BENGHAZIGATE UPDATES: Further Nexus To Morsi’s Brotherhood Mafia; Linkage To MALIK OBAMA & Hillary Clinton Up To Her Neck In Blame…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

WHEN the U.N. can no longer mask the obvious it is high time that the rest of the footdraggers follow suit. How so? Well, there are few addresses whereby up is down and evil is good, and the UN qualifies as one main institution. A culprit.

Now, some evidence, once amassed, becomes solid as a rock. So the proofs leading up to Benghazigate’s killers, and who they are tied into, couldn’t be stronger. Along these lines, let us recap what has already been unearthed and build our case up from there. NO sense reinventing the wheel.

Benghazigate’s stonewall, Egypt’s Brotherhood, its fingerprints and the Blind Sheikh too are prima facie elements. As a result, there is a growing case for the POTUS’s impeachment for arming the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda linked offshoots, which surely is more than a qualifier, not to mention a sundry list of other crimes.

Here comes the UN cesspool, unable to turn tail… 

U.N. ID’s Egyptian Terror network in Benghazi Attack – video embedded

by  on October 24, 2013
The United Nations Security Council has named Muhammad Jamal Abdo Al-Kashif and his Jamal Network as being involved in the attacks on U.S. installations in Benghazi on 9/11/12. It further acknowledges Al-Kashif’s connection to Al-Qaeda’s number one, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who is reported to have worked with former Egyptian president Mohammed Mursi to establish terrorist camps in the Sinai and along the Egyptian / Libyan border.Al-Kashif: Benghazi suspect in Egyptian jail (shouts while holding photo of bin Laden)Al-Kashif: Benghazi suspect in Egyptian jail (shouts while holding photo of bin Laden)We introduce this U.N. document as EXHIBIT AH of our “Ironclad” Report.Via (h/t LWJ), here is what is written about Al-Kashif:

Former top military commander of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad (QE.A.3.01). Since 2011,established Muhammad Jamal Network (MJN) (QE.M.136.13) and terrorist training camps in Egypt and Libya. Conducted MJN’s terrorist activities with support from Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) (QE.A.129.10). Reported to be involved in the attack on the United States Mission in Benghazi, Libya, on 11 Sep. 2012. Headed Nasr City terrorist cell in Egypt in 2012. Linked to Aiman al-Zawahiri (QI.A.6.01) {emphasis ours}

Let’s view this EXHIBT AH, EXHIBT AG, and Addendum N together.

EXHIBT AH: U.N. acknowledges that Al-Kashif, an Egyptian with ties to al-Qaeda’s number one, Ayman al-Zawahiri, was likely involved in the Benghazi attacks.

EXHIBIT AG: U.S. officials, to include the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, acknowledge for the first time that at least two individuals from “Al-Qaeda core” (Al-Zawahiri’s base) were involved in the Benghazi attacks.

Addendum N: Reports of recorded phone conversations between then Egyptian president Mohammed Mursi and Ayman al-Zawahiri to coordinate the release of Jihadi terrorists in order to form terror camps in Sinai and along the Egyptian / Libyan border.

Taken together, these would seem to implicate Mursi even further in the Benghazi attacks.

As the LWJ article points out, while the U.S. State Department recently identified Al-Kashif and his Jamal Network as being terrorist entities, they were not identified as suspects in the Benghazi attacks (EXHIBIT AF) and Al-Kashif was not identified as being part of the Nasr City cell that was broken up in October of 2012.

There are two possible reasons for such omissions being made by State. If al-Zawahiri is the connection between Al-Kashif and Mursi, the U.S. State Department might not want this known. Second, by acknowledging that Al-Kashif was part of the Nasr City cell, State would have to acknowledge Al-Kashif’s subsequent arrest, which would also mean that an Egyptian with ties to Ayman al-Zawahiri and the Muslim Brotherhood who is also a suspect in the Benghazi attacks, is also locked up and no longer on the run.

Calling attention to the fact that Egypt has a Benghazi suspect jailed could increase demands from the American public that the FBI have access to Al-Kashif.

What he might reveal could be beyond explosive.

Now, let’s place more nails, proving Obama Inc’s complicity with Benghazigate and its requisite cover/hush up…but  we need to internalize who the players are and where they ultimately lead – back to Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s (and surrogates) door via Morsi’s Mafia, and the Islamist-in-Chief’s half-brother, Malik Obama!  Still, there is more fuel to add to Obama’s Mid East fires.

Isn’t it time to make this Benghazi Suspect Famous?

Reports of U.S. Intelligence documents being leaked in Egypt show a lead suspect in Benghazi attack met with brother of al-Qaeda leader and was pardoned by then Egyptian president Mohammed Mursi.
Al-Kashif: Time to make this Benghazi suspect famous?Al-Kashif: Time to make this Benghazi suspect famous?Last year, a left-wing group known as Invisible Children – as evidenced by the group’s love forSamantha Power and Cass Sunstein – launched a Kony 2012 campaign that was designed to“make Kony famous” with the help of a viral video. Joseph Kony is an evil warlord who should rightfully be brought to justice but the campaign smacked of political opportunism that included thesale of Kony merchandise with the manufactured assistance of the Hollywood celebrity culture.Even White House press secretary Jay Carney chimed in on the effort.When the elevation of Kony’s public profile is juxtaposed with the absence of such an effort to draw attention to a figure who has been identified by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) as a lead suspect in the 2012 Benghazi attack and even by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist, why isn’t there an effort to make Muhammad Jamal Abdo Al-Kashif famous? After all, he is a lead suspect in the Benghazi attack.You know what else? He’s in jail in Egypt and the vast majority of Americans know neither this nor his name.Why?Perhaps a reading of some relatively recent history can help us answer that question.Via Al-Watan News from one year ago (translated):

Intelligence reports warned of Cairo becoming a new focus for al-Qaeda. This was also revealed by the involvement of elements of the organization in the bombing of a building in Nasr City.

The Egyptian newspaper “Sabah” provided important information in the form of clues that led to the physical presence of members of al-Qaeda in Cairo. These members took advantage of the situation that followed the revolution which made it easier for their presence there. This information refers to the existence of links between the formation of the Nasr City cell and the killing of the American ambassador in Benghazi.

Highlights at the front of the scene name jihadist Muhammad Jamal Abdo Al-Kashif, who was released by President Mursi after the revolution, and who is accused by U.S. intelligence reports of training elements that stormed the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, killing the ambassador and three American diplomats. {emphasis ours}

Note: There is a point of confusion we need to underscore here. Al-Kashif was reportedly freed / released from prison in the weeks after the fall of Hosni Mubarak. This would have been prior to Mursi becoming president (this happened on June 24, 2012). We have seen reports that Mursi pardoned Al-Kashif but have been unable to determine if this means Mursi was involved in Al-Kashif’s physical release or pardoned him later.

Al-Watan also reported on Al-Kashif’s meeting wit Mohammed al-Zawahiri, the brother of al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawwahiri (keep in mind that the cousin of the al-Zawahiri brothers was Mursi’s chief of staff):

Commenting on this information, Dr. Mohammed al-Zawahiri, the brother of Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda leader, denied the presence of cells organized in Egypt, stressing in a statement that al-Qaeda has become just a thought and ended its presence after the killing of Osama bin Laden, and said that “everything on this issue arises just to excite journalists and has no presence on the ground.”

The brother of the al-Qaeda leader revealed that he’d had a meeting with Sheikh Muhammad Jamal Abdo Al-Kashif but only once. Zawahiri said they talked in the affairs of the call (Da’wa) and did not touch the subject of the armed operations. {emphasis ours}

So why doesn’t the Obama administration want to help make Al-Kashif famous like it was willing to do with Kony?

Perhaps it has something to do with why it doesn’t seem interested in making famous the guy responsible for funding and arming Kony; that would be Omar al-Bashir, the president of Sudan who, like Mursi, represents the Muslim Brotherhood.

Benghazi just keeps getting closer and closer and closer to Mursi.

Benghazi just keeps getting closer and closer and closer to Mursi.

Barack Obama’s half-brother Malik works for al-Bashir as Executive Secretary of the Islamic Da’wa Organization (IDO). Making al-Bashir the focus of fame instead of Kony would get too close to Malik Obama.

Making al-Kashif famous would implicate another (former) head of state who represents the Muslim Brotherhood – Mohammed Mursi in Egypt – in the attack in Benghazi that resulted in the deaths of four Americans. It would also implicate the Obama administration, which supported Mursi’s presidency.

The Al-Watan article from one year ago comports with the recent admission by the U.S. State Department that al-Kashif is a terrorist, as well as with the recent UNSC report that says he was involved in the Benghazi attack.

Why isn’t al-Kashif famous yet?

There are few times whereby a “smoking gun” isn’t even necessary to bring the suspects to heel. This is one of those times. The stepping stones have all been laid out, and again, they land straight back, coming full circle, to the POTUS’s door. They drag in his family and his BFF, Morsi’s Brotherhood Mafia.

YET, let us dare not forget the primary, starring role played by the Islamist-in-Chief’s true significant other, Valerie Jarrett. Nothing passes muster without her approval, so when he goes down, she (and several other surrogates, Hill & Huma are inextricably linked) must land in a cell alongside him. More than a worthy cell mate….besides, there is no statute of limitations on treason. Therefore, the entire crew MUST go down for their crimes against the American people. There is no such thing, in crimes of this nature, as “out of sight, out of mind”.

Israel’s Political Leaders (Via Releasing Terrorists/Murderers & So Much More) Betray Zionist Public: Beholden To The “Gang Of The Rule Of Law”. Professor Paul Eidelberg Elucidates

WITH the ongoing “peace” train chugging apace, much has been written about the seemingly “inexplicable”, counter intuitive behavior of Israel’s leaders, particularly regarding their bowing, scraping and appeasing of foreign players who wish the Jewish homeland ill will. Yes, they do, regardless of their sweet nothings. In fact, what kind of “friends” demand that terrorists/murderers be set free, as a condition for “peace” to spring forth? More to the point, what type of “peace” partners MAKE such demands in the first place? As to Israel’s leaders agreeing to such insanity, well, therein necessitates the commentary. The national tragedy.

Time and again, Israel’s leadership outdo themselves through their mendacious (actionable) behaviorbecoming “legal” outlaws in the process – Nullum Crimen Sine Poena: No Crime Without Punishment. A partial listing of recent terrorists/murderers released by PM Netanyahu cries out for Jewish justice – from Israel’s derelict and craven leadership! So much so, stalwart Zionists can’t help but take them to task and upbraid them publicly. To assert that this is a painstaking, depressing and degrading task, well, is to underestimate the gravity of the situation. The “matzav”.

But before we assess the heart of the matter – to garner a clear understanding of how Israel got from there to here – it is worth reviewing some content for contextual heft. Let us now do so, mainly through Israel’s ship of fools and Confronting Israel’s Precarious Future: An Interview With Dr. Martin Sherman.

Onto the (putrid) meat….

The Reported but Ignored Conspiracy of Israel’s Government:

Ariel Sharon, The Role Model of Benjamin Netanyahu

Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Prologue. The time: June 21, 2005. Imagine [then] Prime Minister Ariel Sharon scanning the Jerusalem Post during a trip to Washington. He knows the Post is about the only Israeli newspaper read by American officials. He sees the weekly article penned by the Post’s most respected political analyst, Caroline Glick. Her article is dated June 21, 2005, just a few weeks before Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza. The article is entitled:

A coward for a prime minister”

 The longest chapter in Machiavelli’s The Prince is on conspiracy. A profound but unreported conspiracy was perpetrated in Israel ten years ago. Strange as it may seem, details of the conspiracy were publicized by [former] Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin in a wide-ranging interview of Ariel Sharon by journalist Ari Shavit and published in the June 5, 2003 issue of Ha’aretz Magazine.[1] The interview contains unprecedented and startling revelations. Indeed, Mr. Rivlin exposed what may arguably be called a criminal conspiracy of Israel’s entire Political and Judicial Establishment! What is more, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu current endorsement of a Palestinian state is the consummation of this conspiracy!

Part I. Introduction to the Rivlin Revelations

Ari Shavit entitled his June 5, 2003 interview of Speaker Rivlin “Courting Disaster,” à propos of the policy of territorial retreat or “disengagement” adopted by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. This policy necessitated a legal or judicial foundation. Abandoning Gaza required the forced expulsion of 8,000 Jews from their homes. Since this involved a basic issue of law, it required the cooperation or collaboration of Israel’s Supreme Court.

Shavit’s interview of Rivlin tells the unvarnished story. Speaker Rivlin not only had much to say about Ariel Sharon’s character, but also about the mentality of Supreme Court Justice Aharon Barak. Sharon needed Judge Barak to “legalize” Israel’s Gaza withdrawal, which amounted to a Jewish cleansing policy. Stated more precisely, Sharon needed Judge Barak’s judicial cooperation because the forced expulsion of Jews from their homes in Gaza was clearly a violation of their property rights, indeed, of Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom of which Barak was the principal author!

To legalize the expulsion, the Barak Court simply held that Gaza (as well as Judea and Samaria) are “belligerent occupied territory” to which the Basic Law in question does not apply. But what gave the Supreme Court the authority to designate Gaza “belligerent occupied territory” and ignore that Basic Law?  No such judicial power was granted to the Court by any legislation of the Knesset. Chief Justice Barak simply proclaimed the unprecedented dictum that “everything is justiciable,” a dictum that gave the Court virtually unlimited power. This and more is spelled out in the Rivlin interview of June 5, 2003.

Before examining this extraordinary aspect of the Rivlin interview, the fact that political scientists virtually ignored the revolutionary implications of Barak’s dictum suggests they were either suffering from a cerebral vacuity or that most were reluctant to publicly denounce Sharon’s adoption of Labor’s disengagement policy, even though this policy had been opposed by Israel’s highest military and intelligence officials in public testimony before the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee!

However, rather than impugn the intelligence and patriotism of the political science fraternity, let us exercise our intellects and perhaps amuse ourselves by exploring the more interesting scenario of a publicized but ignored conspiracy, even though it may be nothing more than a case of political cowardice and stupidity, characteristics often attributed to Israel’s government and its advisors. We don’t want to be confused with conspiracy addicts.

Accordingly, to clear the ground for a serious and scholarly inquiry, I shall cite the most relevant parts of Mr. Rivlin’s June 5, 2003 Ha’aretz interview and let the reader himself answer the accusatory question, “What’s going on here in Israel?” I hasten to add that the Rivlin interview is by no means dated, for Israel’s current Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is following the Sharon-Barak legacy so candidly exposed by the Knesset Speaker.

Part II. The Rivlin Revelations

Of its many fascinating revelations, most significant are those involving the character of Israel’s ruling elites and the authenticity of Israeli democracy.  Only two need concern us:

  • Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was a “closet leftist,” and
  • Chief Justice Aharon Barak’s dictum that “everything is justiciable” was nothing less than a “putsch,” a coup d’état.”[2]

It was precisely the Barak dictum that “everything is justiciable” that allowed the Court to “legalize” the government’s “unilateral disengagement” policy and the consequent expulsion of Jews from Gaza. This dictum, which virtually transformed Israel into a judicial dictatorship, violates the democratic orientation of the prophets of Israel, who were the primary defenders of the rights of the Jewish people vis-à-vis their government.

