Category: John Dietrich

208748.png

President Trump and the White Farmers of South Africa


President Trump has inspired the Deep State Media (DSM) to create another firestorm.  This time, his racism is supposedly being revealed because he asked his secretary of state to “closely study the South Africa land and farm seizures and expropriations and the large-scale killing of farmers.”  The president apparently was moved to ask his secretary of state to study the issue as a result of a Fox News program that dealt with the subject.  State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert told reporters that secretary of state Mike Pompeo and President Trump had discussed the issue and Pompeo would “take a look at it.”  The president has not drawn any conclusions.  He has simply asked the State Department to study, or look into, the matter.  This has driven the Deep State into fits of rage.

The transition of South Africa into a larger disaster than Zimbabwe, based on land expropriations, was supposed to occur without media attention.  The beauty of the president’s approach makes concealment impossible.  Apparently, this situation has been covered in the foreign press but not much here.  The Russian government has agreed to accept 15,000 South African farmers because it considered the land confiscation issue a “matter of life and death.”  Australian immigration minister Peter Dutton caused a ruckus by saying Australia should give “special attention” to white South African farmers because they faced a “horrific” situation.  Members of the Deep State believe that it is unnecessary to study this situation.  It is being promoted by right-wing conspiracy nuts.  Therefore, it cannot be true.

The Fox program had made the mistake of claiming that the South African government was already confiscating land without compensation when President Cyril Ramaphosa was merely announcing that he would propose a change in the constitution to allow the practice.  Currently, the policy is termed “willing-seller, willing-buyer.”  This is not outright confiscation.  However, if a farmer is offered 2 cents on the dollar for his farm under the current or coming conditions, he might realize that that is his best option.  The DSM claims that “right-wing commentators have claimed there is an unpublicized ‘white genocide’ unfolding in South Africa, but statistics say the opposite.”  Time magazine has reported, “[K]illings of farmers in South Africa are at their lowest level in 20 years.”  The New York Times quoted Patrick Gaspard, the United States ambassador to South Africa during the Obama administration, as saying: “Here you have a president of the United States who is trafficking in a white supremacist story-line and talking point that has caused incredible damage in the country, in the region, and that is easily disproved.”  The common line seems to be that all of these claims can be easily disproved by statistics and studies.  But who conducts the studies and compiles the statistics?  The South African government has refused to release farm murder statistics since 2007.

MSNBC claims that the president has a “troubled history on race.”  If the president has a “troubled history on race,” it is because the DSM smear machine has created it.  One example is the accusation that the president described several black nations as “s-holes.”  Everyone knows that factually, this is true.  Even Trump-supporters have agreed he said it.  While it is certainly plausible (this is how New Yorkers, who would include President Trump, talk), it is quite possibly untrue.  The one witness who attributed this remark to the president was Senator Dick Durbin.  Senator Durbin has a history of fabricating conversations in private meetings.  In 2013, Durbin claimed that House Republicans acted in a racist manner toward President Obama and said they “can’t stand to look at him.”  The White House and the House speaker’s office denied Durbin’s account of events.  Obama’s press secretary, Jay Carney, said he checked with a participant of the meeting and was told that this did not happen.  Meanwhile, President Trump denied that he used the term.  DHS secretary Kirstjen Nielsen did not recall the president using the term, and two senators, David Perdue and Tom Cotton, claim that the president did not say it.  However, through constant repetition, it has entered the history books as a fact.

The removal or extermination of white farmers will continue.  This is an inevitable process.  It will be followed by a drastic change in…”weather conditions.”  As farms are expropriated, the media will be reporting on a severe drought affecting all of South Africa.  Expropriation-ruined Zimbabwe is already experiencing this climatic change.  Now former president Robert Mugabe declared a state of disaster, due to drought, in 2016.

John Dietrich is a freelance writer and the author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy (Algora Publishing).  He has a Master of Arts degree in international relations from St. Mary’s University.  He is retired from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Department of Homeland Security.

 

 

President Trump has inspired the Deep State Media (DSM) to create another firestorm.  This time, his racism is supposedly being revealed because he asked his secretary of state to “closely study the South Africa land and farm seizures and expropriations and the large-scale killing of farmers.”  The president apparently was moved to ask his secretary of state to study the issue as a result of a Fox News program that dealt with the subject.  State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert told reporters that secretary of state Mike Pompeo and President Trump had discussed the issue and Pompeo would “take a look at it.”  The president has not drawn any conclusions.  He has simply asked the State Department to study, or look into, the matter.  This has driven the Deep State into fits of rage.

The transition of South Africa into a larger disaster than Zimbabwe, based on land expropriations, was supposed to occur without media attention.  The beauty of the president’s approach makes concealment impossible.  Apparently, this situation has been covered in the foreign press but not much here.  The Russian government has agreed to accept 15,000 South African farmers because it considered the land confiscation issue a “matter of life and death.”  Australian immigration minister Peter Dutton caused a ruckus by saying Australia should give “special attention” to white South African farmers because they faced a “horrific” situation.  Members of the Deep State believe that it is unnecessary to study this situation.  It is being promoted by right-wing conspiracy nuts.  Therefore, it cannot be true.

The Fox program had made the mistake of claiming that the South African government was already confiscating land without compensation when President Cyril Ramaphosa was merely announcing that he would propose a change in the constitution to allow the practice.  Currently, the policy is termed “willing-seller, willing-buyer.”  This is not outright confiscation.  However, if a farmer is offered 2 cents on the dollar for his farm under the current or coming conditions, he might realize that that is his best option.  The DSM claims that “right-wing commentators have claimed there is an unpublicized ‘white genocide’ unfolding in South Africa, but statistics say the opposite.”  Time magazine has reported, “[K]illings of farmers in South Africa are at their lowest level in 20 years.”  The New York Times quoted Patrick Gaspard, the United States ambassador to South Africa during the Obama administration, as saying: “Here you have a president of the United States who is trafficking in a white supremacist story-line and talking point that has caused incredible damage in the country, in the region, and that is easily disproved.”  The common line seems to be that all of these claims can be easily disproved by statistics and studies.  But who conducts the studies and compiles the statistics?  The South African government has refused to release farm murder statistics since 2007.

