to recapture the House.

Should they do so, however, they will face two years of frustration and failure. For the enactment of any major element of their liberal agenda—a $15 minimum wage, “Medicare-for-all”—would die in a Republican Senate, or in the Oval Office where it would face an inevitable veto by Trump.

So, what does 2019 look like, if Democrats capture the House?

Speaker Nancy Pelosi. A House Judiciary Committee headed by New York’s Jerrold Nadler who is already howling for impeachment hearings on both Kavanaugh and Trump.

And, by spring, a host of presidential candidates, none of whom looks terribly formidable, led by Cory (“I am Spartacus”) Booker, trooping through Iowa and New Hampshire, trashing President Trump (and each other), and offering themselves as the answer to America’s problems.

Bring it on!

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.

COPYRIGHT 2017 CREATORS.COM



Leaked Video Reveals Shocking Agenda of Internet Giant Google

Revelations of  Google tweaking its search algorithm to promote its leaders’ political and ideological leanings have led to strong statements of protest from company spokespersons, yet new information continues to emerge on just how skewed search results may be. Are more Internet users coming to understand not everything on the ‘net is as it seems, as they’ve discovered about mainstream media? 

By Dave Gahary

For readers who still believe that Google is simply an Internet search engine, a recently leaked video recorded at the company’s “first all-hands meeting” on the Friday after the 2016 U.S. presidential election should put that silly thought to rest.

The 63-minute video—which “reveals an atmosphere of panic and dismay amongst the tech giant’s leadership, coupled with a determination to thwart both the Trump agenda and the broader populist movement emerging around the globe”—was sent anonymously to Breitbart News, and features co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, as well as Google’s chief executive and financial officers and a few vice presidents, who appear to be in a state of subdued shock at the election results.

Soviet-born to Jewish parents, Brin co-founded Google with Page, whose mother was Jewish and whose father made aliyah to Israel. Aliyah, literally “ascent,” means moving to Israel, one of Zionism’s most basic tenets. Israel’s “law of return” grants Jews and their descendants automatic residency rights and Israeli citizenship.

Page and Brin are the 9th and 10th richest people in the world, with net worths of $53.6 billion and $52.1 billion respectively.

In early September it was also revealed—via a leaked email written by Google’s “multicultural marketing” chief—that the tech giant tried to assist Hillary Clinton’s presidential aspirations by boosting Latino turnout.

In the leaked video—marked “Confidential-Internal Only”—the Google heads disparage Trump voters and scheme to use their billions to thwart the president’s agenda.

Kingdom Identity

Brin, who opens up the meeting, assumes that “most people here are pretty upset and pretty sad because of the election.” He calls Trump supporters “fascists and extremists,” saying that, similar to other extremists, people who voted for Trump did so out of “boredom rather than legitimate concerns,” which he claims has led to fascism and communism in the past. He continues by saying, “As an immigrant and a refugee, I certainly find this election deeply offensive, and I know many of you do, too.” Claiming that “it’s a very stressful time and it [Trump’s victory] conflicts with many of our values,” Brin, who vows to get even with the misguided American electorate, is backed up by Google CEO Sundar Pichai, who announces the company’s plans to develop artificial intelligence machines to counter the “misinformation” of “low-information voters,” i.e., anyone who voted for Trump.

There is hope on the horizon for all of the “deplorables,” however, as former Department of Justice prosecutor Larry Klayman—who helped break up AT&T’s monopoly in the 1980s—filed a class action lawsuit on Aug. 29 alleging “Google/YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Apple, and Instagram conspired by entering into an explicit or tacit agreement, in parallel to each other, to restrain trade in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.”

The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, which regulates commercial competition, is divided into three sections. Section 1 states:

Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several declared to be illegal.

Freedom Watch v. Google/YouTube et. al, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, “alleges that the intent and effect of this agreement in restraint of trade is to quash and/or limit advocacy by conservative and pro-Trump public interest groups, advocates, and others to further the leftist anti-conservative agendas of these social media giants and to help bring down the Trump presidency and nullify the vote of the millions of citizens who voted for the president.”

Lewis Foundation Legal Notice

Judging from the latest revelations coming out of Silicon Valley, as well the nearly $3 billion fine levied by the European Union in 2017 against Google for “promoting its own shopping comparison service at the top of search results,” Klayman’s allegations have the potential to gain some traction.

But the fact that Google is an awesome competitor cannot, and should not, be discounted. Earlier this year, Alphabet, Google’s parent company, reported over $100 billion in annual sales—a first in Google’s 20-year history—with total annual revenue topping $110 billion, up from around $90 billion in 2016.