For the sake of clarity, I will divide Rivlin’s far-ranging interview into sections and inject only a few explanatory remarks.

Ari Shavit’s Interview of Speaker Rivlin

Shavit asks Rivlin: “Is [Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon tormented by his personal responsibility for the establishment of the settlements and the need to deal with his mistakes?”

Rivlin: “Whereas in the personal realm Sharon is a very sensitive person whose eyes often grow moist, in the national realm he is entirely without emotions. He has no inhibitions. He is a Mapainik without inhibitions, referring to the Mapai party, the precursor of Labor, which was known for its rampant [left-wing (PE)] pragmatism. When he forms an opinion, nothing will stop him. No sentiment and no human commitment will hold him back.”

“Rivlin himself,” Shavit continues, “is agitated and of two minds about the Sharonist shift. In the room of the Jerusalem hotel in which we meet, his voice cracks and his eyes shine as he talks about the shattered dream of the ‘national camp’ and the loss of the Land of Israel. Even though he understands the logic that is guiding his political patron, Prime Minister [Sharon], he is not willing to accept it. He, Reuven Rivlin, will never lift a finger to hand over the Land of Israel. Even if he remains utterly alone, he will prefer to show allegiance to the lost ideal of Ze’ev Jabotinsky and Menachem Begin and to the integrity of the homeland. It is only after some time … that he begins to speak with the same fervor about the subject we are here to discuss: theconstitutional revolution, Supreme Court President Aharon Barak and the threat posed to democracy precisely by the Israeli establishments. The speaker of the Knesset does not mince his words. He talks bluntly and directly about the things that are disturbing him and making him lose sleep [emphasis added (PE)].”

B. The Relationship between Rivlin and Sharon

Shavit: “Ruby Rivlin, you are very close to Sharon. You hold intimate conversations with him. Where is he taking us?”

Rivlin: “Arik is trying to achieve a solution that will put him into the history books as a person who fomented a historical turning point – like Ben-Gurion in 1947, Begin in 1979 and Yitzhak Rabin in 1993. But Arik also understands in the clearest way possible that he cannot achieve a permanent settlement that will satisfy the Arabs. He understands that no one on the Arab side will agree to forgo the areas that he regards as essential for the defense of the State of Israel.

“I refer mainly to areas in the Jordan Rift Valley and to the strip running from Arad to Jerusalem, in the Dead Sea region. Arik is therefore aiming for a temporary settlement. But the temporary settlement he has in mind is far-reaching. He truly intends the establishment of a Palestinian state with territorial contiguity and a true separation between us and 3.5 million Palestinians.”

Shavit: “Are you saying that the moderate Sharon we have seen … is the real Sharon?”

Rivlin: “Undoubtedly. Whether I like it or not, the moderate Arik is authentic. Look, sometimes he zigzags. Sometimes he says things ambivalently, which can be interpreted either way. But to my chagrin, he has passed the point of no return. I can tell you and your readers with certainty that Arik Sharon is resolute in his position that a settlement has to be reached immediately. When he talks about the end of the occupation and about painful concessions, he is not pulling a fast one and he is not lying – unfortunately.”

Shavit: “When did you grasp that this is it, that he crossed the Rubicon?”

Rivlin: “In October. One night he called me into his office and showed me the road map and asked me for my comments. At that moment I understood that we were approaching the moment of truth. That he’s really going for it.”

Shavit: “So deep down he really has remained a Mapainik?”

Rivlin: “Without a doubt. In the end, Arik believes in security above all and is a salient pragmatist, a disciple of Ben-Gurion….

“Look, Arik Sharon has a doctrine of life that is far more coherent than what journalists give him credit for. It’s true that in the past he moved from one place to another. I myself was critical of him for changing certain positions for political purposes. But people here didn’t understand that from the day he assumed the post of prime minister, his security and political outlook was very crystallized.

“He didn’t know, and he still doesn’t know, how to reach a permanent settlement, but he is determined to recognize a Palestinian state and reach a settlement. Think about the fact that when he says the occupation is hard for the people of Israel he is really saying that the occupation corrupts. That we have the right to the land but that we can’t realize it. In this, he is actually accepting the ideology of the left.”

Shavit: “So the person who heads the Likud today is really a Ben-Gurionist?”

Rivlin: “Arik is definitely a Ben-Gurionist. In our conversations, he laughs and calls me the ideologue, and I laugh and call him [Ben-Gurion’s] disciple. But there’s nothing funny about it. It’s completely true. And for me it’s rough, because since October I have been wracked by an inner conflict between my uncompromising belief that all of Zion is ours, and my close friendship with the prime minister. That’s why, when he offered me a cabinet post in his government, I preferred to become Speaker of the Knesset. I told him openly: Arik, we are now on an irreversible collision course. You are a disciple of Ben-Gurion and I am a disciple of Jabotinsky. You are a pragmatist and I cannot free myself of my belief. I will not convert my religion, I told him. I have no intention of converting.”

C. Historic Earthquake

Shavit: “Let’s get back to him. If he is truly serious, as you describe it, there will be a settlement within half a year to a year. That’s not just talk. There will really be a historic earthquake here.

Rivlin: “For many months I’ve been telling my journalist friends that an earthquake is happening. Arik Sharon is serious about the words he is speaking. And the moment you embark on that road, there is no knowing where it will lead, because once a sacrosanct principle is shattered, anything goes. The process is very powerful.”

Shavit: “Give me a scenario. What’s going to happen?”

Rivlin: “There is one thing on which Arik will make no concessions: terrorism. On this subject Arik has no doubts and everyone can trust him, including Likudniks. If there is terrorism, he will not hand over territory. [More Jews were murdered by Arab terrorists during Sharon’s reign than under that of any other prime minister. (PE)]. But if we actually reach a situation in which a solution is found for terrorism, and there are signs that the Palestinians are trying to meet us halfway, he will establish a Palestinian state in the territories held by the Palestinians with territorial contiguity, which could be very significant from the point of view of the Israeli government’s attitude toward the sacred principle of non-evacuation of settlements.”

Shavit: “Are you saying that Sharon will evacuate settlements already in the stage of the establishment of the temporary Palestinian state?”

Rivlin: “It is definitely possible that an impossible friction between certain settlements and the need for a situation in which the Arabs will not pass through our territory and in which we will not rub shoulders with them – that this will thrust him into a situation in which he will make an Arik-style decision that it’s possible that settlements will have to be evacuated.”

Shavit: “I ask again, Ruby Rivlin: Has Arik Sharon accepted the fact that he will evacuate settlements?”

Rivlin: “What he has accepted is that for us to live within borders that make movement possible for them other than through our territory, it will be necessary to reach a decision to evacuate a number of settlements.”

Shavit: “How many settlements are we talking about?”

Rivlin: “When Arik assumed the office of prime minister, and even earlier, in discussions he held with [former prime minister] Ehud Barak, about 17 settlements [in this category] were identified.”

Shavit: “When Sharon mentions painful concessions, is he referring to these 17 settlements?”

Rivlin: “He sees them above all. Arik has made clear and explained a number of times that their evacuation is necessary in order to stabilize some sort of way in which we will be able to reach some sort of settlement. Today we have cantons. Those cantons will be unified and connected. Connecting the cantons will necessitate this blow to the settlement project. It obliges the evacuation of about 17 settlements.”

Shavit: “Are you telling me that Sharon has reconciled himself to the fact that he will evacuate 17 settlements already at the state of the interim agreement?”

Rivlin: “Yes. When he talks about painful concessions, he is talking about a concrete map that some of the Yesha people [referring to the Yesha council of Jewish settlements in the territories (brackets in original] know about and that he has already talked to them about.”

Shavit: “And does Sharon believe that an evacuation on that scale will bring about calm and conciliation?”

Rivlin: “Sharon thinks that it’s necessary to build some sort of relations of trust. Even though, knowing Sharon as I do, I don’t see him placing any trust in the Arab side” (Italics added PE).

Shavit: Not even in Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas]?

Rivlin: “Not even in Abu Mazen.”

Shavit: “So there is a basic problem in placing trust in the Arabs?”

Rivlin: “He has no trust in them (italics PE). Arik doesn’t like them much because he doesn’t believe them. But Arik knows that negotiations are not conducted only with people you believe. Negotiations are conducted in order to solve problems [!?! (PE)]. Look, Arik does not view the Arabs from a position of superiority. He sees the Arabs as people to whom we owe nothing. We owe nothing to anyone who wants to attack and kill us. That side of the issue is of no interest to him. So when he talks about 3.5 million Palestinians, it is not because of their suffering, but because he has reached the conclusion that to go on ruling them is impractical.”

Shavit: “Will he evacuate Netzarim [an isolated settlement in the Gaza Strip]?” (Bracket in original.)

Rivlin: “Arik is ready to pay the price in places where it is necessary to guarantee the Palestinians continuity. There is no such problem at Netzarim. At Netzarim, the problem is that of Netzarim, not of the Palestinians. Therefore he is more accepting of the need to evacuate [settlements] in the Binyamin region than in the Gaza Strip. But the American pressure in the direction of the Gaza District is very heavy” (brackets in original).

Shavit: “And what about the permanent settlement? Will he not forgo the Jordan Rift Valley and the Gaza Strip and the strip between Arad and Jerusalem even as part of a final peace agreement?”

Rivlon: “In my opinion, he will be more adamant on that than on the question of Jerusalem. That is his casus belli. As far as I know Arik, he will not compromise on that issue. To him, these are territories without which it is impossible to defend Israel. But a situation is liable to develop in which the decision about them will not be his to make” (italics PE).

D. New Sounds about Jerusalem

Shavit: “Is it possible that Sharon will also compromise on Jerusalem?”

Rivlin: “I don’t want to believe that. Arik is suffused with a mystical belief about Jerusalem. But when you embark on the road, you will be asked – Will you now ruin everything just because of Jerusalem? I have a musical ear. In one of his recent speeches I heard new sounds about Jerusalem. They worried me.”

Shavit: “So what you fear is that the process will pull him in further than what he himself supposes?”

Rivlin: “When you embark on a trans-Atlantic flight and the pilot informs you that you have crossed the ocean, you can no longer go back to Europe, you have to land in North America. That is Arik’s situation today, without a doubt. Politically, too. He took the risk knowingly and willingly, and he knows he will have no choice but to land on the other side….”

Shavit: “Is it your assessment that the very course Sharon has embarked on will in the end lead to the 1967 borders or something approximating them?”

Rivlin: “That’s more than an apprehension. That’s a clear scenario. Unequivocally (emphasis added (PE). Because once we live in a global village and the American sheriff is the sheriff of the whole world, you can be the world’s greatest ideologue, but you have to take account of the political situation. And from the moment a crack appears in your belief, the crack gets wider and wider. You get into a state of mind that is not amenable to change [emphasis added (PE)].

What Arik is now doing is causing the national movement to largely shed its basic tenets. Even principles that Arik promised me he would uphold just a few months ago have been eroded. We are entering a process here that does not make conditional the end of one stage before the transition to the next stage. We have already recognized the Palestinians’ right to a state and we are talking about the Saudi plan and the right of return. It’s all up for grabs. So it’s clear that even if there are things that Arik really will not forgo, his successor will continue what he began.” …

 [E] Aharon Barak

 Shavit: “Ruby Rivlin, your attack on the Supreme Court was unprecedented. What brought it on? Why do you perceive the court as being so dangerous?”

Rivlin: “In 1992 I was a member of the [Knesset’s] Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, which formulated and passed the Basic Law on Human Dignity and Freedom. So I know what the idea behind that law was. The idea was to consolidate the rights of people insofar as they are people and the rights of the minority insofar as it is a minority. Under no circumstances was the idea to transfer legislative authority from the Knesset to another body. No one even talked about changing the balance of power between the Knesset and the court (emphasis PE).

“So a few months later, when Dan Meridor declared that a constitutional revolution had taken place, I was stunned. Dan Meridor is one of the followers of Justice Barak [Aharon Barak, the president of the Supreme Court]. Follower is a nice word. I don’t want to use a different word, heaven forbid. But unlike him, I thought – like several former Supreme Court presidents – that there had been no constitutional revolution here. No such thing.

Yet as time passed and the court moved ahead with great deliberation and by creeping annexation took over more and more powers, I realized that not only had there been a constitutional revolution, there had been a coup d’état. (emphasis added (PE). [Rivlin continuing:]I do not accept this revolution. In my view, the Knesset never approved it and therefore it is taking place contrary to the democratic spirit and without authorization.”

Shavit: “‘Coup d’état’ is a serious term to use in this context; it means a putsch” (emphasis PE).

Rivlin: “Correct. And that is the term I used at the President’s Residence last month. Supreme Court President Barak was very hurt by the expression, but in my opinion, when a group of people sit in a room and say that from this moment we are the power, that is a putsch. You tell me: Isn’t it a putsch? It’s a putsch. After all, they did not receive authorization from anyone. They did not consult with anyone. They created a situation of going ahead and seizing power.”

Shavit: “Do you see this as the imposition of a particular worldview on the public by means of an improper procedure? Do you see a move to establish a kind of enlightened absolutism?”

Rivlin: “Yes. It’s as clear as day. Aharon Barak says that we have to distinguish between the Knesset as framing and the Knesset as legislating. He says that if you don’t frame a constitution, I will set forth a constitution instead of you. But who gave him the right? Who gave him the right?”

Shavit: “What you are actually saying, then, is that the whole constitutional move that Justice Barak led in the past decade is illegitimate?”

Rivlin: “Of course. On the basis of the false claim of a constitutional revolution, a new reality was created here. A new government was forged that is above everyone: both above the Knesset and above the government and above the law, too. Take note that the court has effectively placed itself above the law….”

F.  Threat to Democracy

Shavit: “Do you really believe that the court is operating contrary to the democratic spirit and contrary to the values of democracy?”

Rivlin: “Without a doubt. The court is disrupting the whole order of government. I will give you an … example. On the issue of the Landau report [a 1987 report about the Shin Bet security service’s interrogation methods, drawn up by a commission headed by Justice Moshe Landau, a former president of the Supreme Court], Aharon Barak comes and says, Look, even if all 120 members of the Knesset tell me that in the case of a human ‘ticking bomb,’ moderate physical pressure can be used [as the Landau Commission recommended in certain interrogations], I will strike it down. In other words, Barak is placing himself above 120 legislators. He says, If I think it’s wrong, I don’t care what the Knesset thinks ….

Shavit: “Still, why now? What decisions by the court made you react so harshly?”

Rivlin: “There was of course the ruling by a Magistrate’s Court that brought the process ad absurdum. When a junior judge allows himself to invalidate a law of the Knesset, you realize that we have reached a state of total madness. But in my opinion what was even more serious was the decision by the High Court of Justice on the question of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem [when armed Palestinians took refuge there during Operation Defensive Shield in May, 2002 (brackets in original).