MSNBC claims that the president has a “troubled history on race.”  If the president has a “troubled history on race,” it is because the DSM smear machine has created it.  One example is the accusation that the president described several black nations as “s-holes.”  Everyone knows that factually, this is true.  Even Trump-supporters have agreed he said it.  While it is certainly plausible (this is how New Yorkers, who would include President Trump, talk), it is quite possibly untrue.  The one witness who attributed this remark to the president was Senator Dick Durbin.  Senator Durbin has a history of fabricating conversations in private meetings.  In 2013, Durbin claimed that House Republicans acted in a racist manner toward President Obama and said they “can’t stand to look at him.”  The White House and the House speaker’s office denied Durbin’s account of events.  Obama’s press secretary, Jay Carney, said he checked with a participant of the meeting and was told that this did not happen.  Meanwhile, President Trump denied that he used the term.  DHS secretary Kirstjen Nielsen did not recall the president using the term, and two senators, David Perdue and Tom Cotton, claim that the president did not say it.  However, through constant repetition, it has entered the history books as a fact.

The removal or extermination of white farmers will continue.  This is an inevitable process.  It will be followed by a drastic change in…”weather conditions.”  As farms are expropriated, the media will be reporting on a severe drought affecting all of South Africa.  Expropriation-ruined Zimbabwe is already experiencing this climatic change.  Now former president Robert Mugabe declared a state of disaster, due to drought, in 2016.

John Dietrich is a freelance writer and the author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy (Algora Publishing).  He has a Master of Arts degree in international relations from St. Mary’s University.  He is retired from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Department of Homeland Security.

 

 



Source link

Roy Moore vs. the Swamp


The Swamp is in full panic mode.  They are pulling out the big guns.  They claim Judge Roy Moore is a pedophile and cannot be allowed to represent the good people of the great state of Alabama.  If Moore wins the election the Senate should refuse to seat him.  The Washington Post claims it stumbled across this story by accident:  

“While reporting a story in Alabama about supporters of Moore’s Senate campaign, a Post reporter heard that Moore allegedly had sought relationships with teenage girls.”   

The Swamp media would have us believe that they do not have a double standard when it comes to conservatives.  When Sarah Palin was selected for vice president David Corn claimed, “Alaska’s getting pretty crowded…with investigative reporters and scandal-chasers.”  Six weeks after being offered an exclusive story by Paula Jones the Post printed nothing.  The Post’s managing editor, Robert Kaiser claimed, “We have an obligation to the Post’s readers to do our best to establish the truth and not simply to print damaging accusations the moment they are made.”

The authors of the Washington Post article on Moore is very conscious of the problems the paper has with credibility.  They go to great lengths to establish the main accuser’s bona fides. Leigh Corfman is not like Paula Jones, who Newsweek’s Evan Thomas called “some sleazy woman with big hair coming out of the trailer parks.”  McCrummen claims, “none of the women has donated to or worked for Moore’s Democratic opponent.” Corfman voted for Republicans and even voted for Trump.  She described her story consistently in six interviews with The Post.  Neither Corfman nor any of the other women sought out The Post.  All were initially reluctant to speak.  Corfman claims, “I have prayed over this.”  She is obviously what the Post’s Michael Weisskopf called one of the people who are “largely poor, uneducated, and easy to command.”

The Swamp accepts Corfman’s allegations without reservations.  No one from the Swamp asked, “Why is this coming out now?”  After 38 years, is it possible that the memories of a girl from a broken home might be distorted.

Corfman has been divorced three times and has been plagued by financial problems.  She blames her chaotic teenage recklessness, drinking, drug abuse, promiscuity and a suicide attempt on Moore.  By contrast Moore is a West Point graduate, a Vietnam veteran, a law school graduate, and what some would describe as a “holy roller.” This is not to say that “holy rollers” have not been known to “misbehave.”  People have to decide who is more credible.

The question of credibility frequently depends on which side of the political spectrum an individual is on. Members of the Swamp will immediately side with Corfman.  The Swamp creatures have revealed themselves yet again.  Mitch McConnell is leading the charge.  McConnell stated, “If these allegations are true, he must step aside.”  He was followed by Sen. Jeff Flake who argued, “If there is any shred of truth to the allegations against Roy Moore, he should step aside immediately.”   Sen. Susan Collins said, “If there is any truth at all to these horrific allegations, Roy Moore should immediately step aside as a Senate candidate.”  Sen. Lisa Murkowski said, “I’m horrified.”  Sen. Rob Portman said, “It was very troubling … if what we read is true and people are on the record so I assume it is.”  Sen. John McCain had no doubts about Moore’s guilt.  He tweeted, “The allegations against Roy Moore are deeply disturbing and disqualifying. He should immediately step aside and allow the people of Alabama to elect a candidate they can be proud of.”  All of these Senators are Republicans and member of the Swamp.

McConnell and the other Swamp creatures would rather have a Democrat in this Alabama Senate seat.  George H.W. Bush voted for Hillary Clinton and is an unlikely Moore supporter.  Max Boot, a Rubio consultant said, “I would sooner vote for Josef Stalin than I would vote for Donald Trump.”  He is also an unlikely Moore supporter.  These are not 38-year-old allegations.

The Swamp’s Claude Rains imitations are unconvincing.  Presently Senator Bob Menendez is being investigated for financial corruption.  Federal prosecutors believe that “defendants Menendez and Melgen had sex with underage prostitutes in the Dominican Republic.”  These are not 38-year-old allegations.  Three women who made the prostitution allegations later recanted and said they were paid to level the charges.  Who paid them?  Is the Post interested?  

Sen. Lindsey Graham has testified as a character witness for Menendez.  Are Swamp creatures outraged by the recent release of FBI documents claiming Martin Luther King engaged in sex orgies?   Are they outraged by a Hollywood producer, Roman Polanski, who drugged and raped a 13-year-old?  Or was this not a case of “rape-rape?”

Charges of sexual misconduct have been successfully used by the Swamp in the past.  In 1989 Senator John Tower was nominated for Secretary of Defense.  The day the debate on Tower’s nomination began in the Senate, Bob Woodward’s article entitled, “Incidents at Defense Base Cited, Drunkenness, Harassment of Women Alleged” appeared on the front page of the Washington Post.  Bob Woodward reported that informed sources claimed Tower had been drunk at Bergstrom Air Force Base.  

Tower was not confirmed and the next day it was revealed that Woodward’s source was discharged from the Air Force for psychiatric reasons.  Another story used against him was that he danced naked on a grand piano with his mistress, a Russian ballerina. This was reported by Leslie Stahl on CBS, even though the FBI had reported they had reason to believe it was not true. 

Rarely has a pile-on been more hypocritical than when Sen. Ted Kennedy told students at Yale University that he was “troubled” by reports that John Tower drank excessively and made improper advances toward women.

For many Trump supporters, an attack on Judge Moore by McCain is the next thing to an endorsement. If McCain opposes him he must be a patriot.  The president missed a great opportunity to embarrass the Swamp.  He reportedly said that Moore will “step aside” if the charges are true.  He should have mentioned that in light of the Swamp’s past behavior this is unlikely that the charges are true.