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 erasingtheliberty.com for more information.




Trump Kills NAFTA

The new U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement, which replaces the  North American Free Trade Agreement created under Poppy Bush’s administration, will boost U.S. steel, agriculture, and manufacturing, and further President Trump’s America-first agenda, according to the U.S. Trade Representative. 

By Mark Anderson

On Sept. 30, in a pivotal moment for the Trump administration, the United States, Mexico, and Canada concluded negotiations “for a modernized and rebalanced” North American trade pact that largely supersedes the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Thus, the industry-depleting, wage-slashing NAFTA pact, an unpopular creature of anti-sovereignty globalism birthed under the George H.W. Bush administration and signed by President Bill Clinton, evidently is fading into history.

Will this detailed new pact be better? In many ways, it will benefit working-class Americans and farmers, but other previous trade rules will remain the same.

Some key things to glean from it, according to U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Robert Lighthizer, are that the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) “will advance United States agricultural interests in the most important markets for America’s farmers, ranchers, and agribusinesses,” opening new venues “to expand U.S. food and agricultural exports and support food manufacturing and rural jobs.”

And even though “all food and agricultural products that have zero tariffs under [NAFTA] will remain at zero tariffs,” according to the USTR office, “the USMCA will create new market-access opportunities for United States exports to Canada of dairy, poultry and eggs, and in exchange the United States will provide new access to Canada for dairy, peanuts, processed peanut products, and a limited amount of sugar and sugar containing products.”

The USMCA for the time being maintains U.S. tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum entering the U.S.

However, Canadian media, such as the CBC, report: “Talks to lift the tariffs are ongoing, but on a ‘completely separate track,’ according to a U.S. official.” The USMCA encourages U.S.-based manufacturing by requiring that 75% of auto content be “made in North America.”

Lewis Foundation Legal Notice

Other USMCA rules, the USTR office noted, are designed to preserve and “re-shore” U.S. vehicle and parts production; “transform supply chains to use more U.S. content, especially content that is key to future automobile production and high-paying jobs”; and drive “higher wages by requiring that 40-45% of auto content be made by workers earning at least $16 per hour” while incentivizing “new vehicle and parts investments in the United States.”

Furthermore, the pact contains “stronger rules of origin that exceed those of both NAFTA 1.0 and the Trans-Pacific Partnership [from which the U.S. withdrew] including for autos and automobile parts and other industrial products such as chemicals, steel-intensive products, glass, and optical fiber.”

Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving editor.




From Terrorist Assassin to Savior

As Iraq continues its descent into chaos, one Shiite cleric offers to make nation great again. Surprisingly, this same man spent years on American military’s most-wanted lists.

By Richard Walker

As Iraq once again shows increasing potential to descend into chaos, a fiery cleric, once at the top of the U.S. military’s most wanted lists, is riding to the rescue, promising stability. He is the iconic, dark-robed Muqtada al-Sadr who spent many years hiding out in Iran where he gave allegiance to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader.

Al-Sadr’s history no longer troubles many American military and diplomatic figures who watched al-Sadr’s Iraqi political coalition score successes in Iraq’s elections in May this year. Memories of the time when he ran the Mahdi Army and threatened U.S. soldiers occupying Iraq in the wake of the 2003 invasion, have been replaced with a belief that he could now be Iraq’s savior and a potential U.S. ally.

The sudden revisionism lies in the fact that al-Sadr has promised to stamp out corruption and restore public services. These are pressing issues at the heart of the anger fueling serious violence by ordinary Iraqis. They have watched oil flow at an unprecedented rate while the profits have found their way into the accounts of oil corporations, greedy politicians, and powerful clans. Rivers are filling with sewage in parts of the country, and bribery is at an all-time high. Basra, once a jewel in Iraq’s crown, is falling apart.

The American-based writer, Sinan Anton, who was born in Iraq, blames the American invasion 15 years ago, saying what he witnessed in Basra last year was worse than anything under Saddam’s rule. His views about the cause of the chaos are shared by The American Conservative.

The recent defeat of ISIS, while it appeared would like nothing better than a civil war in the country to enable them to gain even more power and territory. And, as militants flee the Russian-Syrian assaults in Syria, they are heading to Iraq.

The striking thing about much of the growing chaos, and the potential for a mass, violent movement to overthrow the established order, is that it is not driven by Sunnis, who fought U.S. troops with Saudi backing after 2003. Instead, the impetus for a revolution is coming from the majority Shiites who are mired in poverty and corruption. Ironically, many of them say they resent Iran’s hold on the political establishment and the fact that Iranian goods are flowing into Iraq while Iraqi production is dying.