“The very fact that the court did not kick out the petitioners and agreed to get into a discussion about the conduct of war policy in wartime proved to me that the court is now placing itself above the government, too. Because the moment the court starts weighing the considerations of the government in matters about which only the government can decide and for which it alone bears responsibility, it’s all over. The court has actually turned itself into a meta-government.

“Therefore, I reached the conclusion that someone had to tell His Honor Justice Barak that there is a limit. Someone had to tell him, It’s not your affair. It’s the affair of the government.”

Shavit: “Do you seriously intend to curb the power of the court by means of legislation?”

Rivlin: “Definitely. It has to be done. We are talking about a burning problem. We are talking about a situation in which they are already talking about a requiem for the law, about how the judge overcame the law. And we are talking about a situation in which the judicial system is endangering the democratic system in Israel because its people are sure that they are better than others. What’s going on here, after all? Effectively there is no longer any law here because the law changes every minute according to the interpretation of the court based on some sort of meta-norm that has never been defined, so no one knows what it is. The result is a situation in which a very small group of people has arrogated to itself the authority to decide values and rules and even policy for a whole country and for a whole public that never gave them any such authorization.”….

Therefore I tell you that they are a gang …. A gang like any other gang. Except that the name of this gang is the gang of the rule of law” (emphasis PE).


[1] For the full text, see IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis Website:

[2] This dictum effectively nullified Israel’s Penal Law governing treason, since it enabled the Court to legalize the yielding of Jewish land contrary to the Penal Law governing treason, which law defines four kinds of acts as treason:

1.  acts which “impair the sovereignty” of  the  State of Israel—section 97(a);

2.  acts which “impair the integrity” of the  State of Israel—section 97(b);

3.  acts under section 99 which give assistance to an “enemy” in war against Israel, which the Law specifically states includes a terrorist organization;

4.  acts in section 100 which evince an intention or resolve to commit one of the acts prohibited by sections 97 and 99.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Quest For Global Dominance – An Interview With Adina Kutnicki

My latest interview at Inquisitr…gifted to my readers.

Hill & Her ACTUAL BODIES/SKELETONS: The Pile Up At Her Door, As She Positions For 2016…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Oh dear, doesn’t Hill have any compassion for alternative media, those of us who operate against all odds, as we attempt to beat back against the lying “mainstream” PC media in a concerted uphill climb? Doesn’t appear to be the case. Damn her…so much garbage to reveal…not enough hours in the day.

Starting with six degrees of separation, this site reveals Hill’s penchant for “swinging” both ways, even as the so called purveyors of “truth” finally catch up to speed, asking the “(in)delicate” question, from even as far away as Israel. Hey, welcome aboard. Even so, if not for Hill’s ” special relationship” with a Muslim Brotherhood operative, Huma Abedina dangerous diva in her own right, the above orientation would resonate on a lower pitch, even if disturbing on its face.

YET, aside from her nuzzling with foxy looking, sly acting Huma, there are so many other skeletons, actual bodies to unearth, courtesy of Hill and Bill! Where, oh where, to begin…perhaps, let’s start with Billy boy’s Presidency…and his diddling with an intern, yucky as it is to report on, it really is the least of it. Besides, their libidos constantly lead these two deviants astray, but they hardly skip a beat, even after hubby’s impeachment! Have you ever seen/heard anything like it?

This duo is simply incapable of being chagrined, chastened nor sidelined, and they really are akin to two “Teflon Dons”. Even her stint at State was marred by more than the usual shenanigans, as pedophilia (and other risky, money business) rocked Clinton’s staff at State

Could it get any worse? You bet. As revealed in a previous commentary, the Clinton machine is like a Mafia (no insult meant to the Mob) mop up crew, one which engages in a multiplicity of cover ups – dead bodies included !

47 Bodies Left in the Wake of Hillary Clinton: Part 1

Hillary ClintonHillary Clinton is circling the wagons and salivating over a presidential run in 2016: Hillary accrued power and her life-long dream of being POTUS is nearing.

But not so fast Hillary. Take a look at the bodies mysteriously left in Clinton’s wake!


1 – James McDougal

James McDougal

Convicted Whitewater partner of the Clintons who died of an apparent heart attack, while in solitary confinement. He was a key witness in Ken Starr’s investigation.

The Baltimore Sun’s Carl M. Cannon wrote on March 9,1998:

James B. McDougal, a former Clinton business partner who had been cooperating with independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr in the Whitewater investigation, died yesterday in a federal prison hospital in Texas. He was 58.

McDougal was serving a 3 1/2 -year sentence after Starr’s office successfully prosecuted him on fraud charges stemming from the collapse of Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan, a McDougal-owned Arkansas thrift that cost taxpayers $60 million when it failed.

His death appears to reduce the legal risks to President Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton, and was a clear setback to Starr and his prosecutors, who huddled in their offices last night after McDougal’s death was announced.

McDougal, who suffered from heart disease and blocked arteries, died of cardiac arrest, the Justice Department said. He had often predicted that his health wouldn’t hold out long enough for him ever to be free again.

At the White House, the president issued a statement referring to the early years of his friendship with McDougal.

“I am saddened to learn about Jim McDougal’s death today,” Clinton said. “I have good memories of the years we worked together in Arkansas, and I extend my condolences to his family.”

The key accusation against Clinton in the Whitewater land deal phase of Starr’s investigation centers on a claim by former municipal judge David Hale, who maintains Clinton urged him in 1986 to seek a fraudulent $300,0000 government-backed loan.

The money was never repaid, and prosecutors alleged that some of it was used to prop up the Whitewater Development Corp., a firm co-owned by McDougal, his then-wife, Susan, and the Clintons.

As noted by Star-Telegram Staff Writer Jack Douglas Jr. and WND:

When Jim McDougal was taken out of solitary, instead of attempting to defibrillate his heart with equipment on hand at the facility, he was driven over to John Peter Smith hospital. Not the closest hospital to the Fort Worth Federal Medical Center, John Peter Smith hospital is a welfare hospital, where (in the words of one local) ,”They let interns practice on deadbeats”.


PAGE 1 PAGE 2 PAGE 3 PAGE 4 PAGE 5 PAGE 6 PAGE 7 PAGE 8 PAGE 9 PAGE 10continue reading until page 10, but do take a moment to get up, stretch your legs, perhaps find a snack in the cupboard and prepare a cup of coffee/tea. You will need some energy boosts to keep on trucking. Folks, please stay away from inebriating alcoholic spirits, you want all your faculties intact to absorb their criminality. It will be worth your time. Pinkie swears. Even those who think they know, all there is about Hill and Bill, likely don’t.

Alas, we all recognize that a graveyard full of their crimes will neither give this criminal duo pause nor stop their associates from shilling/pandering for them. And if one wants to compare them to another twosome, perhaps Bonnie and Clyde comes to mind, but some may rightfully suggest that this is a huge understatement. After all, Hill and Bill have the power to upend America, if they get another shot at the People’s House!

Do Americans really want to go down that (Clintonite) road again? More specifically, can America afford to?

IRAN HEADS DOWN TO THE TRIP WIRE: Month(s) Away From Bomb-Making Ability. DECISION TIME For PM Netanyahu. Obama Already Made His…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

WHETHER one month or three months away – blips to the countdown – the fact of the matter is that Iran’s genocidal regime is within spitting distance of acquiring the ultimate weapons of mass destruction.The following commentaries lay it on the line: Iran’s triumph is almost assured through assists given by the leader of the free worldas such, the Islamist-in-Chief effectively surrendered the free world through the “disarming” of America and Israel. Thus, he is gifting the mad mullahs control of western civilization. This is NO exaggeration.

As a result, surely spending time jaw-jawing is the LAST tack any leader of the free world would take, especially since Iran’s mullahs have been playing rope-a-dope for decades. And yes, diplomacy, if at all doable, is preferable to war. But wishing doesn’t make it so. It’s “usefulness” has LONG since passed.

MORE on this global shaking event….

Israel issues warning on report on Iran bomb

Oren Dorell, USA TODAY October 25, 2013

A new report that says Iran may need as little as a month to produce enough uranium for a nuclear bomb is further evidence for why Israel will take military action before that happens, an Israeli defense official said Friday.

A new report that says Iran may need as little as a month to produce enough uranium for a nuclear bomb is further evidence for why Israel will take military action before that happens, an Israeli defense official said Friday.

“We have made it crystal clear – in all possible forums, that Israel will not stand by and watch Iran develop weaponry that will put us, the entire Middle East and eventually the world, under an Iranian umbrella of terror,” Danny Danon, Israel’s deputy defense minister told USA TODAY.

Iran is developing and installing new and advanced centrifuges that enable Iran to enrich even low-enriched uranium to weapons grade uranium needed for nuclear weapons within weeks, Danon said.

“This speedy enrichment capability will make timely detection and effective response to an Iranian nuclear breakout increasingly difficult,” he said.

“Breakout” refers to the time needed to convert low-enriched uranium to weapons-grade uranium. On Thursday, the Institute for Science and International Security issued a report stating that Iran could reach that breakout in as little as one month based in part on Iran’s own revelations about its nuclear program.

“If they use all their centrifuges … and their stockpiles of low- and medium-enriched uranium, that would take one to 1.6 months,” said David Albright, president of the institute and a former inspector for the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency.

The report comes as the White House is trying to persuade Congress not to go ahead with a bill to stiffen sanctions on Iran to force it to open up its program to inspection. The White House on Thursday invited senate staffers to a meeting on Iran strategy for negotiations that are to resume next month with Iran, it said.

In discussing Iran strategy, President Obama has said Iran is a year or more away from having enough enriched uranium to make a bomb.

Bernadette Meehan, an spokeswoman for the administration’s National Security Council, said the intelligence community maintains “a number of assessments” regarding potential time frames for Iran to produce enough weapons-grade uranium for one weapon or a testable nuclear device.

“We continue to closely monitor the Iranian nuclear program and its stockpile of enriched uranium,” Meehan said.

In the report, Albright said negotiations with Iran should focus on lengthening Iran’s breakout time. ISIS’ analysis is based on the latest Iranian and United Nations reports on Iran’s centrifuge equipment for producing nuclear fuel and its nuclear fuel stockpiles.

Iran’s stockpile of medium-enriched uranium has nearly doubled in a year’s time and its number of centrifuges has expanded from 12,000 in 2012 to 19,000 today.

Sen. Mark Kirk, an Illinois Republican whose Senate Banking Committee is considering legislation to tighten Iran sanctions, said the report shows that Iran is expanding its nuclear capabilities under the cover of negotiations.

“The Senate should move forward immediately with a new round of sanctions to prevent Iran from acquiring an undetectable breakout capability,” he said. The House has already passed legislation to toughen sanctions.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has said his country has no interest in nuclear weapons but that producing nuclear fuel is Iran’s right. However, Iran has blocked international inspectors from some suspected nuclear facilities, making it impossible to determine whether it is complying with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty it has signed.

United Nations inspectors say they have found evidence of a weapons program in violation of Iran’s commitment under the treaty. The USA and the U.N. Security Council have implemented economic sanctions on Iran to persuade it abide by its obligation and verify it is not developing a bomb.

Albright says negotiations with Iran should focus on establishing protocols that lengthen the time period that it would take Iran to convert uranium to weapons grade uranium.

“An essential finding is that they are currently too short and shortening further,” stated the report by the Institute for Science and International Security.

While others see the light, some of them lay it on the line, not unlike similar conclusions drawn at this American-Israeli’s site on numerous occasions. Here’s one such stark rendering: 

October 8, 2013—Rouhani Rope-a-Dope and a Trip Down Memory Lane! 

Rouhani Rope-a-Dope and a Trip Down Memory Lane!

By Ambassador Henry F. Cooper

October 8, 2013

Last week, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani pursued a “charm offensive” in New York including in his address to the United Nations General Assembly. Because he previously diverted interests in the West with seemingly cooperative initiatives while Iran continued enriching uranium, we should be skeptical of his promises not to build nuclear weapons and mate them to ballistic missiles that could reach Israel, our European allies and the United States. He wants the West to lift its sanctions on Iran—while we, and Israel, have insisted that Iran must not gain a nuclear weapons capability. Hopefully, U.S. and other Western leaders will not be taken in by Rouhani’s soft rhetoric. Stay tuned.

October 8, 2013 - Addition

Mohamed Ali’s “rope-a-dope” strategy, used to defeat George Foreman for the Heavyweight Title by letting the ropes absorb much of energy from Foreman’s punches while counter-punching only enough to avoid having the referee stop the fight—Foreman tired, made mistakes and gave Ali an opening for a knockout. Seems like a fair metaphor for Iran and Iranian President Rouhani’s likely strategy in dealing with President Obama. As Senator John McCain noted, it worked like a charm for Russia’s President Putin to exploit Obama’s bluster and inept handling of Syria to gain the initiative in the Middle East, so why not for Russia’s other main ally in the Middle East—Iran, and Rouhani in particular?

The rope-a-dope continues for Syria—as much of the media hypes hopeful interactions with Syria’s chemical weapon stores. Seldom mentioned is that it early was noted that Syria provided information on its chemical weapons stores that did not square with U.S. estimates (previously shared as the basis for the new agreement brokered by Russia). Secretary of State John Kerry tries, with notoriety but little success, to add sound verification measures to Russia’s brokered agreement.  While we await all the fine print, we should expect that Secretary Kerry’s “enforceable” verification objective likely is a figment of his imagination.  Any notable improvement will have to be approved by the U.N. Security Council—where Russia and China can use their veto power to block any measure they don’t like—don’t hold your breath waiting for anything of note on that front.

Regarding Iran and its PresidentHassan Rouhani, I could not agree more with Charles Krauthammer’s September 27th Washington Post article that presaged Rouhani’s “moderate” antics demonstrated during his charm offensive in New York City while visiting to address the United Nations General Assembly. I’m pleased that his excellent article notes many of the points of my emails: September 24—“Don’t Believe your Eyes,” June 18—“Hope for the Best and Prepare for the Worst” and August 13—“Definitely a Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing.” In one of his memorable phrases, Krauthammer wrote, “Such is their contempt for us that they don’t even hide their strategy: Spin the centrifuges while spinning the West.” And he shared a few more pertinent points that should inform those who hope for the best but believe we must prepare for the worst if we are to ever come close to achieving our objectives in the Middle East.

Implications from a Short Trip Down Memory Lane.

I first met Charles Krauthammer at Ambassador Max Kampelman’s home in Georgetown when I was Max’s Deputy and he led the Geneva Nuclear and Space Talks with the former Soviet Union.  He, like Max, was—and may still be as far as I know—a defense minded Democrat after the mold of Washington’s Senator Scoop Jackson. (Actually, Max was Hubert Humphrey’s only staffer when he first came to town as Minnesota’s junior senator.)  I’ve been among Charles’s admirers ever since, even on rare occasions when I have disagreed with him. 