John Dietrich is a freelance writer and the author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy (Algora Publishing).  He has a Master of Arts Degree in International Relations from St. Mary’s University.  He is retired from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Department of Homeland Security.

The Swamp is in full panic mode.  They are pulling out the big guns.  They claim Judge Roy Moore is a pedophile and cannot be allowed to represent the good people of the great state of Alabama.  If Moore wins the election the Senate should refuse to seat him.  The Washington Post claims it stumbled across this story by accident:  

“While reporting a story in Alabama about supporters of Moore’s Senate campaign, a Post reporter heard that Moore allegedly had sought relationships with teenage girls.”   

The Swamp media would have us believe that they do not have a double standard when it comes to conservatives.  When Sarah Palin was selected for vice president David Corn claimed, “Alaska’s getting pretty crowded…with investigative reporters and scandal-chasers.”  Six weeks after being offered an exclusive story by Paula Jones the Post printed nothing.  The Post’s managing editor, Robert Kaiser claimed, “We have an obligation to the Post’s readers to do our best to establish the truth and not simply to print damaging accusations the moment they are made.”

The authors of the Washington Post article on Moore is very conscious of the problems the paper has with credibility.  They go to great lengths to establish the main accuser’s bona fides. Leigh Corfman is not like Paula Jones, who Newsweek’s Evan Thomas called “some sleazy woman with big hair coming out of the trailer parks.”  McCrummen claims, “none of the women has donated to or worked for Moore’s Democratic opponent.” Corfman voted for Republicans and even voted for Trump.  She described her story consistently in six interviews with The Post.  Neither Corfman nor any of the other women sought out The Post.  All were initially reluctant to speak.  Corfman claims, “I have prayed over this.”  She is obviously what the Post’s Michael Weisskopf called one of the people who are “largely poor, uneducated, and easy to command.”

The Swamp accepts Corfman’s allegations without reservations.  No one from the Swamp asked, “Why is this coming out now?”  After 38 years, is it possible that the memories of a girl from a broken home might be distorted.

Corfman has been divorced three times and has been plagued by financial problems.  She blames her chaotic teenage recklessness, drinking, drug abuse, promiscuity and a suicide attempt on Moore.  By contrast Moore is a West Point graduate, a Vietnam veteran, a law school graduate, and what some would describe as a “holy roller.” This is not to say that “holy rollers” have not been known to “misbehave.”  People have to decide who is more credible.

The question of credibility frequently depends on which side of the political spectrum an individual is on. Members of the Swamp will immediately side with Corfman.  The Swamp creatures have revealed themselves yet again.  Mitch McConnell is leading the charge.  McConnell stated, “If these allegations are true, he must step aside.”  He was followed by Sen. Jeff Flake who argued, “If there is any shred of truth to the allegations against Roy Moore, he should step aside immediately.”   Sen. Susan Collins said, “If there is any truth at all to these horrific allegations, Roy Moore should immediately step aside as a Senate candidate.”  Sen. Lisa Murkowski said, “I’m horrified.”  Sen. Rob Portman said, “It was very troubling … if what we read is true and people are on the record so I assume it is.”  Sen. John McCain had no doubts about Moore’s guilt.  He tweeted, “The allegations against Roy Moore are deeply disturbing and disqualifying. He should immediately step aside and allow the people of Alabama to elect a candidate they can be proud of.”  All of these Senators are Republicans and member of the Swamp.

McConnell and the other Swamp creatures would rather have a Democrat in this Alabama Senate seat.  George H.W. Bush voted for Hillary Clinton and is an unlikely Moore supporter.  Max Boot, a Rubio consultant said, “I would sooner vote for Josef Stalin than I would vote for Donald Trump.”  He is also an unlikely Moore supporter.  These are not 38-year-old allegations.

The Swamp’s Claude Rains imitations are unconvincing.  Presently Senator Bob Menendez is being investigated for financial corruption.  Federal prosecutors believe that “defendants Menendez and Melgen had sex with underage prostitutes in the Dominican Republic.”  These are not 38-year-old allegations.  Three women who made the prostitution allegations later recanted and said they were paid to level the charges.  Who paid them?  Is the Post interested?  

Sen. Lindsey Graham has testified as a character witness for Menendez.  Are Swamp creatures outraged by the recent release of FBI documents claiming Martin Luther King engaged in sex orgies?   Are they outraged by a Hollywood producer, Roman Polanski, who drugged and raped a 13-year-old?  Or was this not a case of “rape-rape?”

Charges of sexual misconduct have been successfully used by the Swamp in the past.  In 1989 Senator John Tower was nominated for Secretary of Defense.  The day the debate on Tower’s nomination began in the Senate, Bob Woodward’s article entitled, “Incidents at Defense Base Cited, Drunkenness, Harassment of Women Alleged” appeared on the front page of the Washington Post.  Bob Woodward reported that informed sources claimed Tower had been drunk at Bergstrom Air Force Base.  

Tower was not confirmed and the next day it was revealed that Woodward’s source was discharged from the Air Force for psychiatric reasons.  Another story used against him was that he danced naked on a grand piano with his mistress, a Russian ballerina. This was reported by Leslie Stahl on CBS, even though the FBI had reported they had reason to believe it was not true. 

Rarely has a pile-on been more hypocritical than when Sen. Ted Kennedy told students at Yale University that he was “troubled” by reports that John Tower drank excessively and made improper advances toward women.

For many Trump supporters, an attack on Judge Moore by McCain is the next thing to an endorsement. If McCain opposes him he must be a patriot.  The president missed a great opportunity to embarrass the Swamp.  He reportedly said that Moore will “step aside” if the charges are true.  He should have mentioned that in light of the Swamp’s past behavior this is unlikely that the charges are true.

John Dietrich is a freelance writer and the author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy (Algora Publishing).  He has a Master of Arts Degree in International Relations from St. Mary’s University.  He is retired from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Department of Homeland Security.



Source link

Is U.S. Policy in Afghanistan Doomed?


Politico provides an account of a State Department election night “party” in Kabul’s U.S. embassy.  The author, May Jeong, describes the State Department employees, “who are officially barred from political activism while living abroad but tend to support Democrats.” 

As proof she reports, “On the wall hung a Donald Trump piñata.”  She reports a change in the party’s attitude when it became clear that Trump was going to win the election.  The article explains the role of Scott Guggenheim, “senior adviser” to Afghan President Ashraf Ghani.  He describes Guggenheim as, “one of the most powerful people in the country.”  Guggenheim has worked with Ghani since 2002.  Ghani and Guggenheim are member of the same elite.  Ghani is described as “former academic whose lifelong passion has been studying how to fix broken countries.”  Guggenheim spent the first half of his career as an international development expert.  They attended some of the same schools and both worked for the World Bank.