In May, as instability grew, al-Sadr arrived like a knight on a white charger, promising to make Iraq great again and to drain the swamp. He also promised a non-sectarian approach with a coalition comprising Sunnis and smaller parties, including communists. Most prominent, however, was his main backer, the pro-Iranian Fatih group that won 47 seats to al-Sadr’s 54, giving both the controlling bloc in the Iraqi parliament. Fatih’s leader, Hadi al-Amiri, also runs the massive pro-Iran militia, the Badr Brigades. With al-Amir at his side, al-Sadr is now the Iraqi kingmaker, telling the Iraqi prime minister to pack his bags. Some suspect that Tehran dispatched him to bring stability to Iraq because an internal conflict would not suit Tehran.

Col. Michael D. Sullivan, who served five tours in Iraq and fought against al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army, sees it differently and appears to speak for many in Washington when he says this is a new al-Sadr we’re seeing. He points to the fact that al-Sadr disbanded his Mahdi Army in 2011, ordered them not to attack U.S. troops, and three years later marshalled them to fight ISIS. If some critics think Sullivan’s assessment is wishful thinking, he counters that the cleric is nowadays an Iraqi nationalist and pragmatist, posing no threat to the United States. Former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq James Jeffery seconds his analysis, telling USA Today, “Al-Sadr can be irrational, but he is better than the Iranians taking over.”

It could also be argued that the Iranians will not have to take over Iraq when al-Sadr is running the country with the pro-Iranian Fatih group, its Badr Brigades, and the Mahdi Army.

It is not often acknowledged that Iraq shares a border with Iran, so those making accusations that a politico-religious nexus between the two nations is malign ignore the close historical, religious, and familial connections binding the two countries.

But it is in the shadows that trouble may be lurking.

Israeli warmongers led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are consumed with a desire to have the U.S. go to war with Iran, knowing it would have support from the many pro-Zionists in Congress.

Lewis Foundation Legal Notice

In an example of classic irony, The White House recently threatened Iran with retaliation for an attack on U.S. facilities in the Green Zone in Baghdad even though Iran’s embassy in Basra was set alight and ransacked at the same time. The threat pleased the hawks in Tel Aviv.

For now, there are expectations al-Sadr will support the U.S. military presence in the country, but that could change if Israel initiates a confrontation between America and Iran.

On the other hand, if Sullivan is right, al-Sadr will not seek to anger Washington. While the Pentagon considers him a policy bonus, alliances in the Middle East are fragile when based on self-interest. He could become the cleric with a target on his chest once again if hawks in Washington, Riyadh, and Tel Aviv have their way.

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




Pentagon Whistleblower Won’t Back Down

Retired Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski reflects on the events of 9/11 and Israeli influence on D.C. 

By Dave Gahary

Retired U.S. Air Force (USAF) Lt. Col. and Pentagon whistleblower Karen Kwiatkowski, who exposed a “neoconservative coup” and a “hijacking of the Pentagon” by neocons serving Israel’s interest, sat down with this reporter to reflect on the false-flag terror attacks that changed the course of this country, clearly for the worse.

Kwiatkowski, who retired in 2003 after a distinguished military career, was at one time assigned to the National Security Agency (NSA), eventually becoming a speechwriter for the agency’s director. Upon leaving the NSA, she served as an analyst in the Pentagon’s Near East and South Asia directorate, and doesn’t for a minute subscribe to the U.S. government’s 9/11 conspiracy theory.

AFP Podcast
Dave Gahary talks with Pentagon whistleblower Karen Kwiatkowski.

“I believe the commission failed to deeply examine the topic at hand, failed to apply scientific rigor to its assessment of events leading up to and including 9/11, failed to produce a believable and unbiased summary of what happened, failed to fully examine why it happened, and even failed to include a set of unanswered questions for future research,” she said. “It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics.”

She was at work that day in the world’s largest office building.

“I was at the Pentagon,” she said. “I was not in the part that was immediately impacted, but I feel like, since I was there on that day, and since I was in the Air Force . . . where was the normal Air Force response in the face of hijacked airplanes?”

Kwiatkowski referenced the Oct. 25, 1999 crash of a Learjet carrying professional golfer Payne Stewart and five others that was set to fly from Orlando, Fla., to Dallas, Texas. After losing cabin pressure and incapacitating all aboard due to lack of oxygen, the jet failed to turn toward Dallas and continued on for nearly four hours and 1,500 miles, before running out of fuel over South Dakota and crashing into a field. Unlike any of the hijacked jets on 9/11, this one was intercepted several times.