Many of Charles’ views on negotiating with adversaries are ones I shared with Max, my boss; and they helped guide our Geneva talks with the Soviets—which led to the first arms control agreements actually to reduce nuclear arms. We, in turn, were privileged to work for President Ronald Reagan, who also emphasized a few overarching principles—among them, that we should:

  • Understand those with whom we negotiate—especially how they see the world from their point-of-view, and
  • Be prepared to speak the truth to all in polite but unapologetic terms.

Under the first principle, Reagan understood Soviet strategic perspectives about which the preceding administration made hopeful but incorrect assumptions. Consequently, the first thing President Reagan did was to insure that we would negotiate from a position of strength. He rejected previous détente policies that had guided U.S. strategic thinking for years—noting memorably that his objective was that, “We win, they lose.”  The preceding administration had hollowed-out our military while negotiating an unverifiable Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) Treaty that legitimized a massive Soviet build-up of nuclear arms while ours atrophied. (It was never ratified, since Reagan and many others on his team rejected it.) While ignoring much criticism from the liberal elite, Reagan withdrew from negotiations for a year, while initiating a major strategic modernization program, before beginning new Strategic Arms Reduction Talks (START) aimed at negotiating from a position of strength actually to reduce nuclear arms—not legitimizing a build-up as had been the result of previous mostly unverifiable treaties.

On the second principle, Reagan memorably overruled his diplomats in speaking the truth about and to the Soviets—for example in calling the Soviet Union the “evil empire” . . . which it definitely was . . . and later in Berlin challenging, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” His policies and loyal supporters at home and abroad were most pleased to see the breakup of the Soviet Union, which Russia’s President Vladimir Putin called the “greatest geopolitical disaster of the 20th century” . . . lest there be any doubt about his objectives today in the Middle East or elsewhere.

President Obama should note these principles—so far given short shrift by him and his negotiators. I want to mention just a few specifics.

With respect to our dealings with Russia, the Obama administration has regressed to a world in some ways like the one President Reagan inherited, with a so-called New START treaty that cut our strategic arms while legitimizing still increasing Russian nuclear arms, a modernization program reminiscent of the 1970s Soviet arms control world that Reagan inherited. In reality, it is a New SALT treaty, not a New START treaty—Reagan and his negotiators would not have produced such an unbalanced treaty. And President Obama’s promise, last Fall, of “flexibility” on missile defenses after being re-elected  does not bode well for U.S. interests in current and future talks with Russia that could link U.S. concessions with things we want from Russia—e.g., including in the Middle East where our handling of Syria has left Putin in charge.

A complication in our dealings with Russia is that we should be confronting another “evil empire,” to use Reagan’s description of the Soviet Union as the then preeminent Communist power seeking world domination. We could and should use that same term to describe Islamic true believers who think that under sharia law which American Islamists see as preeminent even over the U.S. Constitution, that their mission is to reign supreme over all others in a global Caliphate—to impose their beliefs on all others by force if needed, potentially to kill them if they refuse to submit.  In particular, this is the context for Iran’s mullahs calling Israel the “Little Satan” and America the “Great Satan,” and threatening to destroy both.

Oblivious to an Existential Threat?

The Obama administration seems to ignore these realities—to put it kindly. For example, the Director of National Intelligence absurdly testified that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is a “largely secular organization, which has eschewed violence.” Try telling that to the Egyptians who threw out elected President Mohamed Morsi because he gave preeminence to the Brotherhood. Or consider the Brotherhood’s motto: “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest aspiration.”

The administration also has limited the flow of information about this Islamist threat to the front lines of those confronting it—whether on the battlefield, in diplomatic actions, or even within Washington’s halls of government. And many senators and representatives have ridiculed efforts of their colleagues to smoke out this poison within our ranks. For a comprehensive and referenced discussion of this threat, see the recent Gatestone Institute article by Claire Lopez, formerly a career operations officer with the Central Intelligence Agency, the conclusion of which is quoted below.

October 8, 2013 I

Bottom Lines for Iran.

We need to understand threats confronting us and speak the truth to power about them—especially as they mature and grow. While we still retain global power, not effectively countering “rope-a-dope” strategies being employed against us is a danger, especially re. Iran—we are not dealing effectively with its existential threat to all we hold dear.

Last week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu laid out his related concerns in a speech to the United Nations General Assembly—and, I am sure, in private to President Obama.  They are entirely consistent with Charles Krauthammer’s—and mine. He made clear that Israel will do all in its power to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons—and urged that the international community—particularly the United States—should not be taken in by Iranian deceptions intended to persuade the West to reduce it sanctions on trade with Iran while continuing to reduce the time for an Iranian breakout capability to producing nuclear weapons—already within a period of months.

As Netanyahu noted, Iran has intercontinental range ballistic missiles (ICBMs) that can reach the United States—therefore, we should be as concerned as Israel about Iran getting nuclear weapons that could be mated to such missiles to attack us as well as Israel. As we have noted previously, Iran (and also North Korea) has also launched satellites capable of carrying nuclear weapons to attack any place on Earth—they head south, and on their initial passage over the United States could detonate a nuclear weapon and expose the entire continental U.S. to an EMP. Today, we are undefended against this threat.

In short, we should do what we can not to fall prey to Rouhani and other rope-a-dope maneuvers—not to mention those of Iran’s real leader—Rouhani’s boss, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Following Rouhani’s return from New York last week, Khamenei let everyone know on a state TV broadcast that “We support the government’s diplomatic moves including the New York trip because we have faith in them [Rouhani et al].  But some of what happened in New York was not appropriate” . . . presumably a reference to his 15 minute telephone call from President Obama in which Rouhani may have stepped over some line of concern.  And Khamenei made clear that he did not trust Americans—that feeling is, or should be, mutual.  Perhaps there’s a little “good cop, bad cop” going on here?

October 8, 2013 III


Continue reading the whole analysis atop the linked article!

Understood within the above prism, cogently laid out by High Frontier, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist (besides, how many of us are endowed with such brain power…not too many) to figure out the calculus: Iran is Allah-bent on gaining the bomb – at ALL costs, even if their citizens have to starve in the process – and the Islamist-in-Chief is similarly inclined to gift it to them. No sense in pussyfooting otherwise.

One either tends towards reality-based thinking, or not. But when one lives in close proximity to hell fire, continuing to believe in fantastical conclusions is a non-starter. Not sure about others, but would rather be prepared – as best as possible – for eventual chaos, rather than blindsided.

For many unfathomable reasons, PM Netanyahu allowed half of world Jewry to be boxed in, all the way down to the bewitching hour. While his concentration should not be distracted by this and that (well deserved) smack – during this MOST perilous juncture in Israel’s history, as Jerusalem prepares to act at this twilight hour – surely his decision to hitch Israel’s fate in line with Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s “promises” will be revealed as an out-sized national/global disaster that should never have occurred!

Rest assured, history will vilify both leaders. One sought to bring the west to its knees, whereas the other’s spinelessness led Israel (half of world Jewry, mere decades after the Holocaust) right down to the “trip wire” 


AMERICA’S ACADEMIC CESSPOOL: Constitutional Adherents Dare Not Speak…”Queers”, Other Grievance-Mongering Groups, Hoist Your Banners! Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Only in today’s America, a nation predicated/birthed on freedom and liberty, is it acceptable to dictate what is “tolerable/acceptable” and what is not. Mind you, the issue is not whether or not one is free to violate civilized societal norms, but whether one can even advocate on behalf of America’s fundamental foundations. Its moorings. Oh dear…how far the national discourse has sunk – straight into the cesspool.

Whereas leftist imbued academia offers “safe” places/zones to advocate on behalf of every “ism” acceptable in their radical milieu, America’s founding documents are verboten. Internalize what this really entails: students who wish to OPENLY exhibit their sexual confusion are free to do so. Okey dokey. In fact, monies are thrown their way to “explore” this or that, and the freakier the sideshow the better. How’s that for (parental) bang for your (educational) buck? Personally, having spent several hundred thousand dollars to educate 2 sons (at MIT & Caltech…schools where there is little time to sleep, let alone agitate over this or that) , there is a sensitivity/understanding of the exorbitant costs paid for a private university education. As such, this issue does not quality as a minor annoyance. A blip on the radar. It’s an investment of huge proportions. 

NOT only that, if a student voices an iota of criticism in the direction of the faculty or the administration all hell breaks loose. One is relegated to campus purgatory, if one dares/deigns to voice any dissent to their PC mandates. Talk about (mental) boot camp. In effect, freedoms for thee (radicals), but not for conservative students on America’s non-free campuses. And little offends them more than those who espouse any allegiance to Constitutional ethos. The nerve of these soon to be grown up “bitter clingers”! What are they thinking, bringing Constitutional fealty onto America’s campuses? Have they fallen on their heads?

The question becomes: why the preference for one subset and the prejudice against the other, if in fact academia is supposed to be a place where a free exchange of ideas is the “common core” denominator?

Simply put, the most non-free places in America (and elsewhere, particularly in Israel) is within the confines of the college campuses. Seriously. Consider the damage accrued: if not for leftist academia, the havoc wrought by (im)moral relativism would be negligible. Coupled with an open season on Jewish students who dare to support Israel, or speak up against blatant antisemitic diatribes from their profs, well, what else is needed to prove the above outrageous facsimile of higher education? 

And even in Israel, the nation where supporting its raison d’etre should be a given, students are vilified (by their profs and their leftist back benchers…from inside and outside the country) for supporting the nation’s moorings. Post-Zionist academics further Israel’s delegitimization and this is a (tragic) fact.

Back to America’s academic cesspool…

The Constitution guarantees the right to free speech, but don’t try to pass out copies of it at Modesto Junior College in California.

A student at the school who tried to pass out pocket-size pamphlets of the very document that memorializes our rights got shut down on Sept. 17 – a date also known as Constitution Day.

Campus authorities told 25-year-old Robert Van Tuinen, who caught the whole thing on videotape, he could only pass out the free documents at a tiny designated spot on campus, and only then if he scheduled it several days in advance.

“Watching the video is a combination of depressing and nauseating, to see what rigamarole students have to go through just to express themselves on campus,” said Robert Shibley, senior vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), which has taken on campus speech codes around the nation.

Van Tuinen, who said he’d read up on the school’s regulations and expected to get chased away from outside the student center, went to FIRE with the video. The foundation penned an email letter to the school’s administration on Van Tuinen’s behalf early Thursday, but Shibley said there had been no response later in the day.

A spokeswoman for the college tells that students and the general public are permitted to pass out materials in areas on campus that are generally available to the public, as long as they do not disrupt the orderly operations of the college.

“In the case of the YouTube video, it does not appear that the student was disrupting the orderly operations of the college and therefore we are looking into the incident,” Modesto Junior College Marketing and Public Relations officer Linda Hoile said.

In the video, Van Tuinen is confronted by an unidentified campus police officer within minutes of passing out the pamphlets. When he protests, he is told “there are rules.”

“But do you know what this is?” he asks. “What are the rules? Why are the rules tied to my free speech?”

Van Tuinen explains that he wants to start an organization called Young Americans for Liberty.

“That’s fine, but if you’re going to start an organization like that you have to go through the rigamarole,” the police officer tells him.

“It was a tense situation,” Van Tuinen, who is from Modesto, told “To be told I can’t do something as basic as handing out the Constitution was frustrating.”

Eventually, the police officer escorts Van Tuinen into an administrative office, where an unidentified woman shows him a binder with rules she says govern free speech on campus. She explains that there is a designated place “in front of the student center, in that little cement area,” where free expression is allowed, but then notes that two people are already using it.

“You’d have to wait,” she says. “You could go on (Sept.) 20th, the 27th or you can go into October.”

Eventually he is advised to make an appointment with Brenda Thames, vice president of student services, who can explain the policy.

Shibley said he was angered by the video, but not surprised.

“One of the revealing things about this particular case is what students have to go through just to express themselves on campus,” Shibley said.

He said the very idea of speech codes on campus ought to be troubling to Americans.

“They are imposed in an attempt to sanitize the public space of anything that might offend somebody,” he said. “The fact is, no school specifically needs a speech code. They have the ability keep order on campus . Of people are too loud, harassing people, or blocking traffic they have the means to address that.”

NONE of the above is happenstance, nor simply a question of mean spirited nitpicking by profs and their (open and hidden) supporters. Not at all. Their Omerta – on anything outside the realm of radical causes/politics – is purposefully designed to destroy America and to bring it to its knees. What better way to do so, than to deconstruct future generations and their “normative” behaviorThe queerer the better.

Alas, budding Conservatives are treated worse than persona non-grata. Like the devil incarnate.

The Leader Of The Free World Aims For America’s And Israel’s Jugular – Their “Disarming”: The Benefits Accrued To Iran

As has been charged at this site ad nauseum, the leader of the free world is both anti-American and pro Islamist. As a result, Barack HUSSEIN Obama works to weaken America and to decapitate Israel. Concomitantly, he strengthens Islamic regimes. NO doubt about it. For the record, the plans Obama Inc. has in place won’t be thwarted through partisan bickering. In fact, said squabblings lends the POTUS free cover to pursue his nation- stabbing. Besides, the Islamist-in-Chief’s deadly end point transcends – at least it should – petty politics.

That being said, this site warned against the Islamist-in-Chief’s reelection, to the point of sounding like a broken record. In the main, his efforts to bring down America are well known, and its results are playing out before American’s (and others) horrified eyes. 

Specifically, the Radical-in-Chief’s animus towards freedom is on full display through his dictatorial actions, in relation to his own citizens, as well as his treacherous dealings in the Mid East and beyond. Said dealings expose, yet again, his fealty to Islamic regimes. The deadlier the better. And, back in 2009, when Obama Inc. enjoyed a prime geo-political opening to push the mullahs back, he did no such thing. Most revealingly, Obama acted as a shield for Iran’s Islamic regime, instead of assisting its dying freedom fightersSimply put, Barack HUSSEIN Obama revealed his hand. He had no time, nor inclination, to give them anything but the finger. Absolutely.

Even more so, what else can one conclude from Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s cheerleading for the Muslim Brotherhood, both in the Mid East and Washington? Hardly freedom fighters – Obama or his Brothers!

Which leads us straight back to Iran…and the POTUS’s assists towards the Iranian bomb, as their triumph will be directly accrued to his “helping hands”.

As such, what does a POTUS do to simultaneously aid his Islamic Brothers (even though of the Shiite persuasion), at the same time that he weakens America? He disarms one, but not the other!


Charges president’s move meant to ‘disarm America’

In an attempt to “disarm America,” President Obama has canceled a defense system, placing the U.S. home front in danger of a missile attack, including one that could be launched from Iran, charged the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

In a radio interview today, Sen. James Inhofe R-Okla., warned that Iran is using Western talks to stall the international community while it assembles a nuclear weapon and delivery system.

“Way back in 2007, our unclassified intelligence said Iran is going to have a nuclear weapon and a delivery system by 2015. That was way back in 2007. That’s a year and a half from now and they are right on the road to making that a reality,” Inhofe said.

The senator, recovering at home from quadruple bypass heart surgery, was speaking on Aaron Klein’s WABC radio show.