Jeong claims that Guggenheim’s “sympathies run far closer to Afghanistan than the United States” and that he “often slips into the collective possessive pronoun—our country, our people—and refers just as reflexively to ‘you Americans.’”  He sees Afghanistan as a victim of modernizing struggles.  Apparently he believes in the “Noble Savage Theory.”  He attributes Afghanistan’s trouble to the result of British colonialism.  “What the British achieved was turning one of the oldest civilizations into warring tribes.”  The problem with this theory is that most of Afghanistan’s problems preceeded the British invasion.  The United Nations Development Program rates Afghanistan one of the worst countries in the world to be born female.  The sexual abuse of children is long standing characteristic of Afghan culture. “The practice is called bacha bazi, literally ‘boy play,’ and American soldiers and Marines have been instructed not to intervene.” 

One of Guggenheim’s major duties is to act as Afghanistan’s informal ambassador to the world of foreign donors who fund most of the country’s budget.  Approximately 70 percent of the Afghan government’s budget since the 2001 has been supplied by foreign donors.  Guggenheim asked,  “Is the Parliament of Afghanistan really representative of the country, or is it a bunch of warlords dividing up national rent? This is what American foreign policy in Afghanistan has created. The institutions they built up are deeply corrupt.”  There are billions of taxpayer dollars circulating through Afghanistan.  One example is the $43 million ($42.7 million, to be exact) spent to build a compressed natural gas station in Afghanistan. Naturally this figure was disputed when the cost became public.  Critics claim the true cost was somewhere between $5 million and $10 million.  This is not a very precise figure for a facility that would cost no more than $500,000 in neighboring Pakistan.

Guggenheim views Afghanistan as an American experiment.  He was attracted to the job there by “the promise of the early years.”  He saw Afghanistan as a “modern society that would catch up to regional success stories like India or Iran.”  After emerging from decades of civil war and misrule it offered a country-sized laboratory.  Afghanistan was a chance to implement some of the theories Guggenheim and Ghani had “discussed during countless conversations at weddings, backyard swims and garden parties across decades.”  Progressives believed that a vote for Ghani was “a vote for progress, for reform, for equality, for human rights, and a sense of Afghanistan joining the rest of the world.”  Guggenheim described his vision: “What I’d like to see is countries with deep historical legacies, that are struggling, pull it off.  Some sense that they will finally get their act together and they are going to be democratic and there is going to be basic freedoms. Kids can go to a movie theater and not worry about being blown up, that sort of thing. I’m still a deep idealist on those scores.”  This would have been a prefect time for Mr. Guggenheim to break out in song: “You may say I’m a dreamer But I’m not the only one.  I hope some day you’ll join us And the world will live as one.”  But how many eggs will be required to make this omelet?

The people implementing U.S. policy in Afghanistan will have to put away their piñata and deal with the Afghan people for what they are.  They will not be holding any “gay” pride parades in Kabul in the near future.  The United States is providing billions to support an admittedly corrupt government yet this government is giving away mining rights to Chinese companies.  Guggenheim appears to be coming to the realization that the theories formulated at “weddings, backyard swims and garden parties across decades” may not be practical.  He declared, “What you are doing is doomed.  But isn’t that the story of life? And so, you do it anyway.”  Jeong described this as “sardonic wit.”  It is a type of wit that goes over well at garden parties but not in foxholes.  He should not try out his wit on the mothers of soldiers who have returned to the U.S. in body bags.  The elite has a different sense of humor.

 

John Dietrich is a freelance writer and the author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy (Algora Publishing).  He has a Master of Arts Degree in International Relations from St. Mary’s University.  He is retired from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Department of Homeland Security.

 

Politico provides an account of a State Department election night “party” in Kabul’s U.S. embassy.  The author, May Jeong, describes the State Department employees, “who are officially barred from political activism while living abroad but tend to support Democrats.” 

As proof she reports, “On the wall hung a Donald Trump piñata.”  She reports a change in the party’s attitude when it became clear that Trump was going to win the election.  The article explains the role of Scott Guggenheim, “senior adviser” to Afghan President Ashraf Ghani.  He describes Guggenheim as, “one of the most powerful people in the country.”  Guggenheim has worked with Ghani since 2002.  Ghani and Guggenheim are member of the same elite.  Ghani is described as “former academic whose lifelong passion has been studying how to fix broken countries.”  Guggenheim spent the first half of his career as an international development expert.  They attended some of the same schools and both worked for the World Bank.

Jeong claims that Guggenheim’s “sympathies run far closer to Afghanistan than the United States” and that he “often slips into the collective possessive pronoun—our country, our people—and refers just as reflexively to ‘you Americans.’”  He sees Afghanistan as a victim of modernizing struggles.  Apparently he believes in the “Noble Savage Theory.”  He attributes Afghanistan’s trouble to the result of British colonialism.  “What the British achieved was turning one of the oldest civilizations into warring tribes.”  The problem with this theory is that most of Afghanistan’s problems preceeded the British invasion.  The United Nations Development Program rates Afghanistan one of the worst countries in the world to be born female.  The sexual abuse of children is long standing characteristic of Afghan culture. “The practice is called bacha bazi, literally ‘boy play,’ and American soldiers and Marines have been instructed not to intervene.” 

One of Guggenheim’s major duties is to act as Afghanistan’s informal ambassador to the world of foreign donors who fund most of the country’s budget.  Approximately 70 percent of the Afghan government’s budget since the 2001 has been supplied by foreign donors.  Guggenheim asked,  “Is the Parliament of Afghanistan really representative of the country, or is it a bunch of warlords dividing up national rent? This is what American foreign policy in Afghanistan has created. The institutions they built up are deeply corrupt.”  There are billions of taxpayer dollars circulating through Afghanistan.  One example is the $43 million ($42.7 million, to be exact) spent to build a compressed natural gas station in Afghanistan. Naturally this figure was disputed when the cost became public.  Critics claim the true cost was somewhere between $5 million and $10 million.  This is not a very precise figure for a facility that would cost no more than $500,000 in neighboring Pakistan.