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

On the first interception, a USAF F-16 Fighting Falcon test pilot from Eglin Air Force Base was ordered to intercept. The pilot made several unsuccessful attempts to communicate with Stewart’s jet and completed a thorough visual investigation before breaking formation and proceeding to an Illinois Air Force base. The second interception consisted of two Falcons from the Oklahoma Air National Guard (ANG) who were ordered to intercept before breaking off to rendezvous with a tanker for refueling. The third interception and escort saw two more Falcons from the North Dakota ANG ordered to intercept before being forced to break off their pursuit to land at local airports. The Lear jet ran out of fuel and descended, resulting in a ground impact at nearly supersonic speed, which left a crater 42 feet long by 21 feet wide by eight feet deep.

“That’s the normal kind of response in a domestic air incident like that,” Kwiatkowski explained, “and, of course, we didn’t have anything like that on 9/11.”

Kwiatkowski recounted the faulty intelligence she witnessed being cooked up by the Pentagon’s now-defunct Office of Special Plans for an invasion after 9/11.

“What they were doing was ginning up the war against, they hoped, Iran and Iraq at the same time,” said Kwiatkowski. “Iraq was the one that they really planned to invade and wanted to, but there was no justification for it. What they were doing was to sell a war that nobody wanted, that nobody needed, that really wasn’t justified by any national security means, and the way they did it was disinformation and taking over the intelligence.

They created their own intelligence. They funneled it into the arteries of the intelligence system. And, of course, leaking it to the newspapers and the media, ultimately to propagandize the whole American public. So, they wanted a war and they got one.”

Lewis Foundation Legal Notice

These neocons who hijacked U.S. foreign policy “believed in a muscular foreign policy, in particular one that would do the work, I think, of Israel, certainly in the Middle East,” she continued.

“Take the hits for Israel, help work with Israel as if Israel was joined at the hip with the United States, in terms of policy, which it is not. We got to watch the formation of this organization and its handpicked people, political appointees, people with no military background to speak of, but plenty of agenda.

“And you put that together with the right rank and the right access to the mainstream media in this country,” she explained, and, voila, you have a war. The war designers are the worst kind of traitors.

“There are a lot of people very comfortable with saying whatever they have to say to get what they want,” said Kwiatkowski. “Well, in government when they lie, people die.”

This reporter asked if the United States is Zionist occupied territory.

“I think that’s fair to say about Washington, D.C.,” she answered. “The Congress certainly is. Our congressmen, they don’t really owe allegiance, for the most part, to the people that voted for them.”

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




Former Georgia Legislator Remembers ‘Silent Sam’

Ben “Cooter” Jones spoke with AFP about Southern heritage and his work as a civil rights advocate, and his time at University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, where his dorm room overlooked the statue of the noble young Confederate soldier setting off to war, “Silent Sam.” 

By Dr. Ed DeVries

As the host of TBR Radio’s “The Dixie Heritage Hour,” it has been my privilege on multiple occasions to interview former Georgia Rep. Ben Jones (D). Many of you remember him as “Cooter,” the lovable tow-truck driver on the television show “The Dukes of Hazzard.”

As a young man, 100 years after the beginning of the War Between the States, in 1961, Jones left his job at a factory in Wilmington, N.C. to hitchhike his way to Chapel Hill where he enrolled in the University of North Carolina (UNC).

He was assigned a bed in the “Battle Dormitory, which faced Franklin Street, Chapel Hill’s ‘main drag.’ My room, 8 Battle, looked out over McCorkle Place, the ‘upper quad’ of the campus.”

“It was from there, over the next two years,” Jones said, “that I watched the changing of the seasons on the campus grounds, the blazing autumn hardwoods, and those seductive dogwood and magnolia spring-times, not to mention the passing co-eds.”

Continuing to reminisce, he said, “I was told that Thomas Wolfe, the author of Look Homeward, Angel had lived in that room and looked out that same window back in 1916. I could not believe my good fortune in having landed in this ‘Southern Part of Heaven.’ Like Wolfe, I was overflowing with ideas and dreams and confusion. And, like him, I chased the elusive girls of the night and drank the last drop that was to be had.”

But most notably, he said, “The one constant outside that window, in every season, was the noble statue of ‘Silent Sam,’ the Confederate soldier who stood vigilant watch over the campus.”

Kingdom Identity

On the night of Aug. 20, radical far-left activists toppled the statue of Silent Sam. As AFP goes to press, the statue has not been replaced, but university administrators say he will be put back.

“Sam,” Jones said, “represented those young students who had left the campus when ‘the War’ came, those noble students who went off to do their duty. It was said that UNC gave more students to the Southern Cause than any other school.”