“I don’t trust the verification is in place, and they haven’t even said that they are going to slow down on their production right now,” Inhofe said of the talks between Iran and six world powers in Geneva earlier this month.

Inhofe told Klein that Obama’s cancellation of the U.S. missile-defense complex in Poland places America in grave danger.

“This president, President Obama, way back in his first budget four and a half years ago, one of the things he did in his effort to disarm America, was to do away with the ground-based interceptors that we were building in Poland.”

The senator asked Klein: “Now why were we building that in Poland? … We were doing it because we have 33 ground-based interceptors all on the West Coast of the United States.”

Inhofe said it “wasn’t until about 10 years ago that we realized how close Iran was.”

“And there shouldn’t be any doubt in anyone’s mind that if they had the weapon and the delivery system they would use it,” he said. “And where would that go? It would come from the east.”

However, Inhofe charged, cancellation of the U.S. interceptor site in Poland has resulted in the inability to effectively shoot down missiles coming from the east.

“Now we could be lucky if we had one shot to get it from the ground-based interceptor on the West Coast,” he said. “But we all know the security of that system is to be able to shoot, look and shoot. Now we can do that for something coming from the west. We can’t do it for something coming from the east.”

The disarming of America is both internal and external. At the same time that Barack HUSSEIN Obama eviscerates actual missile shields, he is busy gutting the Second Amendment. Thereby, he is effectively working towards disarming Americans! 

YET, on the other hand, Iran’s Hitlerite regime is given cover by the leader of the free world, to race towards the ultimate weapons of mass destruction. Now, if THAT doesn’t indict the POTUS, thus, demonstrating what his plans are and where his proclivities lie, then nothing else will suffice. 

Sach ha’kol, at the end of it all, either he will be removed or the free world will fall. Many millions of lives hang in the balance.

The Radicalization of Police Forces Under The Reign Of Obama Inc: Its Blow Back. LEGAL Gun Owners In Cross Hairs & Chicago’s TOP COP THREATENS Citizens! Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

For those who are grounded in the concept of “rule of law”, thus, evincing respect for the laws of the land, it is especially galling to internalize that the aforementioned – as defined by western norms – is dead and buried. Stick a fork in it.

And ever since the ascension of the Lawbreaker-in-Chief, the amount of lawbreaking through “legal” entities has been astonishing. Mind numbing.

Let us commence our tortuous journey within, and take due note of what the chief law enforcer of the land really thinks about “law and order”, as Eric Holder runs a completely lawless AG’s office !

Not unlike all revolutionaries, the Islamist-leaning side of Eric Holder bellied up to invoke/institute blasphemy laws in contravention of U.S. Constitutional-based underpinnings – stealthily. Say what? 

Hardly content with the above anti-American edicts, Holder & gang push forward with an Omerta: the (“legal”) purging of Islam + terror ! And alongside said dictates lies the sham of immigration “reform”, nothing more than a “koshering” of illegals to upend America, plus, to ensure that Demsters rule (with an iron first) for decades to come. What a devious plan.

Which leads us straight to the inflammable and “seemingly” inexplicable exhortation from Chicago’s TOP COP!



Chicago police superintendent Garry McCarthy has not been shy about his disagreement with the new concealed carry laws in Illinois. IR readers may reacall that during an interview with WVON radio earlier this year McCarthy made statements showing his disdain for the 2nd amendment.

“You put more guns on the street expect more shootings,” McCarthy said. “I don’t care if they’re licensed legal firearms, people who are not highly trained… putting guns in their hands is a recipe for disaster. So I’ll train our officers that there is a concealed carry law, but when somebody turns with a firearm in their hand the officer does not have an obligation to wait to get shot to return fire and we’re going to have tragedies as a result of that. I’m telling you right up front.”

The comments by McCarthy were obviously meant to intimidate gun owners who choose to exercise their rights. McCarthy would not say what specific training officers will undertake if any. However, he did admit that in the past his department has made mistakes in shooting unarmed civilians. He believes the concealed carry law will increase those types of unfortunate incidents.

“You say concealed carry I say Trayvon Martin. Police officers make mistakes all the time,” McCarthy said. “We spend six months in the police academy, six months of field training and ongoing training on a regular basis and the fact is once in a while we’re going to shoot someone with a cellphone; we’re going to shoot somebody with a flashlight and none of that is okay. But now you take John Q. Civilian, you give them six weeks or 10 weeks of training and you say ‘have at it?’ The fact is more guns are not the solution to the firearm gun violence problem in this country. Less guns and reasonable gun laws are. And just because it’s 49 states to one doesn’t mean the state of Illinois is wrong on that one.”

More HERE.

On the other hand, U.S. Border Patrol Agents have been given specific orders to “stand down”, and not to pursue illegal aliens entering America’s borders. So, at one end of law enforcement, regular police forces are being prepped as military enforcers, but those who are  supposed to hunt down illegals, drug smugglers and terrorists are ordered to do nothing. Why? 

Now, this blog previously asserted, the radicalization of law enforcement, into a military-oriented organism, is a done deal. Let this sink in: U.S. law enforcement leaders are running wild and morphing police units into military-like enforcers. It is this revamping/mindset which allows for a law enforcement head to utter the most aggressive, anti Constitutional, confrontational edicts to date.

Wrap your head around what Chicago’s chief cop is really stating: regardless of a citizen’s lawful right to own a firearm, the ensuing orders are to shoot first and that is that. Thus, isn’t said exhortation precisely what military forces are ordered to do: shoot to kill the enemy? In reality, law abiding citizens are now lumped together with criminals AND terrorists, and there is nothing which will stop them from executing anyone who stands in their way. Got that?

Welcome to the Dictatorship of the United States. A (soon to be) tyranny !

Hezbollah’s GROWING Presence In U.S. Prisons: The Dangers From Behind Bars. How Did This Happen? Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

As to Hezbollah’s U.S. thrust, the most lethal terror organization alongside the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood (Iranian Shiite align with Sunni Al Qaedawhen it suits their mutual interests…Al Qaeda is harbored within Iran!), this is hardly “news”. Nevertheless, the fact that its cells are burrowed INSIDE & OUTSIDE America, to the degree that even America’s prisons are metastasizing like cancer clusters, well, no amount of warnings should be considered too many.

So,  once again, Northeast Intelligence Network did some digging and jihadi compounds were uprooted. Again, not news at this end, just serving as back up. But there’s more…as Hezbollah’s Latin American forward bases prime for jihad, when given the orders to pounce. Yet, the FBI/CIA are hardly ready to protect from their strikes, as Iranian hit squads run circles around U.S./western intelligence. Yes, they do.

INDEED, jihad is here, there and everywhere, and do you know who your neighbors are? More pointedly, do you know that Barack HUSSEIN Obama, through orders given to fellow Islamist-leaning AG Holder, purposefully denies any nexus of Latin America to Hezbollah’s narco-terror?

Is it any wonder that America’s prisons are fertile feeding ground for Hezbollah and more? 

"Hezbollah: The Global Footprint of Lebanon's Army of God," by Matthew Levitt. Photo: Screenshot.“Hezbollah: The Global Footprint of Lebanon’s Army of God,” by Matthew Levitt. Photo: Screenshot.U.S. law enforcers have noted an increase of tattoos on prison inmates, particularly in the Southwest, with script written in Farsi and with graphics depicting Hezbollah imagery, The Wall Street Journal reported, citing a newly published book, “Hezbollah: The Global Footprint of Lebanon’s Army of God,” by terrorism expert Matthew Levitt.The WSJ said Hezbollah’s “operatives and sleeper cells are certainly in America. ‘Law enforcement officials across the Southwest,’ Mr. Levitt writes, ‘are reporting a rise in imprisoned gang members with Farsi tattoos,’ including some with Hezbollah imagery. Another official he quotes puts it this way: ‘You could almost pick your city and you would probably have a [Hezbollah] presence.’”While Hezbollah has yet to mount an attack on U.S. soil, the group’s chief patron, Iran,  is not reluctant to do so, the WSJ said. “In 2011, Tehran tried to hire a drug trafficker in Mexico to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in a Washington, D.C., restaurant (the would-be assassin turned out to be a federal agent). And Iranian diplomat Mohsen Rabbani, who masterminded Hezbollah’s attacks in Argentina in the 1990s, assisted a (foiled) plot to bomb JFK Airport in New York City in 2007. Whether Hezbollah would strike the American homeland is an open question. But as Matthew Levitt’s well-researched book makes clear, it isn’t an outlandish one.”Levitt is a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and is a former FBI counter-terrorism analyst.

  • In Venezuela we have been denouncing the presence of hezbollah for years. The plot to bomb JFK airport in 2007 was hatched partly in Venezuela and the direct flights between Caracas and Tehran, sometimes with stop overs in Damascus, served as vehicles for hezbollah easy entry in Latin America. For years the Venezuelan head of issuing local documents , first as chief officer of the identification department and then as interior minister, was Tarek Al Aissami a known operative of the Baath party. Surely some came to the US with Venezuelan papers and once here they find solace viewing some Washington NGO’s defend the venezuelan regime. Yes, danger is here and one day will show its face in its usual gruesome way. Hezbollah has also from its venezuelan base have been involved in drug traffic, just ask the DEA.

Until the 9/11 2001 terror attacks , no terrorist organization had killed more Americans than Hezbollah, the WSJ writes. “Today it remains an efficient global terror operation, having executed bombings on four continents, built a presence on six and even branched out to drug trafficking.”

There is always a price to be paid for silence, but remaining mute, instead of shouting from the rooftops, in some acute circumstances, can extract an unbearable price. Still, some remain mum to the burgeoning threat from Hezbollah (and Islamic jihad in general) due to Islamist-leaning sympathies, while others are just plain cowards. Spineless. Whatever the case, rest assured, Americans will pay a price which will leave few unscathed, even those who feign otherwise. Deaf, dumb and blind is hardly a strategy.

A catastrophe waiting to happen!

DHS, Valerie Jarrett’s Fiefdom, TARGETING U.S. (Patriotic) Citizens/Christians: Warnings From (Retired) Army Officers of MARTIAL LAW & More…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Regardless of whose name is atop the official masthead at DHS, the fact of the matter is that Iranian-born Valerie Jarrett runs the show. It is her (private) fiefdom. Her playground.

This site has been warning its readers of an impending storm, and not ala the made up out of whole cloth “global warming” kind! This is no hoax.

To be exact, DHS has been exposed as the antithesis of a homeland security umbrella. As a matter of record, back in July 2012, at the inception of this blog, it  became glaringly apparent that DHS’s original mandate was compromised, and by those whose interests were decidedly anti-American. How can this be?

Well, the purposeful (emphasis added) deconstruction of America, its destruction, necessitates many “helping hands”, and the co-opting of DHS is a logical, resource-rich, “go to” address. Simple as that. Devious.

Fanning the flames, in September 2012, Black Hawks were sighted swirling overhead in U.S. cities, and droppings of info seeped out that DHS was stockpiling inordinate amounts of ammo and military-style armor, well beyond what has ever been purchased for cumulative years in toto. Why exactly? Are flying saucer aliens swooping down, as such, heretofore unseen protection is now mandated? Inquiring minds want – demand – to know.

From one patriot to another, issuing warnings re DHS and other relevant concerns comes with the territory. One’s duty. Yet the situation becomes even more incendiary and pressing, when one encounters the politicizing of the largest umbrella for homeland security-related matters. You think?

Thus, the unfathomable insertion of Russian/Eastern European and other foreign foreign troops onto U.S soil should send shivers down every patriot’s spine. If not, then why not? By the way, the above is just the tip of DHS’s spear, as gun control is a BIG part of their plansas they prepare for war against the citizens!

Retired Army officer warns: DHS preparing for war against American citizens

  • Capt. Terry M. Hestilow, U.S. Army, Retired.

“It is with gravest concern that I write to you today concerning the recent appropriation of weapons by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that can only be understood as a bold threat of war by that agency, and the Obama administration, against the citizens of the United States of America,” his letter began.

The retired officer expressed deep concerns over “recent purchases of almost 3,000 mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) armored personnel carriers, 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition (with associated weapons), and other weapons systems.”

Capt. Hestilow added a statement that Barack Obama made during his 2008 campaign.

“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve gotta (sic) have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded [as the United States military],” he said.

He also accused the administration of “deliberately defunding, overextending, and hollowing the Department of Defense,” which he said is the “only legitimate agency” with the mission of conducting combat operations.

In his letter, Capt. Hestilow called on Congress to demand that the DHS surrender their weapons systems to the Defense Department. He also accused the DHS of enforcing the “tyrannical acts of this president” and said lawmakers should dissolve the agency “as soon as possible.”

“One needs only to look to the rise of Adolf Hitler, and his associated DHS organizations, the SA and the SS, of 1932-1934, to see the outcome of allowing an agency of government this kind of control over the free citizens of a nation,” he added.

Capt. Hestilow said that Americans cannot “be so naïve” as to think that what happened in Germany cannot happen here.

Earlier in the week, Capt. Hestilow asked his Facebook followers who the DHS intends to kill with the weapons and ammunition that it has recently purchased.

“Short answer,” he wrote. “You and me! Anyone they think is standing in their way to impose a new Marxist government! Anyone who stands for the U.S. Constitution!”

“If I live and still have a page to speak out on later this week, I will discuss a proper Constitutional response in a couple of days. Standby. Out,” he wrote on Thursday.

Capt. Hestilow ended his strongly-worded letter with a simple declaration: “We refuse to surrender our Constitution or our nation!”

Now, it goes without saying, when the fish stinks from the head up, all manner of poisonous edicts emerge. So, the new honcho at DHS, Muslim Brotherhood operative, Mohamed Elibiary, is warning thusly:

“Department of Homeland Security adviser Mohamed Elibiary has warned the tea party movement against attempting to change the U.S. political landscape through “Christianist Xenophobia.”

Elibiary further charged some “white identity/privilege types” have a problem with a “black president” and “brown Mexicans.”

Asked by WND in an email to clarify his remarks, Elibiary replied: “’Christianist’ is a term coined about a decade ago and like ‘Islamist’ (for Muslims) and ‘Zionist’ (for Jews) refers to Christians who mix theology and nationalism.”
Elibiary said “Christianists” view “today’s politics through a theologically influenced (Calvinist) view of America’s founding.”

“Xenophobia is easier for you to understand on your own, but it generally manifests itself in anti-immigrant policies of which Islamophobia today inside the U.S. is just one sub-component for some White Identity/Privilege types that have a problem with a black president, brown Mexicans and so on and so forth,” he told WND.

By the way, the above operative has the audacity to opine (not unlike his fellow stealth Islamist, Grover Norquist) that he is Conservative-leaning and not a leftist. Well, yes, he is a Conservative Muslim, but not a Conservative American!