Guggenheim views Afghanistan as an American experiment.  He was attracted to the job there by “the promise of the early years.”  He saw Afghanistan as a “modern society that would catch up to regional success stories like India or Iran.”  After emerging from decades of civil war and misrule it offered a country-sized laboratory.  Afghanistan was a chance to implement some of the theories Guggenheim and Ghani had “discussed during countless conversations at weddings, backyard swims and garden parties across decades.”  Progressives believed that a vote for Ghani was “a vote for progress, for reform, for equality, for human rights, and a sense of Afghanistan joining the rest of the world.”  Guggenheim described his vision: “What I’d like to see is countries with deep historical legacies, that are struggling, pull it off.  Some sense that they will finally get their act together and they are going to be democratic and there is going to be basic freedoms. Kids can go to a movie theater and not worry about being blown up, that sort of thing. I’m still a deep idealist on those scores.”  This would have been a prefect time for Mr. Guggenheim to break out in song: “You may say I’m a dreamer But I’m not the only one.  I hope some day you’ll join us And the world will live as one.”  But how many eggs will be required to make this omelet?

The people implementing U.S. policy in Afghanistan will have to put away their piñata and deal with the Afghan people for what they are.  They will not be holding any “gay” pride parades in Kabul in the near future.  The United States is providing billions to support an admittedly corrupt government yet this government is giving away mining rights to Chinese companies.  Guggenheim appears to be coming to the realization that the theories formulated at “weddings, backyard swims and garden parties across decades” may not be practical.  He declared, “What you are doing is doomed.  But isn’t that the story of life? And so, you do it anyway.”  Jeong described this as “sardonic wit.”  It is a type of wit that goes over well at garden parties but not in foxholes.  He should not try out his wit on the mothers of soldiers who have returned to the U.S. in body bags.  The elite has a different sense of humor.

 

John Dietrich is a freelance writer and the author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy (Algora Publishing).  He has a Master of Arts Degree in International Relations from St. Mary’s University.  He is retired from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Department of Homeland Security.

 



Source link

Sharyl Attkisson Pulls Back the Curtain


Sharyl Attkisson’s The Smear gives insight to how news is made today. It goes a long way in convincing readers that they should believe only a small portion of what is released by the government and reported by the press. This leads to a very cynical view of the news and confirms Otto von Bismarck’s claim that “Nothing is proven until it is officially denied.” Attkinsson gives an account of how massive the smear industry is. My only criticism of the book is her contention that, “the organized political smear entered the contemporary marketplace circe 1987.” Some of these smear techniques can probably be found in a study of politics in the ancient Sumerian city of Ur. The “scientific” smear might be traced back to George Creel’s World War I Committee on Public Information or Edward Bernays 1920s book Propaganda. She also appears to attribute the advice “Admit nothing” to the CIA. This is a classic Communist technique. Dozens of Communist spies had denied their connection to the Communist party and have been believed by the gullible for decades. She mentions the “infamous senator Joseph McCarthy.” who was the victim of an extremely effective smear campaign. She might benefit from reading M. Stanton Evans’ Blacklisted by History. Few people could survive the scrutiny and smear campaign Senator McCarthy was subjected to.

Her account of Larry Flynt’s reward for information on Congressional extramarital affairs was revealing. Just how many congressmen have nothing to hide and cannot be blackmailed? The government undoubtedly has an incredible amount of information on every American. We know the FBI spied on Martin Luther King. With the power of modern computers virtually everything can be recorded and stored in a database that is on a 1.5 million square foot facility in Utah. Data collection is only one area that government officials have lied to Congress and the public about. James Clapper, James Comey, and John Brennan have all perjured themselves in Congressional testimony.

It is truly amazing that Donald Trump was elected president in the face of opposition from the media, academia, government bureaucracy, the Democratic Party and a large portion of the Republican Party. Attkinsson reveals the role of “non-profit” organizations in the smear industry. She specifically mentions David Brock’s compensation, which numbers in the millions.

Donald Trump’s victory has increased the need of the left to limit the amount of information available to the public. The effort to eliminate “fake news” is a project led by people like Barack Obama, David Brock, Mark Zuckerberg, Angela Merkel and countless other members if the establishment. Attkisson points out the problem with restricting news: “it relies on some of the very organizations that have gotten caught in compromising situations.” Some of the people responsible for determining what is “fake news” might have a problem. Anita Kahane, a former Stasi agent and social activist, may have a problem with being objective. As Attkisson says, “those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.”

The internet has made it extremely difficult to spread fake news. Dan Rather learned this when he attempted to pass off a memo that he claimed was created in the 1970s. It was immediately recognized as a fake because it was created with a computer font that did not exist at the time. The “dossier” claiming to show Trump connection with the Russians is similarly an obvious fake. It is amazing that people in the intelligence community can get away with claiming that it might be accurate. The first page of the dossier is classified “Sensitive Source — Confidential.” You do not have to be an intelligence expert to know that sensitive sources are never classified confidential. A school teacher might try an experiment with a class of 6th graders. After a brief lesson on classification have them produce a document containing a “sensitive source.” It is unlikely that any of these children would label the document “Confidential.”

John Dietrich is a freelance writer and the author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy (Algora Publishing). He has a Master of Arts Degree in International Relations from St. Mary’s University. He is retired from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Department of Homeland Security.

Sharyl Attkisson’s The Smear gives insight to how news is made today. It goes a long way in convincing readers that they should believe only a small portion of what is released by the government and reported by the press. This leads to a very cynical view of the news and confirms Otto von Bismarck’s claim that “Nothing is proven until it is officially denied.” Attkinsson gives an account of how massive the smear industry is. My only criticism of the book is her contention that, “the organized political smear entered the contemporary marketplace circe 1987.” Some of these smear techniques can probably be found in a study of politics in the ancient Sumerian city of Ur. The “scientific” smear might be traced back to George Creel’s World War I Committee on Public Information or Edward Bernays 1920s book Propaganda. She also appears to attribute the advice “Admit nothing” to the CIA. This is a classic Communist technique. Dozens of Communist spies had denied their connection to the Communist party and have been believed by the gullible for decades. She mentions the “infamous senator Joseph McCarthy.” who was the victim of an extremely effective smear campaign. She might benefit from reading M. Stanton Evans’ Blacklisted by History. Few people could survive the scrutiny and smear campaign Senator McCarthy was subjected to.

Her account of Larry Flynt’s reward for information on Congressional extramarital affairs was revealing. Just how many congressmen have nothing to hide and cannot be blackmailed? The government undoubtedly has an incredible amount of information on every American. We know the FBI spied on Martin Luther King. With the power of modern computers virtually everything can be recorded and stored in a database that is on a 1.5 million square foot facility in Utah. Data collection is only one area that government officials have lied to Congress and the public about. James Clapper, James Comey, and John Brennan have all perjured themselves in Congressional testimony.