A few weeks into Jones’s career, President John F. Kennedy visited the campus where he gave a speech on Founders Day. Jones remembers the president. “In his first year in office, JFK was in full form, at his handsome, youthful, and charismatic best.”

Commemorating the school’s Confederate past, Jones recalls, “this liberal Democrat from Massachusetts” said:

There is, of course, no place in America where reason and firmness are more clearly pointed out than here in North Carolina. All Americans can profit from what happened in this state a century ago. It was this state, firmly fixed in the traditions of the South, which sought a way of reason in a troubled and dangerous world. Yet when the war came, North Carolina provided a fourth of all of the Confederate soldiers who made the supreme sacrifice in those years. And it won the right to the slogan, “First at Bethel, farthest to the front at Gettysburg and Chickamauga, last at Appomattox.”

Jones said that the president’s words that day “had a profound effect upon me.” And he would remember them again, a little over two years later, when Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas.

The Real Lincoln, Thomas DiLorenzo
Thomas DiLorenzo “shows Lincoln as he truly was, a mentally unstable despot bent on dragging the nation into years of bloody, unnecessary fratricide.” Now just $16 from the AFP Store.

“He had asked us, that day he spoke at Chapel Hill, ‘Are you going to be a hammer or an anvil?’ Within days, I was marching and demonstrating in the civil rights movement. It was my way of dealing with his death.”

As a civil rights activist, Jones would ultimately be recruited by Dr. Martin Luther King. He would also be “sucker punched, shot at, threatened,” and he would even spend “more than a few nights in jail.”

It was during his time as a civil rights activist that Jones, “began to realize that my Southernness was more than just a birthright. I came to believe that it was an honor bestowed upon me by my Maker. I still feel that way.”

King and other leaders in “the movement,” a movement of Southerners,” also agreed with him.

Asking him what King thought about monuments, like Silent Sam, now being destroyed by protestors in his name, Jones said: “Dr. King never contemplated the destruction of historic monuments or the removal of historic symbols and flags. He was a Southerner, who shared our past. His entire thrust was for Southern whites and blacks to ‘dine together at the table of brotherhood.’ He understood that our common history would be the essential foundation for our common future.”

When asked what he thought about the current situation at his alma mater, he said:

Fifty-plus years ago I would look out at Silent Sam from my window in Battle Dorm and try to imagine what it must have been like to have gone off to war in those days. I thought of Sam as maybe a youth from somewhere like Tarboro or Clinton or Hickory. He was of good heart, I figured, maybe 18 or 19, a bit thin, a bit afraid. He was of that tough North Carolina stock, that “salt of the Earth” fellow whose character is reflected in the state’s motto, Esse Quam Videri —‘To be, rather than to seem.”

He could have been my great-great-uncle Gabriel Jacobs, who was killed at age 21 at Frayser’s Farm pursuing [Gen. George] McClellan in his escape to the river. He, in turn, had been named for his great-great-great-grandfather Gabriel Jacobs, a slave who had been freed by his master, John Custis, in Northampton County, Va., in 1695.

The radical trash who tore down Silent Sam and those academic idiots who enable them are not worthy to walk on the same ground as Gabriel Jacobs. Silent Sam will rise again, and we, not they, shall overcome.

Lewis Foundation Legal Notice

As the former congressman was uttering his prophesy, Thom Goolsby of the university’s board of governors was announcing at a press conference: “Silent Sam will be reinstalled, as required by state law, on the campus within 90 days. The criminals who destroyed state property at UNC and the police who did nothing will be held accountable. The university will not allow anarchy to reign on our campuses.”

A pastor and in-demand traveling speaker, Dr. Edward DeVries is the editor of the Dixie Heritage Newsletter and a contributing editor at THE BARNES REVIEW. He is the author of 30 books including the two-volume Glory in Grey. Some of his other titles include Sacred Honor, The Truth About the Confederate Battle Flag, Prayer is Simple, Every Member a Minister and Coaching Youth Baseball the Right Way. He is also the host of TBR RADIO’S “Dixie Heritage Hour.” Please check it out at BarnesReview.org.




Are Violent Leftists Above the Law?

Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe has exposed federal employees subverting the president while on the streets of America, antifa activists continue their violence without consequence and are now thumbing their noses at the courts.

By John Friend

Members of antifa, the fanatical, violent left-wing activist organization that regularly engages in intimidation, sabotage, destruction of private property, and outright terrorism against its political opponents, have continued their open defiance of the law, with one prominent member of the D.C. antifa movement publicly refusing to cooperate with a federal grand jury subpoena recently.