IN close proximity to the above revelations, along comes an ex-Navy SEAL and he emits a bombshell, and this serves as confirmation of related info this site is sharing/blaring for close to a year. Being right is not always rewarding…knowing full well that the groundwork for Martial Law is being prepped

Ex-Navy SEAL Drops Bombshell On FOX: Says Government Is CREATING Conditions To Impose Martial Law (Oct 15, 2013 Video Report) 

ATOP an avalanche of mounting evidence, is it still a hysterical rant to posit: there are manifest parallels between DHS and Nazi Germany’s Gestapoand Islamists are now in the service of radical leftists and vice versa? Unreservedly, the answer is – NOT at all! 

Rest assured, the Gestapo did not morph into its infamous essence overnight. Slowly, steadily, it forward-marched Germany into the depths of hell, before many of its citizens knew what hit them.

Herein lies a historical nexus. A calamity in the making.

JUDENRAT, JACOB BENDER, Fronts For Anti-Semitic, Anti-American, Islamic Propaganda Arm – CAIR…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

MOST tragically, there is never a dearth of traitors – aka Judenrats – to investigate, be they aligned with the self-hating Jewish variety, or part of the anti-American crew. 

In fact, while this blogger takes no credit for the compilation of the following list, it is more than worthy of a big heads up – The JEWISH SHIT LISTMake sure to skim through their names via alphabetical order and to set aside enough time…there are so many of them to familiarize yourselves with! Having come across this “distinguished” list in the beginning of a certain investigation, suffice it to say, it bore fruit.

Now, in order to internalize Jacob Bender’s “worthiness” as a necessary addition to the above list, one must understand the inner recesses of CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) and their end goals; the implementation of Sharia Law in the U.S., and the destruction of Israel through their Brothers-in-Arms in the Mid East. 

Just for a glimpse into Bender’s new anti-American and anti-semitic bosses – a double whammy, but they almost always go hand in hand – some pertinent factoids can be found within Hamas’s CAIR (the Muslim Brotherhood’s American propaganda arm) and its anti-American bullying. Clear as a bell. As a matter of fact, within a few day’s time, an upcoming interview, to be published at, will detail the out-sized dangers to America (and the west in general) from the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR, plus other related matters. Stay tuned.

{UPDATED Interview:The Muslim Brotherhood’s Quest For Global Dominance – An Interview With Adina Kutnicki}


ONTO the latest Judenrat

ISRAEL-HATING LEFTIST JEWISH TRAITOR to head chapter of Muslim Brotherhood front group CAIR

Jacob Bender is the first Jew to lead a chapter of the Muslim Advocacy Group CAIR. The Philly activist gets well-deserved hostility from the Jewish community as he spouts the same kind of ‘Islamophobia’-centered Muslim propaganda spewed by all the terror-linked Muslim Brotherhood front groups like CAIR in America.


FORWARD  Jacob Bender is set to be the voice of Philadelphia-area Muslims, to take on discrimination they encounter in workplace and in the public sphere, and to fight expressions of hate. And his Jewish faith, Bender believes, can only help him do the job effectively.

“The Muslim community is under attack from Islamophobic forces, and it is the obligation and responsibility of people of good will to stand up and say this is a bigoted attack,” Bender said. “This is fully in keeping with my life goals.”

The Council on American Islamic Relations’ Philadelphia branch announced the appointment of Bender as its executive director October 15. Bender is the first Jew, and the first non-Muslim, to serve as director of a CAIR branch. “The needs of the Muslim community are really the needs of any minority community in the United States,” said Iftekhar Hussein, chairman of CAIR-Philadelphia’s board of directors. “Jacob, being Jewish, understands that from his own background.”


An activist on Jewish-Muslim interfaith issues who has been involved in the past on the progressive end of Middle East peace advocacy, Bender will face two entirely different sets of expectations in his new position. He will meet a local Muslim community expecting a non-Muslim to represent its needs just as well as would a member of their own faith. He will also face a national Jewish leadership that has all but deemed CAIR off-limits for any dialogue.

In a lengthy document published in 2006, the Anti-Defamation League accused CAIR of holding extreme positions on Israel and of having links to individuals and groups that expressed support for terror organizations. Jewish groups have also pointed in the past to the fact that CAIR was initially named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the case of the Holy Land Foundation, an American-based charity charged with raising funds for Hamas. But in 2012 a circuit court ordered that the reference to CAIR be expunged.

“CAIR is far off the radar screen of the Jewish community,” said Ethan Felson, vice president of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs. “The Jewish community looked at their record and said, ‘We won’t work with this group.’” While no official policy has been adopted, the Jewish community has excluded CAIR from all joint interfaith activities with the Muslim community and has focused on ties with the Islamic Society of North America and with local mosques and imams.

CAIR and Bender reject the Jewish organizations’ claims that the group is in any way extreme. “There will always be those who will try to demonize other groups,” Bender said. “As someone who has long supported Palestinian rights and was critical of the policy of occupation, I find no contradiction between my long-stated opinions on the Middle East and those of CAIR.”

Abraham Foxman, the ADL’s national director, said in a statement to the Forward that “time will tell.” Bender’s Jewish faith, he said, does not necessarily matter. “Unfortunately, there are Jews who are anti-Jewish and anti-Israel,” Foxman added, “but we will wait and see.”

His job at CAIR-Philadelphia, one of a network of 20 independent chapters across the country, will focus primarily on countering anti-Muslim discrimination. In recent years the chapter has been among the key groups fighting against anti-Sharia laws proposed in Pennsylvania. It has spoken out publicly against anti-Muslim stereotypes following the Boston marathon bombing.

“I’ve never had any question or negative feeling about CAIR ever since I came in contact with them,” Bender said. “I’ve never encountered any anti-Jewish or anti-Semitic sentiment. The opposite is true.”



Jacob Bender is a documentary filmmaker, video producer, photographer, graphic designer, and interfaith consultant

Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, Jacob was one of the initiators of interfaith dialogue with the American Muslim community. He has spoken dozens of times at mosques and at large gatherings of Muslims in the United States, particularly at the conventions of the Islamic Society of North America, the largest Muslim organization in the US.

In 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, Jacob was a featured speaker at the annual Doha Conferences on Religious Dialogue, organized by the Foreign Ministry of Qatar. In 2008, he was invited by the Saudi Embassy in Washington, DC, to participate in the historic interfaith conference in Madrid initiated by HRH King Abdallah of Saudi Arabia. In January and June of 2009, Jacob spoke at interfaith conferences organized by Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt. Jacob has also been a featured guest on the Aljazeera Channel show “Min Washington.”

Jacob has published articles in Islamic Horizons Magazine, The Daily Star of Beirut, Lebanon, and an article appeared about him in The Arab News of Saudi Arabia. His “Letters to the Editor” have been published in newspapers around the world, including The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The International Herald Tribune, The Jordan Times, The Gulf News, and El Pais.

In 1984, Jacob was a speech writer on interfaith affairs for Rev. Jesse Jackson during his historic presidential campaign.

Jacob has been a leading voice in the American Jewish community for a just resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict. 1995, he led delegations of American peace activists that met with Chairman Yassir Arafat in Gaza and King Hussein in Amman.

Jacob has a degree in “The History of Religions” from the University of California at Los Angeles, and studied film and television at New York University’s Graduate School of Film.


“There is no ‘Clash of Civilizations’ between the Muslim World and the West. There is only a clash of ignorance.”


Out of Cordoba is a documentary film, directed by Jacob Bender and produced by Mr. Bender and MLK Producciones of Malaga, Spain, that explores some of the most vexing questions of our time: Is there a “clash of civilizations” between the West and the Islamic world? Are Jews and Muslims eternal enemies, incapable of peaceful coexistence? Does religious faith lead inevitably to xenophobia and violence?


Big Peace – “Out of Cordoba,” (2008) was directed by Jacob Bender, self-described as “one of the initiators of interfaith dialogue with the American Muslim community. He has spoken dozens of times at mosques and at large gatherings of Muslims in the United States, particularly at the conventions of the Islamic Society of North America, the largest Muslim organization in the US.” He neglects to mention that ISNA was also named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism finance trial.

Restoring ‘“Al-Andalus’ – an ageless Model of Tolerance” has been the stated goal of Al-Qaeda. In September 2007 Ayman al-Zawahiri issued an audio tape calling for the reconquest of “Al-Andalus” and more recently called for the “cleansing” of North Africa of Spaniards and the French as preparation for the reoccupation of “Al-Andalus”. An al-Qaeda-linked cyber-jihadist group that targets US companies with hacks and computer worms styles themselves as “The Brigades of Tariq ibn Ziyad”, named after the invader and occupier of Spain.


The Out of Cordoba documentary’s Advisory board includes the usual Shariah apologists Karen Armstrong and John L. Esposito, but also: Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf of the Ground Zero Mosque, Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi, Fiqh Council of North America, and Dr. Sayyid Muhammed Syeed, Islamic Society of North America.


The Funders for the film include the Alwaleed bin Talal Foundation (Prince Alwaleed bin Talal is an investor in News Corporation and gives in the tens of millions to Harvard, Georgetown and others to start Shariah academic programs), the Muslim Brotherhood-associated International Institute of Islamic Thought, the Islamic Society of North America (unindicted co-conspirator) and the Alavi Foundation (FBI began to seize their assets in 2009, and the former president was sentenced in 2010 to prison).

As discussed, it is beyond necessary, yes, it is obligatory, to out the traitors in our midst. Readers may recall Anna Baltzer and her closer than close nexus to the infamous BDS movement (Boycott, Divest, Sanction), whereby many CAIR operators are duly enmeshed. As such, much time has been expended on detailing her multi-faceted attacks on Israel, even as she opines: she is not a self-hating Jew! But never mind, judge for yourselves.

This is hardly a matter of different strokes for different folks. But it is a matter of Jews aiding and abetting those who seek nothing less than Israel’s destruction, and by definition the murder of half of world Jewry. They can couch their activism/work in whatever dishonest, balderdash cloaks they want.  Besides, there is nothing more disturbing, to those who paint themselves otherwise, than shining a spotlight on their treachery. Alas, those of us who understand what they are really up to will continue dogging/digging into their activities. 

It’s not a threat. It’s a promise.

Israel’s Arab Enemies Exhort The Truth In Arabic: We Will DESTROY Israel. Israel’s Leaders Lie To Its Jewish (Majority) Citizens About “Peace”. What’s Going On? Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Much has been written at this site regarding Islamic mandates, particularly in relation to jihad. Terms are bandied about by others, some of whom have little understanding of their depth and breath.

In this regard, a mission herein is to enlighten and duly inform, with the goal being action-oriented, as opposed to throwing up ones hands. 

And just because Islamic leaders lie to their citizens (on a regular basis) regarding other matters, it doesn’t mean that the collective Arab/Muslim goal to destroy Israel isn’t full of truth telling. Say what? But first things first.

Islamic imperatives dictate submission to Allah – Islam LITERALLY means to submit – and this is not up for debate. It is obligatory. Besides, unlike other religions, there are no squishy areas in ones adherence to Islam, if one seeks to stay in the fold, or even remain alive in Muslim-ruled countries. And it is this all or nothing ideology which renders the world awash in jihadist bloodletting.

On the other side of the spectrum, Israel’s leaders lie on a regular basis too, but from the opposite side of the spectrum. They (for the most part) understand full well that “peace” (as defined by their enemies, with the unbearable price tag to be extracted) is unattainable, as it will literally destroy the nation – through every “peace” process and by every piece of land they surrender. This is not rocket science. Their “peace” at all costs obsession/quest has left a trail of thousands of dead and maimed Jewish bodies. In fact, one only has to peer through a PA officer’s binoculars to realize how attainable their end goal is. Easy as pie.

Few Israeli intellectuals have the integrity to admit as much, but Professor Paul Eidelberg is not among the liars and fraudsters.

Paul Eidelberg

When Yasser Arafat said, “Peace means the destruction of Israel,” that’s speaking as it is.

When Benjamin Netanyahu said (at his most recent speech at Bar-Ilan University), “For peace, the Palestinian Authority must recognize the Jewish homeland,” that’s speaking as it ain’t.

Arafat, an accomplished liar, was telling the truth—to his audience, an Arab audience that possessed understanding, not fools.

Netanyahu, a less accomplished liar, was obscuring the truth—to his audience—an audience that lacked understanding, an audience of fools.

Translate Netanyahu’s Bar-Ilan remark into Arabs terms. “For peace, the Palestinian Authority must renounce Islam, jettison the Qur’an and 1,400 years of Islamic history and theology.”

What would be the audience of such a remark? Obviously not an audience of fools. The audience would be one that understood the true nature of the conflict. Such an audience would recognize that the democratic or ethnocentric and “value-free” idea of conflict resolution does not apply to the anti-democratic world of totalitarian Islam.

Such an audience would understand—as did Alexis de Tocqueville—that  nations devoted to Islam have much in common with the pagan nations mentioned in the Bible. Such nations which, like the Canaanites, sacrificed their children as burnt offerings to Baal, are comparable to Muslims nations that use their children as human bombs.

Since such nations do not recognize the Biblical concept of man’s creation in the Image of God, they reject the idea of the inviolable dignity of the human personality. This Islamic denial of Genesis 1:26 prompts Muslims to call Jews “pigs” and “dogs.”  Hence, the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians of which Netanyahu speaks is a conflict between good and evil, and this is beyond the ken of the “value-free” political science that has either influenced Israel’s Prime Minister or that induces him to speak of the conflict as it aint and not as it is.

Here’s another way of rendering Netanyahu’s Bar-Ilan remark into Arab terms. “For peace, the Muslim world must change its power structure. Its leaders must cease being autocrats and become democrats.”

The above renderings of Netanyahu’s Bar-Ilan remark means that the conflict in question is not resolvable in peaceful terms. However, to make such a “politically incorrect” statement is beyond the capacity of politicians like Mr. Netanyahu, who dare not speak of the conflict as it is, but only as it aint.

Similarly, Prof Eidelberg’s rendering of Oslo’s Authentic Truth makes nonsense of Israel’s leadership’s “promises”, and exposes what the enemy has in store for her. Would Israel’s leaders ever be so truthful? NOT if they want the powerful, non-elected leftist “elites” to back them. 

However, there are some duly doable prescriptions for the onset of long-standing “peace and quiet”, thus, promising to usher in decades of calm and without surrendering an inch of the Jewish homeland! It has yet to be tried: Kill For Peace. Hell, it worked for the U.S. (when they had leaders who understood how to take care of business) and allied powers during WW 2.

In tandem with the above insights and recommendations, Dr. Martin Sherman is another such intellectual giant who stands above the fray of Israel’s braying “peace” jackals. His weekly Jerusalem Post column skewers the leadership’s mendacity, and it can be found within Into The Fray. MORE than worth the read, if truthfulness is your barometer. His recent interview at, Confronting Israel’s Precarious Future: An Interview With Dr. Martin Shermanis a devastating indictment of Israel’s leadership, most trenchantly, their lack of strategic policy making, which, by default, has led to many “peace” disasters. 

The point being, it doesn’t have to end this way, as there are intellectual warriors at the ready. They just need more support.

Heed the valiant profs and their dire, but sober, warnings.