It is truly amazing that Donald Trump was elected president in the face of opposition from the media, academia, government bureaucracy, the Democratic Party and a large portion of the Republican Party. Attkinsson reveals the role of “non-profit” organizations in the smear industry. She specifically mentions David Brock’s compensation, which numbers in the millions.

Donald Trump’s victory has increased the need of the left to limit the amount of information available to the public. The effort to eliminate “fake news” is a project led by people like Barack Obama, David Brock, Mark Zuckerberg, Angela Merkel and countless other members if the establishment. Attkisson points out the problem with restricting news: “it relies on some of the very organizations that have gotten caught in compromising situations.” Some of the people responsible for determining what is “fake news” might have a problem. Anita Kahane, a former Stasi agent and social activist, may have a problem with being objective. As Attkisson says, “those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.”

The internet has made it extremely difficult to spread fake news. Dan Rather learned this when he attempted to pass off a memo that he claimed was created in the 1970s. It was immediately recognized as a fake because it was created with a computer font that did not exist at the time. The “dossier” claiming to show Trump connection with the Russians is similarly an obvious fake. It is amazing that people in the intelligence community can get away with claiming that it might be accurate. The first page of the dossier is classified “Sensitive Source — Confidential.” You do not have to be an intelligence expert to know that sensitive sources are never classified confidential. A school teacher might try an experiment with a class of 6th graders. After a brief lesson on classification have them produce a document containing a “sensitive source.” It is unlikely that any of these children would label the document “Confidential.”

John Dietrich is a freelance writer and the author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy (Algora Publishing). He has a Master of Arts Degree in International Relations from St. Mary’s University. He is retired from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Department of Homeland Security.



Source link

199175_5_.jpg

Some New Thoughts on Donald Trump's Warsaw Speech


Donald Trump’s Warsaw speech has reignited a controversy about the superiority of Western civilization.  He is being excoriated for dog whistling a variety of taboo assertions.  The Atlantic accuses him of racial and religious paranoia.  The New Republic claimed the speech was an appeal to the International Brotherhood of White Grievance.  His main offence was to declare that Western civilization is superior to others and that it is under attack.  Educated people have been taught that all societies are equal and to claim otherwise is racist.  This fact is codified in United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.  It asserts, “all doctrines, policies and practices based on or advocating superiority of peoples or individuals on the basis of national origin or racial, religious, ethnic or cultural differences are racist, scientifically false, legally invalid, morally condemnable and socially unjust.”  Therefore Mogadishu is equal to Malmö. 

Trump’s position is similar to Italy’s Silvio Belusconi who commented shortly after the 9/11 attack: “We should be confident of the superiority of our civilization, which consists of a value system that has given people widespread prosperity in those countries that embrace it, and guarantees respect for human rights and religion.  This respect certainly does not exist in Islamic countries.”  Belusconi was immediately set upon by the pack of independent minds. The Belgian Prime Minister, Guy Verhofstadt responded, “I can hardly believe Mr. Berlusconi made such remarks because the EU is based on values such as multiculturalism and the meeting of different civilizations.”  The head of Italian Jewish organizations, Amos Luzzatto, told the newspaper La Repubblica, ”In my opinion, one can not speak of the superiority of one culture over another.”  Belusconi received so much criticism that he felt it necessary to apologize.  It was a demonstration of the power of the charge of racism.

No other societies have such a reluctance to declare their superiority.  This was explained by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the future Pope Benedict XVI.  He wrote, “There is a self-hatred in the West that can be considered only as something pathological. . . . it no longer loves itself; it now only sees what is despicable and destructive in its own history, while it is no longer able to perceive what is great and pure there.”  This pathology is not an accident.  It is the product of years of indoctrination.

The primary promoter of this indoctrination was the Communist Party.  An early Communist master propagandist, Willi Munzenberg, said, “We must organize the intellectuals and use them to make Western civilization stink!”  Judge Robert Bork related a story about Yale University proposing a study of Western civilization.  He tells how an English professor exploded: “Western Civilization?  Why not a chair for colonialism, slavery, empire, and poverty?” while a history professor said: “The major export of Western Civilization is violence.”

This hostility to things Western gradually morphed into an anti-white prejudice.  Susan Sontag famously declared, “The white race is the cancer of human history. It is the white race and it alone – its ideologies and inventions – which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself.” Entertainers like actor Donald Sutherland have declared that they are “ashamed” of being white”  Sutherland continued, “It’s interesting to realize that you are seen as an integral part of a group that many of whom are mendacious, misogynist, of bigots, racists, and it’s appalling.”

Mona Sahlin, former leader of the Swedish Social Democratic Party, responded to the question what is Swedish culture? “I cannot figure out what Swedish culture is. I think that is what makes many Swedes so envious of immigrant groups. You have a culture, an identity, a history, something that binds you together.”  Former British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, reportedly said, “the English as a race are not worth saving”.  German Leftist politician Gregor Gysi declared, “Every year more native Germans die than there are born.  That is very fortunate.  It’s because the Nazis are not very good at having offspring”.  Salafism expert and Green party member Kurt Edler suggests that Germany has no real culture.  He claims, “the indigenous people themselves have completely disintegrated. The common word is dominant culture. There is none. There are lifestyle milieus.”  According to Edler, “the West has long since perished.”  This is also the conclusion of  Vladimir Putin who declared, “In a European country, a child is raped by a migrant, and the court releases him. It doesn’t fit into my head what on earth they’re thinking over there. I can’t even explain the rationale – is it a sense of guilt before the migrants? What’s going on? It’s not clear….A society that cannot defend its children has no future.”

There was one glaring error in Trump’s speech.  He stated, “we have never given up on freedom and independence as the right and destiny of the Polish people, and we never, ever will.”  The Poles in his audience undoubtedly noticed this error and were reminded of some unpleasant memories at the end of World War II.

 

John Dietrich is a freelance writer and the author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy (Algora Publishing).  He is retired from the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Donald Trump’s Warsaw speech has reignited a controversy about the superiority of Western civilization.  He is being excoriated for dog whistling a variety of taboo assertions.  The Atlantic accuses him of racial and religious paranoia.  The New Republic claimed the speech was an appeal to the International Brotherhood of White Grievance.  His main offence was to declare that Western civilization is superior to others and that it is under attack.  Educated people have been taught that all societies are equal and to claim otherwise is racist.  This fact is codified in United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.  It asserts, “all doctrines, policies and practices based on or advocating superiority of peoples or individuals on the basis of national origin or racial, religious, ethnic or cultural differences are racist, scientifically false, legally invalid, morally condemnable and socially unjust.”  Therefore Mogadishu is equal to Malmö. 