Paul “Luke” Kuhn, an independent journalist who was exposed for trying to attack and sabotage the DeploraBall 2017 celebration in Washington, D.C. following President Donald Trump’s inauguration, defiantly refused to appear before the federal grand jury after receiving a subpoena relating to videographic and photographic evidence in his possession in an ongoing investigation into antifa violence.

Kuhn appeared outside the courthouse in the nation’s capital alongside fellow antifa activists, who proudly proclaimed their resistance to the grand jury process and their refusal to cooperate. Kuhn eventually burned the subpoena during the press conference while antifa members cheered him on. Video of the entire incident is available online.

“They picked the wrong guy to mess with,” Kuhn declared. “No cooperation no matter what it takes, no matter what the consequences.”

In recent weeks, antifa groups have vandalized and outright destroyed Confederate monuments in the South and have vowed to continue their destruction of private property in order to combat “white supremacy.” In late August, roughly 250 neo-Bolsheviks knocked over and vandalized the “Silent Sam” Confederate statue on the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill campus. Following the toppling of the statue, various groups came out to demonstrate against and in favor of the vandalism, resulting in the arrests of seven individuals.

Think the IRS Never Loses Cases? Think again!

This latest news regarding antifa criminality and open defiance of the law comes as Project Veritas, a non-profit organization dedicated to exposing corruption and malfeasance, just published details of an undercover investigation into a current State Department employee who is a leading member of the D.C.-based chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, an extreme leftwing group that is sympathetic to the antifa movement. Project Veritas released an undercover video interview with State Department employee Stuart Karaffa, who openly admits he is working to undermine this president.

The State Department has publicly acknowledged Karaffa is an employee and has stated it is closely reviewing the case.

“I can confirm Stuart Karaffa is a management and program analyst with the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations,” a State Department spokesperson told Breitbart News earlier this week. “We take seriously any allegation of a violation of the Hatch Act and financial disclosure rules and are closely reviewing this matter.” The Hatch Act forbids federal employees from engaging in personal political activity while on duty for the government.

In the video, Karaffa admits he does work for the Democratic Socialists of America while on duty. “I’m careful about it,” he states in the explosive video. “I don’t leave a paper trail.”

The recent investigative report released by Project Veritas is part of its ongoing “Deep State Unmasked” investigative series, which aims to expose the resistance to Trump within the federal government and bureaucracy.

Lewis Foundation Legal Notice

“This unelected cabal of federal government employees—the Deep Staters—are getting away with subverting the will of the people,” Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe notes. “In fact, the Constitution is being stomped upon by the actions of the members of the Deep State. They are in all branches of government and they are hiding among two million other federal employees.”

The goal of the investigative series is to expose these “Deep Staters” and shed light upon their subversive, corrupt activities.

“Project Veritas must unmask and show you the faces of representative members of the Deep State,” O’Keefe insists. “Government exists with the consent of the governed and that consent cannot be manufactured by the masked and subversive. This truth must be pursued at all costs, including going undercover.”

John Friend is a freelance author based in California.




Neocons Punish Palestinians

After the Palestinian Liberation Organization called for Israel to be investigated for war crimes at the ICC, the State Department ordered its D.C. office be closed. Palestinian officials have vowed to fight back against this kind of “collective punishment” of Palestinians.

By Dr. Ed DeVries

The State Department has ordered the closure of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) office in Washington, D.C. because the PLO “has not taken steps to advance the start of direct and meaningful negotiations with Israel,” the State Department announced Sept. 17.

In an official statement, U.S. officials said, “PLO leadership has condemned a U.S. peace plan they have not yet seen and refused to engage with the U.S. government with respect to peace efforts and otherwise.”

The PLO office, which serves as a de facto “embassy” staffed by an “ambassador” to represent Palestinian interests to the U.S. government, has been instructed to close no later than Oct. 10.

The decision follows an extended period of estrangement between the Palestinian Authority, a self-declared but unrecognized nation-state on Israel’s West Bank, and the United States. The Palestinians have also withdrawn from talks over a still-to-be-released plan for peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

Kingdom Identity

In response, Palestinian officials vowed to fight what they are calling “bullying tactics” and “collective punishment” of the Palestinian people.

“These people have decided to stand on the wrong side of history by protecting war criminals and destroying the two-state solution,” said chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat. “I told them if you are worried about courts, you should stop aiding and abetting crimes.”

This brings us to the real reason for ordering the closure: The PLO has called for an investigation of Israel by the International Criminal Court (ICC). Neither the United States nor Israel recognizes the court.