DEFILING The Kiddies Via “Koshering” Pedophilia: The Left’s Next Phase For Bringing Down America Amidst Sexual Gratification/Perversion…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Has anyone wondered why the left/red set feels so at home in the Islamist/green milieu, championing them at every twist and turn, as they forward march arm in arm? Well, some will posit that Allah-loving Islamists have little in common with G-dless leftists – or so it would seem. NOT so fast.

Aside for their abiding hatred of western civilization, underpinned by Judeo-Christian moorings, their obsessive fondness for under-aged kiddies is more than a bonding factor. A mutual admiration/attraction lust-pack! NO joke.

It is no secret that Muhammed took a kiddie bride, her name was Aisha, and no matter how many times his followers claim he wasn’t a pedophile, well, good luck with that tall tale. But some things still require visual aids, so here’s one for the books – Don’t shoot the messenger!

Back to the left’s pedophilia “koshering”…


Exclusive: Matt Barber exposes ‘progressive’ effort to roll-back laws against pedophilia

So much for the left’s “consenting adults” rhetoric on sex. Forever the consummate conservationists, our self-described “progressive” friends at the ACLU, MSNBC and elsewhere have been ramping-up efforts to downsize from “consenting adults” to merely “consenting” – a far less cumbersome qualifier in the noble struggle for unrestrained sexual license.

Tolerating “intergenerational romance” for “minor-attracted” adults is all the rage these days.

Ever hear of Kaitlyn Hunt? Over the past year or so this poor, misunderstood lesbian woman’s “anti-gay persecution” has become a cause célèbre among “gay rights” activists and other left-wing purveyors of perversion.

Despite mass rallies and online petitions signed by hundreds-of-thousands of the uber-”tolerant,” the clearly “homophobic” Florida criminal justice system has, nonetheless, convicted Ms. Hunt of multiple felonies for sexually assaulting – repeatedly – a 14-year-old girl.


Oh, sure, her minor victim allegedly “consented” to what the “Free Kate” crowd has portrayed as a harmless tryst – but, of course, by law children below the age of consent cannot consent to sex with adults. Period.

Still, the “progressive” establishment evidently felt that, for whatever reason, this was their hill to die on – this was the case that might help them realize the historical “gay rights” goal of rolling-back most, if not all, age of consent laws – statutes designed to protect children from adult sexual predators like, well, Kate.

Veteran journalist Robert Stacy McCain has covered the Hunt case extensively. In a recent piece for the American Spectator headlined “Kaitlyn Hunt is guilty and, yes, there is a movement to ‘normalize pedophilia,’” McCain writes: “Kaitlyn Hunt is a criminal. We can state that as a Neutral Objective Fact, now that the 19-year-old former cheerleader has pleaded ‘no contest’ to multiple felonies related to her sexual affair with a minor. What remains is the question of what her plea in a Florida courtroom Thursday means for what Rush Limbaugh has called the movement to ‘normalize pedophilia.”‘

Here’s the answer: There is no question. There is categorically a movement to normalize pedophilia. I’ve witnessed it firsthand and, despite “progressive” protestations to the contrary, the “pedophile rights” movement is inexorably linked to the so-called “gay rights” movement.

Two years ago I – along with the venerable child advocate Dr. Judith Reisman – attended a Maryland conference hosted by the pedophile group B4U-ACT. Around 50 individuals were in attendance, including a number of admitted pedophiles (or “minor-attracted persons,” as they euphemistically prefer).

Also present were a few self-described “gay activists” and several supportive mental-health professionals. World renowned “sexologist” Dr. Fred Berlin of Johns Hopkins University gave the keynote address, opening with: “I want to completely support the goal of B4U-ACT.”

Here are some highlights from the conference:

  • Pedophiles are “unfairly stigmatized and demonized” by society.
  • “We are not required to interfere with or inhibit our child’s sexuality.”
  • “Children are not inherently unable to consent” to sex with an adult.
  • An adult’s desire to have sex with children is “normative.”
  • “These things are not black and white; there are various shades of gray.”
  • A consensus belief by both speakers and pedophiles in attendance was that, because it vilifies MAPs, pedophilia should be removed as a mental disorder from the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM, in the same manner homosexuality was removed in 1973.
  • Dr. Fred Berlin acknowledged that it was political activism, similar to the incremental strategy witnessed at the conference, rather than a scientific calculus that successfully led to the declassification of homosexuality as a mental disorder: The reason “homosexuality was taken out of DSM is that people didn’t want the government in the bedroom,” he said.
  • The DSM ignores that pedophiles “have feelings of love and romance for children” in the same way adults love one another.
  • The DSM should “focus on the needs” of the pedophile, and should have “a minimal focus on social control,” rather than obsessing about the “need to protect children.”
  • Self-described “gay activist” and speaker Jacob Breslow said that children can properly be “the object of our attraction.” He further objectified children, suggesting that pedophiles needn’t gain consent from a child to have sex with “it” any more than we need consent from a shoe to wear it. He then used graphic, slang language to favorably describe the act of climaxing (ejaculating) “on or with” a child. No one in attendance objected to this explicit depiction of child sexual assault. There was even laughter.

You may think that such abject evil simply represents the fringe of today’s sexual “progressivism.” It doesn’t. It represents the honest.

Consider, for instance, that during Obama’s first term, the official website for the Department of Health and Human Services linked to “parenting tips” that referenced children as “sexual beings” and suggested that they should experiment with homosexuality and masturbation.

You may also recall that Mr. Obama appointed Kevin Jennings, founder of the “Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network,” or GLSEN, to the post of “safe schools czar.” The position is now defunct, ostensibly due to national outrage over Jennings’ appointment.

In keeping with the thinly veiled goals of B4U-ACT, GLSEN seems to be “running interference” for pedophiles, having tacitly advocated adult-child sex through its “recommended reading list” for kids.

This of no surprise when you consider that one of Jennings’ ideological heroes was Harry Hay, the “founding father” of homosexual activism. “One of the people that’s always inspired me is Harry Hay,” he has said glowingly.

Was Harry Hay fringe? No, not among “gay” activists. He’s an icon. Again, he was just honest. In 1983, while addressing the pedophile North American Man/Boy Love Association, or NAM/BLA, Hay said the following:

“It seems to me that in the gay community the people who should be running interference for NAM/BLA are the parents and friends of gays. Because if the parents and friends of gays are truly friends of gays, they would know from their gay kids that the relationship with an older man is precisely what 13-, 14-, and 15-year-old kids need more than anything else in the world. And they would be welcoming this, and welcoming the opportunity for young gay kids to have the kind of experience that they would need.”

If he were alive today, Harry Hay would likely have led the movement to “free Kate.”

And by “free Kate,” he would have meant – and they actually mean – “free us.”

And by “free us,” of course, what they really mean is “free children.”

Recall the oft repeated angst – over the future of the kiddies at this site – as alarm bells pierce like bloody screams. But before we go straight for the left’s jugular, let us recognize the DIRECT part played by Barack HUSSEIN Obama, both a red/green devotee! 

As an alternative lifestyle aficionado, the Gay-in-Chief made time to call an NBA player who “came out”never mind the weight of the free world on his shoulders. Precious. Excited…tingly too. FINALLY, the “puritanical” DOMA was knocked down and the POTUS was front and center in this life-style changing “coming out” party. He sort of, kind of, gave it a good housekeeping seal of approval. And as the gay agenda and its militancy marches forward, he/they still insist they LOVE the kiddies, and are only concerned for their welfare! Well, they can shove their love….

Oh boy…with man-boy “lover” Kevin Jennings in a high level position to swoop down, even though skulking in the shadows…and with a domestic terrorist, Billy Boy Ayers, in charge of America’s national curriculum, the bringing down of America is in place.  

As such, the aforementioned plans for “inter generational romance” is absolutely doable. OMG!!

BENGHAZIGATE’S STONEWALL: Egypt’s Brotherhood & Its Fingerprints; Proxy Jihadis; Weapons Running; Blind Sheik’s Release & Obama’s Brotherhood Nexus…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

This site’s main converging theses involving Benghazigate are akin to jigsaw puzzle pieces, yet they possess several moving parts. And while regular puzzle parts have to fit neatly into their designated board, such is not the case in the high stakes “game” of geo-politics, whereby moving parts are often more valuable than static ones.  

Now, readers surely recall the insane concoction from Obama Inc’s mouthpieces: yes, the video made the jihadis kill Americans in Benghazi…as believable as “the dog ate the homework” fib, yet this was no grade school tall tale. But once the above lie lost its legs, tidbits of truth started seeping through.

Let us recap some of the essential charges, and then the reader will understand why Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood Mafia are the main culprits, of which Al Qaeda is an offshoot. The lessons learned will then illuminate the trail, highlighting why he has fought so hard to protect his Brothers from the long-arm of (what was once) American justice.  

Enter the Blind Sheikh…and the Egyptian Brotherhood’s die hard push to release him from U.S. imprisonment. Mind you, this terrorist is so important to their pyramid that he is also front and center at this American-Israeli’s op-ed, The Opening of Jihad On U.S. Soil, written back in November 2005. Most recently, he made an “appearance” at this site in The Impending Release Of The Blood Soaked Terror Sheikh. An important fella indeed. A superstar. 

Most significantly, the Brotherhood Mafia (regardless of their address, be it Egypt, Syria or any other Islamic nation world over, including Washington’s power centers !) is so tightly woven into Obama Inc.’s DNA, as punishment for deposing Morsi, Washington has ordered the cut off of the financial spigot, as linkage to the re-installment of the Brotherhood to power ! What?

Ironclad: Egypt Involved in Benghazi Attacks – videos embedded

By Walid Shoebat, Ben Barrack and Keith Davies
A Libyan intelligence document has been produced that directly implicates Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood president Mohammed Mursi in the attacks on American installations in Benghazi on 9/11/12. Those who attempt to discredit this document run into trouble when it is coupled with real-time video we uncovered on 9/13/12. In that video, gunmen at the scene of the attack can be heard declaring that they were sent by Mursi. After weeks of attempting to push the narrative that a video was responsible, the Obama administration ultimately had to concede that the attacks in Benghazi were terrorist in nature.
A few months after 9/11/12, the top lawyer for the Pentagon stated that the war on terror should be wagedby “law enforcement and intelligence agencies”.Based on the Obama administration’s standard, the Benghazi attacks should be treated as a crimeinstead of as an act of war.
Therefore, let us bring forth the evidence, which implicates the leader of a nation state (Egypt) in the attack and warrants a grand jury (House of Representatives) investigation to decide if administration officials should be indicted (impeached).Since we’re deciding who to indict, we must look at evidence of involvement in the attack. Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood President – Mohammed Mursi – is a good place to start. Our first two exhibits are both damning but when taken together, may just constitute a ‘smoking gun’.
EXHIBIT A is a video shot from a cell phone at the scene of the attacks. In this video, gunmen are seen running toward the camera, toward other gunmen. At one point – in Arabic which we have confirmed – one approaching gunman says, “Don’t Shoot us! We were sent by Mursi!”. Even though the video is in Arabic, you can discern the word “Mursi”.Libyan Intelligence document 
(EXHIBIT B) has now been brought forward by credible Arabic translator Raymond Ibrahim. This document discusses the confessions of six members of an Egyptian Ansar al-Sharia cell who were arrested and found to be involved in the Benghazi attacks. Ibrahim reported the following about this document:

It discusses the preliminary findings of the investigation, specifically concerning an “Egyptian cell” which was involved in the consulate attack. “Based on confessions derived from some of those arrested at the scene” six people, “all of them Egyptians” from the jihad group Ansar al-Sharia (“Supporters of Islamic Law), were arrested.

According to the report, during interrogations, these Egyptian jihadi cell members “confessed to very serious and important information concerning the financial sources of the group and the planners of the event and the storming and burning of the U.S. consulate in Benghazi…. And among the more prominent figures whose names were mentioned by cell members during confessions were: Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi

Libyan Intelligence Document translated by Ibrahim

Libyan Intelligence Document translated by Ibrahim (EXHIBIT B)

Upon doing even further analysis of this document, we found that it aligned with even more evidence we uncovered back in September.

For example, in addition to mentioning Egypt, Mursi, and Ansar al-Sharia, the document also mentions Al-Nas TV and Dar Al-Hekma, both of which we raised red flags about in the days and weeks after the Benghazi attacks.

Let’s consider the timeline of events leading up to and including 9/11/12:

Thursday, September 6th: According to the Wall Street Journal, this was the day that the 14-minute Innocence of Muslims video trailer was sent to “journalists around the world”. Some of the video was translated into Arabic.

Friday, September 7th: Egypt’s Wisam Abdul Waris of Dar Al-Hekma (yes, the same Dar Al-Hekma identified in the Libyan Intelligence document) publicly denounces Innocence of Muslims. He does so while calling for the criminalization of any defamation of Islam, even in non-Muslim countries.

Saturday, September 8th: Al-Nas (yes, the same Al-Nas identified in the Libyan Intelligence document) talk show host Khalid Abdallah, who is sympathetic to the more fundamentalist, Salafi Muslims, interviewed a Muslim activist named Mohammad Hamdy and aired translated portions of the Innocence of Muslims video that for weeks, Obama administration officials attempted to blame for the Benghazi attacks. Reuters reported days later that the airing of these clips from the video was “the flashpoint” for the protests in Cairo and attacks in Benghazi. Here is the video of the exchange. Portions of the Innocence of Muslims video are aired beginning at the 5:46 mark:

Sunday, September 9th: An interview with Wisam Abdul Waris is uploaded to YouTube. A translated excerpt of what Waris said is beneath the video:

“We have moved to review with Mr. Rifai all the legal procedures today by which we created The Voice of Wisdom Coalition (I’itilaf Sawt al-Hekma); it will hold accountable everyone who insults Islam locally and internationally, in accordance with every country’s laws. We all know the problems Yasser Al-Habib had in London and after that in Berlin… in Germany, an extremist group was allowed to publicize cartoons that insult the prophet in front of the Salafist Mosque in Berlin, through a legal decision. So what we did was to ask Sharabi Mahmoud to reject this legal decision on behalf of the Egyptian people who are Muslim; for this reason, we created this coalition. We also made an official request from the Church in Egypt to issue a public announcement, to state it has nothing to do with this deed.”

At this point, let’s introduce the YouTube channel of Sam Bacile. It is later learned that Bacile is actually Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the man behind the Innocence of Muslims video. At one time, two videos appeared on the Feed tab of Bacile’s channel. Sometime between September 9th – 11th, the administrator commented on the Waris video.

About one week earlier, Bacile identified the other video that appeared on his channel as one of his favorites; it is a video of Nader Bakkar, the official spokesman of the Salafist Nour Party. Bakkar and Waris joined forces in the effort expressed by Waris on September 7th. Here is a screenshot:


Also at one time, Bacile had one video “Like”. It’s curious that this video featured an interview with a British female convert to Islam:


Though the video is no longer associated with the Sam Bacile YouTube channel, it is still posted:

The New York Times reported that the Sam Bacile YouTube account was actually opened and maintained by Bakoula’s son, Abanob Nakoula.