Trump’s position is similar to Italy’s Silvio Belusconi who commented shortly after the 9/11 attack: “We should be confident of the superiority of our civilization, which consists of a value system that has given people widespread prosperity in those countries that embrace it, and guarantees respect for human rights and religion.  This respect certainly does not exist in Islamic countries.”  Belusconi was immediately set upon by the pack of independent minds. The Belgian Prime Minister, Guy Verhofstadt responded, “I can hardly believe Mr. Berlusconi made such remarks because the EU is based on values such as multiculturalism and the meeting of different civilizations.”  The head of Italian Jewish organizations, Amos Luzzatto, told the newspaper La Repubblica, ”In my opinion, one can not speak of the superiority of one culture over another.”  Belusconi received so much criticism that he felt it necessary to apologize.  It was a demonstration of the power of the charge of racism.

No other societies have such a reluctance to declare their superiority.  This was explained by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the future Pope Benedict XVI.  He wrote, “There is a self-hatred in the West that can be considered only as something pathological. . . . it no longer loves itself; it now only sees what is despicable and destructive in its own history, while it is no longer able to perceive what is great and pure there.”  This pathology is not an accident.  It is the product of years of indoctrination.

The primary promoter of this indoctrination was the Communist Party.  An early Communist master propagandist, Willi Munzenberg, said, “We must organize the intellectuals and use them to make Western civilization stink!”  Judge Robert Bork related a story about Yale University proposing a study of Western civilization.  He tells how an English professor exploded: “Western Civilization?  Why not a chair for colonialism, slavery, empire, and poverty?” while a history professor said: “The major export of Western Civilization is violence.”

This hostility to things Western gradually morphed into an anti-white prejudice.  Susan Sontag famously declared, “The white race is the cancer of human history. It is the white race and it alone – its ideologies and inventions – which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself.” Entertainers like actor Donald Sutherland have declared that they are “ashamed” of being white”  Sutherland continued, “It’s interesting to realize that you are seen as an integral part of a group that many of whom are mendacious, misogynist, of bigots, racists, and it’s appalling.”

Mona Sahlin, former leader of the Swedish Social Democratic Party, responded to the question what is Swedish culture? “I cannot figure out what Swedish culture is. I think that is what makes many Swedes so envious of immigrant groups. You have a culture, an identity, a history, something that binds you together.”  Former British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, reportedly said, “the English as a race are not worth saving”.  German Leftist politician Gregor Gysi declared, “Every year more native Germans die than there are born.  That is very fortunate.  It’s because the Nazis are not very good at having offspring”.  Salafism expert and Green party member Kurt Edler suggests that Germany has no real culture.  He claims, “the indigenous people themselves have completely disintegrated. The common word is dominant culture. There is none. There are lifestyle milieus.”  According to Edler, “the West has long since perished.”  This is also the conclusion of  Vladimir Putin who declared, “In a European country, a child is raped by a migrant, and the court releases him. It doesn’t fit into my head what on earth they’re thinking over there. I can’t even explain the rationale – is it a sense of guilt before the migrants? What’s going on? It’s not clear….A society that cannot defend its children has no future.”

There was one glaring error in Trump’s speech.  He stated, “we have never given up on freedom and independence as the right and destiny of the Polish people, and we never, ever will.”  The Poles in his audience undoubtedly noticed this error and were reminded of some unpleasant memories at the end of World War II.

 

John Dietrich is a freelance writer and the author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy (Algora Publishing).  He is retired from the Defense Intelligence Agency.



Source link

The Truth About the 'Wiretapping' is Coming Out


The progressives’ Penny Dreadful about Donald Trump being put in the White House by Vladimir Putin is beginning to unravel. 

On March 2, Evelyn Farkas, a former deputy secretary of defense in the Obama administration, revealed on MSNBC that Obama officials were surveilling the Trump campaign.  Farkas resigned from her government post in September 2015 to become the senior foreign policy advisor for presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.  Farkas stated: 

“the Trump folks, if they found out how we knew what we knew about their, the staff, the Trump staff’s dealing with Russians, that they would try to compromise those sources and methods, meaning we would no longer have access to that intelligence. So I became very worried, because not enough was coming out into the open, and I knew that there was more…. We have very good intelligence on Russia.  So then I had talked to some of my former colleagues, and I knew that they were trying to also help get information to the Hill.” 

On March 30 she appeared on MSNBC to claim that what she said was distorted and fake news.

And on the dark campaign of fake news, you know, that’s still ongoing. We see even someone like myself get swept up in all of this. You know, when people like me are speaking on behalf of process, people spin to it suit their needs. And I think it may be that the Russians are behind even such fake news today.”

The Russians may have attempted to interfere in our election.  They probably had no more success than the Gulf States, Mexico or the Mossad.   Powerful nations, including the U.S., frequently interfere in foreign elections.  There were contacts between Trump supporters and the Russians.  General Flynn and Senator Sessions spoke with the Russian ambassador.  What they said was probably perfectly innocent.  Flynn may have told the ambassador to be patient.  The belligerent Obama policy would end with Trump’s assumption of the presidency.  Flynn, a retired head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, must have known that his conversation was being recorded.  His suggestion was no worse than President Obama’s remark to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he would be “more flexible” after the U.S. presidential election.

Would the Obama Administration “spy” on Americans?  Perhaps we could consult the former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan.  Brennan stated before the Council of Foreign Relations,

“As far as the allegations of, you know, CIA hacking into, you know, Senate computers, nothing could be further from the truth. I mean, we wouldn’t do that. I mean, that’s, that’s just beyond the, you know, the scope of reason in terms of what we would do.” 

Brennan said this in response to allegations that the CIA was hacking Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein.  Unfortunately, he later had to apologize for his remarks when it was revealed that the CIA was in fact spying on the senator.  Director of National Intelligence James Clapper committed perjury during congressional testimony about spying on Americans.  The President had no problem with spying on Angela Merkel.   How extensive was FBI involvement in this spying?  Is the FBI investigating itself?  Should Director Comey recuse himself?

The accusation of Russian influence is being investigated by the FBI, CIA, NSA, the Senate Intelligence Committee, the House Intelligence Committee and thousands of reporters in the establishment media.  So far they have come up with nothing.  Much of the suspicion of Russian interference is based on the “Steele” dossier.  At one point the FBI was considering paying Steele for his information.  The Steele dossier is not a government document.  However, it was compiled by someone with experience in intelligence and should conform to certain basic principles.  The “Confidential” and “Sensitive Sources” marking on the cover page do not make sense.  “Sensitive Sources” are never “Confidential.”  Senator McCain forwarded the dossier to the FBI.  It had previously been provided to Vice President Biden.  Biden claimed “It surprised me in that it made it to the point where the agency, the FBI thought they had to pursue it.”  Biden realized that it was obviously bogus.  It is hard to believe that Senator McCain is less perceptive than the vice president.  The FBI may also be relying on information provided by the company Crowd Strike, a company with diminished credibility.

Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, stated: “let’s take just one moment to review what we already know. Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, ordered a deliberate campaign carefully constructed to undermine our election.  Russian operatives also hacked John Podesta.   This is not innuendo or false allegations.  This is not fake news.”  It appears senator has come to his conclusions prior to an investigation.  There is no evidence that Putin ordered this campaign.  If there is such evidence it was obtained from someone very close to the Russian president and it was extremely irresponsible for the senator to reveal this information.

Congressman Devin Nunes claims that the Obama White House surveilled members of the incoming Trump administration on subjects that had nothing to do with Russia.  The claim that this information was collected “incidentally” will not endure.  Nunes is being vilified for being an unsophisticated former dairy farmer and there are demands he recuse himself.  Sen. Charles Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has begun his own investigation.  On March 6, Grassley demanded the FBI turn over documentation and answer questions about the Washington Post’s allegation that the FBI planned to pay for Steele’s information.  Grassley sent a follow-up letter on March 28 having not received answers to his first request.

The fifth column in the intelligence community can stonewall and the establishment media can obfuscate for only so long.  Patriotic members of the rank and file within the intelligence community will speak up.  We will be treated with headlines like “Trump Russia dossier key claim ‘verified’” from the BBC.  The key claim is that there was a spy in the Russian embassy.  They could have consulted Inspector Clouseau for that piece of investigative reporting.  These media reports will not survive internet exposure.  

John Dietrich is a freelance writer and the author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy, Algora Publishing, 2013.

 

 

The progressives’ Penny Dreadful about Donald Trump being put in the White House by Vladimir Putin is beginning to unravel. 

On March 2, Evelyn Farkas, a former deputy secretary of defense in the Obama administration, revealed on MSNBC that Obama officials were surveilling the Trump campaign.  Farkas resigned from her government post in September 2015 to become the senior foreign policy advisor for presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.  Farkas stated: 

“the Trump folks, if they found out how we knew what we knew about their, the staff, the Trump staff’s dealing with Russians, that they would try to compromise those sources and methods, meaning we would no longer have access to that intelligence. So I became very worried, because not enough was coming out into the open, and I knew that there was more…. We have very good intelligence on Russia.  So then I had talked to some of my former colleagues, and I knew that they were trying to also help get information to the Hill.” 

On March 30 she appeared on MSNBC to claim that what she said was distorted and fake news.

And on the dark campaign of fake news, you know, that’s still ongoing. We see even someone like myself get swept up in all of this. You know, when people like me are speaking on behalf of process, people spin to it suit their needs. And I think it may be that the Russians are behind even such fake news today.”

The Russians may have attempted to interfere in our election.  They probably had no more success than the Gulf States, Mexico or the Mossad.   Powerful nations, including the U.S., frequently interfere in foreign elections.  There were contacts between Trump supporters and the Russians.  General Flynn and Senator Sessions spoke with the Russian ambassador.  What they said was probably perfectly innocent.  Flynn may have told the ambassador to be patient.  The belligerent Obama policy would end with Trump’s assumption of the presidency.  Flynn, a retired head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, must have known that his conversation was being recorded.  His suggestion was no worse than President Obama’s remark to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he would be “more flexible” after the U.S. presidential election.

Would the Obama Administration “spy” on Americans?  Perhaps we could consult the former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan.  Brennan stated before the Council of Foreign Relations,

“As far as the allegations of, you know, CIA hacking into, you know, Senate computers, nothing could be further from the truth. I mean, we wouldn’t do that. I mean, that’s, that’s just beyond the, you know, the scope of reason in terms of what we would do.” 

Brennan said this in response to allegations that the CIA was hacking Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein.  Unfortunately, he later had to apologize for his remarks when it was revealed that the CIA was in fact spying on the senator.  Director of National Intelligence James Clapper committed perjury during congressional testimony about spying on Americans.  The President had no problem with spying on Angela Merkel.   How extensive was FBI involvement in this spying?  Is the FBI investigating itself?  Should Director Comey recuse himself?

The accusation of Russian influence is being investigated by the FBI, CIA, NSA, the Senate Intelligence Committee, the House Intelligence Committee and thousands of reporters in the establishment media.  So far they have come up with nothing.  Much of the suspicion of Russian interference is based on the “Steele” dossier.  At one point the FBI was considering paying Steele for his information.  The Steele dossier is not a government document.  However, it was compiled by someone with experience in intelligence and should conform to certain basic principles.  The “Confidential” and “Sensitive Sources” marking on the cover page do not make sense.  “Sensitive Sources” are never “Confidential.”  Senator McCain forwarded the dossier to the FBI.  It had previously been provided to Vice President Biden.  Biden claimed “It surprised me in that it made it to the point where the agency, the FBI thought they had to pursue it.”  Biden realized that it was obviously bogus.  It is hard to believe that Senator McCain is less perceptive than the vice president.  The FBI may also be relying on information provided by the company Crowd Strike, a company with diminished credibility.

Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, stated: “let’s take just one moment to review what we already know. Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, ordered a deliberate campaign carefully constructed to undermine our election.  Russian operatives also hacked John Podesta.   This is not innuendo or false allegations.  This is not fake news.”  It appears senator has come to his conclusions prior to an investigation.  There is no evidence that Putin ordered this campaign.  If there is such evidence it was obtained from someone very close to the Russian president and it was extremely irresponsible for the senator to reveal this information.

Congressman Devin Nunes claims that the Obama White House surveilled members of the incoming Trump administration on subjects that had nothing to do with Russia.  The claim that this information was collected “incidentally” will not endure.  Nunes is being vilified for being an unsophisticated former dairy farmer and there are demands he recuse himself.  Sen. Charles Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has begun his own investigation.  On March 6, Grassley demanded the FBI turn over documentation and answer questions about the Washington Post’s allegation that the FBI planned to pay for Steele’s information.  Grassley sent a follow-up letter on March 28 having not received answers to his first request.

The fifth column in the intelligence community can stonewall and the establishment media can obfuscate for only so long.  Patriotic members of the rank and file within the intelligence community will speak up.  We will be treated with headlines like “Trump Russia dossier key claim ‘verified’” from the BBC.  The key claim is that there was a spy in the Russian embassy.  They could have consulted Inspector Clouseau for that piece of investigative reporting.  These media reports will not survive internet exposure.  

John Dietrich is a freelance writer and the author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy, Algora Publishing, 2013.

 

 



Source link