The Washington Post reports that there is legislation in place to close the PLO office in the event they ever attempt to prosecute Israel or the United States in the ICC.

On sale now at AFP’s Online Store.

At the same time the State Department was closing the PLO office, National Security Advisor John Bolton was putting the ICC on notice.

During his 9/11 commemoration speech, given the prior day to the Federalist Society, Bolton, an unapologetic advocate for Israel, made it abundantly clear that “The United States will not in any way cooperate with the International Criminal Court.” He called the ICC an “unaccountable, bureaucratic body that runs counter to the Constitution and is antithetical to our nation’s ideals.”

Neither the United States nor Israel are signatories or participants in the treaty that established the ICC, thus the ICC has no jurisdiction over either nation or over the citizens of any non-signatory nation. When officials from the ICC announced recently that they were stepping up last Afghanistan,” Bolton used his 9/11 speech as an opportunity to send a message:

Today, on the eve of Sept. 11, I want to deliver a clear and unambiguous message on behalf of the President of the United States. The United States will use any means necessary to protect our citizens and those of our allies from unjust prosecution by this illegitimate court. We will not cooperate with the ICC. We will provide no assistance to the ICC. And we certainly will not join the ICC. We will let the ICC die on its own.

After all, for all intents and purposes, the ICC is already dead to us.

To make sure that the warning was taken seriously, the national security advisor threatened sanctions and punishments to any ICC judges, prosecutors, or investigators who would dare to defy the U.S.:

We will sanction their funds in the U.S. financial system, and we will prosecute them in the U.S. criminal system. We will do the same for any company or state that assists an ICC investigation of Americans.

Bolton also threatened a ban on travel to the United States for people involved in the attempted prosecution of Americans before the ICC and proposed measures to strengthen existing agreements with other countries to shield Americans from international prosecution.

So while the official order makes no mention of the PLO’s attempt to prosecute Israel, and possibly Americans, in the ICC, it was no coincidence that the PLO office was ordered to close at the same time as the president’s national security hawk put the ICC on notice. The State Department ordered the PLO out of Washington to ensure that the world received Bolton’s message loud and clear.

Lewis Foundation Legal Notice

Quick to respond, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas addressed the United Nations Security Council the next day, calling for “an international Middle East peace conference to be convened” later this year. He also attacked Trump for recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

Trump is scheduled to address the UN General Assembly later this month. It is believed that he will intentionally ignore Abbas’s remarks, since he is not the “president” of a recognized nation. He will instead use the opportunity to remind the world of the threat posed by Iran and to reiterate his opposition to the international nuclear deal with that nation.

Since its founding in 2002, all three successive administrations of both political parties have rejected the jurisdiction of the ICC over American citizens. However, the Obama administration did cooperate with the court in its prosecution of non-U.S. persons.

A pastor and in-demand traveling speaker, Dr. Edward DeVries is the editor of the Dixie Heritage Newsletter and a contributing editor at THE BARNES REVIEW. He is the author of 30 books including the two-volume Glory in Grey. Some of his other titles include Sacred Honor, The Truth About the Confederate Battle Flag, Prayer is Simple, Every Member a Minister and Coaching Youth Baseball the Right Way. He is also the host of TBR RADIO’S “Dixie Heritage Hour.” Please check it out at www.BarnesReview.org.




Armchair Warriors for Zion

The U.S. government is bursting with lackeys who place Israel, not America, first. While Jared Kushner, Mike Pompeo, and John Bolton are ever busy ensuring U.S. foreign policy considers Israel first, now Kenneth Marcus at the Department of Education is working to eliminate any ideas that might prevent the foreign nation holding first priority in our students’ minds, as well.

By Philip Giraldi

I have recently written about how American Jews who are protective of Israel have succeeded in inserting themselves in the U.S. government at various choke points where the bilateral relationship between Tel Aviv and Washington are managed. The Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence (OTFI) in the Treasury Department, for instance, is notable in that regard, as it has been a Jewish enclave since its founding under George W. Bush in 2004. Since that time, it has successfully ignored Israeli violations of law to include its nuclear program and colonization of the West Bank while increasing penalties inflicted on countries like Iran, regarded as hostile to Israel. Nor should one forget the Jewish cabal that was largely responsible for the Iraq war, which proved disastrous to genuine American interests.

Doug Feith and Paul Wolfowitz at the Pentagon together with Scooter Libby at the White House were responsible for the phony intelligence that was stove-piped up to policy makers to make it look as if Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and was a threat to the United States. Air Force Col. Karen Kwiatkowski has reported how neoconservatives corrupted the intelligence analysis process. Meanwhile Israeli intelligence officers, diplomats, and military personnel were able to move around the Pentagon freely, having special access granted to them by Feith.