Monday, September 10th: One day prior to the anniversary of the 9/11/01 attacks, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens – the highest ranking State Department official in Libya – arrives in Benghazi from Tripoli and is due to return to Tripoli on the 14th. Despite warnings and previous attacks, the U.S. Special Mission Compound (SMC) in Benghazi was woefully insecure and not equipped to protect Stevens.

As an aside, the State Department didn’t just drop Stevens inside a compound that wasn’t sufficiently secured. It hired the February 17th Martyrs Brigade to provide security. The F17MB has allegiances to both Al-Qaeda and one of the groups identified in that Libyan Intelligence document mentioned earlier.

Via Newsmax:

Several entries on the militia’s Facebook page openly profess sympathy for Ansar al-Sharia, the hardline Islamist extremist group widely blamed for the deadly attack on the mission. The State Department did not respond to a Newsmax request for an explanation as to why the February 17th Martyrs Brigade was hired to protect the mission.

An Interim Progress Report released by the House Oversight Committee stated the following about F17MB:

Numerous reports have indicated that the Brigade had extremist connections, and it had been implicated in the kidnapping of American citizens as well as in the threats against U.S. military assets.

It should be noted that Almogaz News reported that Ansar Al-Sharia of Egypt is a “Salafist group” (keep in mind that Al-Nas is also Salafist). The mission of Ansar al-Sharia – according to Almogaz – is to “release Islamist prisoners”.

Tuesday, September 11th: The itinerary for Ambassador Stevens says that he is to meet with F7MB at 11:00am but next to this are the handwritten words, “Another day”.


The itinerary was drafted on September 8th, which is also the same day that F7MB made it knownthey would be pulling back on support:

…on September 8, 2012, just days before Ambassador Stevens arrived in Benghazi, the February 17 Martyrs Brigade told State Department officials that the group would no longer support U.S. movements in the city, including the Ambassador’s visit.

The attack on the SMC is launched later that evening. Sean Smith is killed in the attack but the body of Christopher Stevens could not be located and was later removed by Libyans and taken to a hospital under the control of Ansar al-Sharia, according to the testimony of Gregory Hicks, who became the highest-ranking State Department official in Libya after Stevens passed away.

At the Washington Free Beacon, (EXHIBIT B-1) Bill Gertz reported on the shocking but unconfirmed claim made by an al-Qaeda terrorist named Abdallah Dhu-al-Bajadin:

An al Qaeda terrorist stated in a recent online posting that U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens was killed by lethal injection after plans to kidnap him during the Sept. 11, 2012 terror attack in Benghazi went bad.

While the charge that Stevens was killed by lethal injection is unsubstantiated, evidence that the attack on the Benghazi SMC was about kidnapping, not murder, is corroborated by multiple pieces of evidence. If true, what would be the motive behind the kidnapping of the top State Department official in Libya?

Keep reading.

That the attack was planned and involved foreigners (Egyptians) corroborates what Libyan President Mohamed Yousef el-Magariaf told CBS News’ Bob Scheiffer on Face the Nation on Sunday, September 16th (EXHIBIT C):

BOB SCHIEFFER: And you believe that this was the work of al Qaeda and you believe that it was led by foreigners. Is that– is that what you are telling us?

MOHAMED YOUSEF EL-MAGARIAF: It was planned– definitely, it was planned by foreigners, by people who– who entered the country a few months ago, and they were planning this criminal act since their– since their arrival.

Relative to Mursi’s alleged involvement, El-Magariaf provided only circumstantial evidence by identifying attackers as being “foreigners” but in retrospect, the Libyan president’s claims that day are corroborated by the Libyan Intelligence document and the real-time video.

Also on September 16, 2012, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice appeared on five Sunday talk shows and asserted the attack was the result of a spontaneous demonstration in response to a video. Here are quotes from Rice’s appearance on ABC This Week, during which she said the following (EXHIBIT D):

“What happened this week in Cairo, in Benghazi, in many other parts of the region was a result, a direct result of a heinous and offensive video that was widely disseminated, that the U.S. Government had nothing to do with, which we have made clear is reprehensible and disgusting.”

At a minimum, Rice was directing attention away from Mursi’s involvement with this demonstrably false statement. A short time later, she went as far as directly defending Mursi…………(continue reading all the evidence at the initial article, Ironclad….)

It is not for nothing that this blogger keeps linking Barack HUSSEIN Obama back to the Muslim Brotherhood Mafia. In starkest terms, the leader of the free world is, in one form or another, a member of the Brotherhood. YES, you read that right, an actual member.

Now, this is not a charge that is coming from thin air, nor is it a blithely mentioned indictment of the leader of the free world. Hardly. But two trusted investigative journalist contacts, both of whom operate independently of one another, and VERY plugged in professionals – who must, for obvious safety reasons, remain nameless…Hastings, Breitbart and the rest – have evidence to back up their claims. Not only that, but Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s Brotherhood status is precisely why approximately 8 billion in U. S. payoffs was given to Egypt’s Brotherhood, as “guarantees” for their silence. What does this all mean?

In plain language, the leader of the free world is only as useful as his ability to deliver the goods. How many times has this blog termed the Brotherhood a Mafia? Again, not for nothing. As such, they are in possession of a paper trail, one which, if released, would blow Obama (and his Islamic-leaning Washington surrogates) straight into jail cells – or worse.

Believe it, or not.

Iran’s Triumph (Almost) Assured Through The Leader Of The Free World: America’s Surrender To The Islamist Revolution…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Just because one is an inveterate monster (read: Iran’s Hitlerite, Mahdi-driven leadership) does not obviate their capacity to see other evil-doers for what they are. In fact, it takes an incomparable, monstrous liar to often spot ones opponent’s inner core, so just consider it to be an inherent “liar’s radar”

But, what does this have to do with those who are causing chaos world over? Everything. You see, the most dangerous killers in Iran, the Quds Forces, are not off target as they posit the truth: yes, the leader of the free world has surrendered to Iran’s will. Yet, they are wrong in their underlying assessment, accusing Washington of bending to their will. Well, if one side is in sync with the other’s end goals, then surely one cannot be accused of surrendering, even if it appears as such to the outside world. 

So, in effect, Iran’s lying regime is doing what they do best, as they spin a narrative of surrender to the world. However, Barack HUSSEIN Obama surely knows that Iran’s genocidal regime sees through his mask, as he does theirs. Besides, Valerie Jarrett, his Iranian alter ego, is guiding him all the way with many surrogates in tow – to Iran’s success!

Most trenchantly, as Commentary Magazine – a “thinking” person’s  venue – assesses:

It’s fair to point out that American officials have spent the last five years persuading those who are worried about the nuclear threat reassuring us that there is plenty of time to talk about it and that the “window of diplomacy” was still open. To that end, the Obama administration has wasted years on laughable attempts to engage the Islamist regime and on diplomacy aimed at assembling a weak international coalition willing to impose sanctions on Iran and a diplomatic process that consistently flopped. Thus, if Iran is so much closer to realizing its dream of obtaining a genocidal weapon and making diplomacy difficult it is only because they have successfully manipulated a U.S. administration that wanted to be deceived. That’s something to be taken into consideration as we observe the ability of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani to persuade the West to restart diplomacy almost as if the past decade of talks had never occurred.

ONTO Obama’s de facto surrender of the free world to the genocidal mullahs…..


Quds Forces chief: President’s remark acknowledged inability to change regime


President Obama’s statement to the United Nations last week that America is not seeking regime change in Iran is not merely a kind remark, but a recognition of U.S. inability to bring change to Iran, the head of Iran’s Quds Forces, Gen. Qasem Soleimani, said.

Joining in that view, an outlet of the Quds cyber forces officers posted an image of a surrendering Obama in military uniform under the title “In a not too distant future.”

The image has Soleimani on top overlooking the defeat of America with a note at the bottom: “One Qasem Soleimani is enough for all the enemies of this country (Iran).”

That claim was underscored this week by Seyed Hossein Naqavi Hosseini, a member of Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, who said that while “Iran complies with the Non-Proliferation Treaty rules and regulations and cooperates within that framework, it will never accept the Additional Protocol.”

That protocol allows the IAEA to verify whether countries are complying with nuclear regulations.

“Tehran will not accept any kind of suspension or halt, and all Iranian nuclear facilities will continue their operation,” Hosseini said.

Soleimani, in a Thursday speech to the Congress of Martyrs of the Holy Defense, said Obama was not after regime change only because the United States can’t topple Iran, adding that “America in the last 35 years has committed the most cowardly and worst practices against the … Islamic Republic.”

His remarks were reported by Fars News Agency, an outlet run by the Revolutionary Guards.

Soleimani, called by a former CIA officer the “most powerful operative in the Middle East today,” directs all terrorist activities of the Islamic regime throughout the world and commands much of the behind-the-scenes operations in Syria to protect the Assad regime.

Another Iranian general,Yahya Safavi, former chief commander of the guards and special adviser to the supreme leader, said that the United States has clearly retreated and has chosen a soft approach on Iran.

“It seems that the Americans have reached a conclusion that Iran is a powerful and stable power in the region that maintains a logical and smart method in conflict with its enemies,” Safavi said. “Americans now see that they can’t confront the powerful Iran. Of course Iran will remain aggressive with its demands against America, because the reality is that there is much to demand from the Americans.”

In his U.N. speech, Obama reiterated his desire to continue negotiations with Iran and stated that Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear energy. He cited a fatwa (religious edict) by the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, against nuclear weapons and President Hasan Rouhani’s earlier statement to the U.N. that the Islamic Republic will never develop a nuclear weapon.

But the Islamic regime recently paraded a new line of ballistic missiles that have a range of 1,250 miles and bragged that its power will change the geopolitics of the region and the world. It also announced the production of hundreds of small submarines to add to its ability to threaten the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf. And last month it announced the completion of the installation of 18,000 centrifuges at its nuclear enrichment sites.

In emphasizing America’s “surrender,” Gen. Hossein Salami, the deputy commander of the Revolutionary Guards, said in a speech at Friday prayers in Qom that, “The enemy only understands the logic of power and nothing else. … The jihadist groups (Hezbollah and others), in defeating the Israeli army, planted a seed that has grown to a strong tree with its branches visible throughout the world, and the threats by the oppressive powers no longer frighten the Muslims as the apparent posture of America has collapsed,” Iran’s Tasnim news agency reported Friday.

“Today our vision of America’s power is realistic,” Salami said. “The Americans, in a time when their president sneezed a storm [that] would form in another part of the world, today are incapable of a military operation in a country that suffers under three years of war (Syria).

“America’s power has been damaged and you can see its weakness in their own land in front of the Iranian officials. … Such impotence has not been seen from America in front of a country such as ours.”

Obama revealed that although the Iranian president refused to meet with him, he did hold a telephone conversation with Rouhani and that he was hopeful there would be a positive outcome in upcoming negotiations over Iran’s illicit nuclear program.

Although Rouhani in several interviews stated that he has full authority to negotiate and that he was hopeful the nuclear issue could be resolved, a powerful member of the Iranian parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee revealed last week that Rouhani has only been authorized by the supreme leader to change tactics but not policy. He said there would be no negotiations with America on the principles of the Islamic regime or anything else.

A recently revealed video of Rouhani before the Iranian June presidential elections shows him boasting about deceiving the West and advancing Iran’s nuclear program during his tenure as the head of the Islamic Republic’s nuclear negotiating team.

According to a source in the Revolutionary Guards intelligence unit, who cannot be named for security reasons, the regime’s ayatollahs got exactly what they wanted: a commitment from America to accept the regime’s nuclear program and a statement from the president of America not wanting regime change in Iran.

Rouhani’s approach of moderation on the surface has isolated Israel as the regime knew that America would not take military action against Iran under Obama but was not sure about Israel, he said, and that’s now secured.

Most tellingly, this is where “negotiations” stand, as the Islamist-in-Chief assists Iran over the finish line – 

Nothing remains of the Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s four stipulations for accepting a nuclear accord with Iran. Not a  vestige will reach the Geneva conference agenda after Washington brushed aside every one of those stipulations, which were: to halt uranium enrichment, remove enriched uranium stocks from Iran,  shut down the Fordo underground enrichment plant and suspend construction of the heavy water reactor in Arak for the production of plutonium.

Secretary Kerry threw a bone to the Israeli government in his comment Sunday via satellite to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee summit in California:  “I want you to know that our eyes are open, too. While we seek a peaceful resolution to Iran’s nuclear program, words must be matched with actions. In any engagement with Iran, we are mindful of Israel’s security needs.”

Of utmost significance, as always, in relation to Israel’s security interests, the onus lies with Israel’s PM. Now, whereas the hour before midnight is fast approaching, those of us in the cross hairs can only hope and pray that PM Netanyahu is not uttering his regular rhetorical flourishes and is deadly serious: 

Addressing a Knesset session marking the 40th anniversary of the Yom Kippur war, Tuesday afternoon, the prime minister said: One lesson Israel learned from the Yom Kippur war was “never disallow the option of a preemptive strike a priori.” While this option may not meet all situations, it deserves careful and earnest consideration.

Netanyahu went on to say: The potential international reaction to such an attack is of less consequence than the price in blood Israel is apt to pay from a future “strategic blow” and the necessity to hit back.

Lest anyone believes that this American Israeli (living in the eye of the Iranian storm) has any patience for the prognostications delivered through a writer’s imagination, let alone takes them seriously, in regard to this existential issue, you would be correct. However, there are always exceptions to rules and this is one such time. So, as a gift to the readers, this blog offers up the following read, one which is a “fictional” scenario, yet its base elements are more than on target – Iran Knows What the West Forgot: Charm is Cheap. Read it.

Iranian President Hasan Rouhani

MOST significantly for Israel, as well as the entire west, those in league with Barack HUSSEIN Obama want nothing more than for Iran to gain the ultimate weapons of mass destruction. Why, just ask yourselves, are they dragging their feet through their fealty to jaw-jaw, knowing full well that it will NEVER stop Iran (despite sanctions) from getting within spitting distance to the bomb? Basically, these delaying tactics are necessary to bring about World War 3, after which the “New World Order” will become a fait accompli. 

Yes, there are those who will tsk, tsk over such words, as the meanderings of much more than a vivid imagination. Fine. But the guideposts are indeed pointing in the above direction, so much so that its explanations (historical parallels too) are more than resonant with the wildfires in the Mid East, as the leader of the free world assists the most hard-line leaderships to gain power.

Think about why EVERY counter intuitive measure, to deal with the world’s most dangerous and fanatical regime, is in play. It’s no accident.

Basically, thirty five years after Iran’s Islamic revolution, the free world is falling off a cliff. And in terms of the ever patient Islamic mindset, such a short time span is barely a blip on their radar. However, for the ADD-afflicted west, it is truly long gone history. Therein lies (part of) their triumph.

UPDATE: cementing Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s plans and betrayals – How Turkey shopped Mossad spies to Iran: A story leaked by Washington to caution Netanyahu – DEBKAfile Special Report October 17, 2013