As it turned out, there were no such weapons and the only beneficiaries of a shattered Iraq were Israel and Iran. Currently, many of the same people, who in no way suffered career-wise for their poor judgment and their collaboration with a foreign country, are pushing all available buttons to bring about a much bigger war in Syria and a new conflict with Iran. The new policy, spelled out by National Security Advisor John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on recent trips to Israel, demands the ouster of Iranians from Syrian territory and regime change in Damascus. It will require a U.S. armed presence in Syria for years to come.

Syria will thereby become the next Afghanistan and Iraq, dysfunctional countries all in a row that once upon a time were both independent and stable. Nowhere has the United States “won” in any sense, and the occupations appear to be interminable. You can blame the dunderheads in Washington for the policy failure, but you must also blame Israel.

Think the IRS Never Loses Cases? Think again!

One should not ignore the interminable so-called Middle East peace process, either, which is all about protecting Israeli interests. It is being run by presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner and a team of Orthodox Jews negotiating with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. And the U.S. Ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, is also an Orthodox Jew with a rabbi as his principal advisor. Friedman spends his days defending Israel, even when it shoots dead 70 unarmed demonstrating Gazans.

Recent policy initiatives by the White House have consisted of cutting off all funding to Palestinian refugees in an attempt to make them either surrender or disappear, preferably both. It is a policy dictated by Israel, which provides no benefits to the United States. Bolton, in his recent condemnation of the International Criminal Court, tied the refusal to recognize the court and the closure of the Palestine Liberation Organization in Washington to attempts to hold Israel accountable for war crimes, meaning American policy is being driven by Israeli interests.

Wandering Who?
Available at the AFP Online Store.

The most recent bit of Israel-first policy in the Trump administration involves the Education Department. As some university students are actually capable of thinking independently and are rejecting the standard Israeli fabricated line about how it is the “only democracy in the Middle East” and “America’s best and truest ally,” both of which are manifestly untrue, it was perhaps inevitable that the government Zionists who are intent on protecting Israel would turn to shutting down any criticism of the Jewish state on campus. There was, however, a little problem sometimes referred to as the First Amendment, guaranteeing free speech. So along comes Kenneth Marcus, and he finds a nice little niche in the government where he can work to stop the process whereby Jewish students, so it is being claimed, are being made uncomfortable by criticism of Israel.

Marcus has been the assistant secretary of education for civil rights since June, which gives him authority to enforce what he chooses to define as the rights of students at universities. The position is quite powerful in that any university or college receiving federal funds can be deprived of that income if it is found to be in violation of the rules that Marcus chooses to enforce.

Marcus is an ardent Zionist, who has frequently been in the news opposing Palestinian groups on campus. His appointment is a major shift in how the Department of Education sees its role in serving as thought police at America’s institutions of higher learning.

It is not as if Marcus’s views were unknown before he was appointed. He previously served as head of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, which he founded in 2011 “to combat the resurgence of anti-Semitism in American higher education.” He was an outspoken advocate for all things Israeli and Jewish, with particular focus on silencing the Palestinian-led nonviolent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS), which Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders have perhaps correctly identified as the biggest threat to their country. Netanyahu, of course, defines a threat as anything that prevents him from dispossessing the Palestinians of the remainder of their land and inducing or forcing them to move elsewhere.

The BDS movement is indeed popular among university students in the United States and also in Europe, as it combines nonviolence with an assertion of the rights of the Palestinian people.

Lewis Foundation Legal Notice

Marcus has reopened a case dismissed in 2014 that was initiated seven years ago by a Zionist group against Rutgers University, claiming that the school permitted a “hostile environment” for Jewish students. Investigation by the Obama administration Department of Education determined that that was not so, but Marcus thinks otherwise, revealing his turnaround decision in a letter to his allies at the Zionist Organization of America.

Marcus’s office does not have jurisdiction over religious discrimination, but it does “aggressively enforce” civil rights “which prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity or national origin.” So he is calling Jews an “ethnicity” linked to Israel as a “right to self-determination.” Any criticism of the existence of Israel then becomes anti-Semitism and also racist, making the promotion of the Palestinian cause hate speech and therefore subject to being banned on campus.

More than 200 civil rights groups objected to the appointment of Marcus but the Senate nevertheless confirmed the assignment by a 50 to 46 vote. That a partisan like Marcus would be considered as an enforcer of civil rights is a travesty, as he, like many other Jewish Zionists in senior government positions in the Trump administration, are only interested in what they think benefits Israel.

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