U.S. BORDER CRISIS DESIGNED TO ASSIST TERRORIST INFILTRATIONS:ITS FUEL;NARCO-TERROR!Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

UNDER the “covert” eyes of John Brennan (as an aside, his devil-like stare is beyond creepy, ya think?) Obama Inc.’s plans to destroy America are coming full circle. And while its seedlings were implanted decades ago, the fact of the matter is, currently, ALL stops are in full force in order to effectuate America’s demise. Brennan’s task is to be the wielder of the forceps. The undertaker. On the other hand, this may sound like hysteria-talk and fantastical to boot, at least to a certain segment of the population. Suit yourselves. Mea culpas won’t be necessary. Nor expected.

During a dangerously volatile period of domestic terrorism, young anarchists were plotting the upending of America. In the vanguard stood the Weather Underground and the Black Panthers. Implanted in 1969 in the heart of a revolutionary movement, Larry Grathwohl, a 22-year-old Vietnam vet, found himself acting as an FBI informant. Inserted into the Weather Underground organization under deep cover, he became privy to their terror plots as well as the leadership’s “reasoning”. It is this facet which still resonates today. BRINGING DOWN AMERICA is a gripping tale of plots and subplots, each one aimed at “the violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie [and] the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat”, as Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, and Jeff Jones exhorted in their 1974 manifesto, “Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism.” The subtext of this gripping memoir is brought to the fore in Chapter 14: “The Cover Is Blown:”

Once in the van we drove around the city… while we were driving Maynard & Green (my FBI handlers) began telling me about the mystery man waiting for me. He was an Arab guerrilla. My meeting was to be in strict confidence. They refused to tell me why he was in the country, how he got in, obviously he was working for the U.S….

Then, as now, the left operated in tandem (and separately) with Arab terrorists to bring down “Amerika”. These same leftists of yesteryear (albeit much grayer, but colluding with Muslim Brotherhood operatives DEEP inside Obama Inc.) are completely ensconced inside the regime of Barack HUSSEIN Obama, as indicated within the above linked book review at American Thinker!

SIGNIFICANTLY, there isn’t a more suitable candidate for the hit job. His credentials are impeccable. Let’s nickname him: Johnny boy or grave digger…take your pick.

Credential One:

AS a man known to have many “talents”, there are some which come in handier than others. Head and shoulders above the rest. Specifically, a “mysterious” death, related to his boss, surfaced to the fore. Interesting CV requirement. How many of us meet said rigorous standards for employment, unless applying as lieutenants at Mafioso Inc.? Sheesh.

Credential Two:

MOST revealingly, being a Muslim convert adds heft and weight to said gainful employment. Mind numbing.

Credential Three:

NOW, in line with said anti-American credentials, does it come as a shock that Johnny boy aka grave digger took his oath of office, as Director of the CIA (OMG), on a draft of the Constitution? You know, the one which didn’t yet possess the BILL OF RIGHTS! You got that? Talk about sleigh of hand…bait and switch…finger in the eye…an FU symbol too…towards the American people!

Credential Four:

STILL, sorry to be the bearer of even more bad news, but, who recalls the “fortuitous” death of Michael Hastings (alongside Breitbart, Fuddy and who knows how many others), somewhat before he was about to blow the cover off of Johnny boy’s aka grave digger’s nexus to the Fraudster-in-Chief’s bonafides/passport breach?

ALAS, in furtherance of their illegal goals, readers may also recall several commentaries linking Islamic terror to drug/gang cartels, under the rubric of “narco-terror”. This is being mentioned because the criminally bent duo (with MANY of their inside helpers) can’t just wave a magic wand and expect America’s house, its underpinnings, to come tumbling down. A coup de grace is required.

ENTER: narco-terror and the illegal “kiddie” putsch against the borders. The nexus.

And while Hezbollah is highlighted within the above mentioned commentaries (they are at the epicenter of narco-terror within the “triangle” border region of Latin America), when it comes to decimating America, even Sunni ISIS (aka ISIL) terrorists fighting Iranian Shia proxy forces for control in the Mid East, join hands to bring the U.S. to its knees. The enemy of my enemy is my friend….

And, as a stepped up “student” of all things related to Islamic terror, well, it became impossible to miss the most intrinsic linkage of all, at least regarding the infiltration and penetration into America. Elsewhere too.

IN this regard, porous borders, mainly via Mexico’s entry points, are a pre-requisite. So, isn’t it convenient that Obama Inc. DENIES that Latin American networks are front and center funding bases for Islamic terror? Not only that, but MS 13 leads the pack. Their tentacles, for years, have reached into innumerable U.S. cities and towns, both large and small. Are they just plain stupid, or evil? Rhetorical.

PEER within this video link- ► 42:21► 42:21

IF your heart can stand it, get a load of this:

Tosh Plumlee, former CIA Agent, reveals startling information about our nation, and our government!  This is jaw-dropping information that we are definitely not supposed to know about!  He discusses covert operations, including what’s really going on at the ‘border’ and why we are being distracted! He also reveals information about drug cartels and government involvement, (coming martial law), and the fact that Muslim terrorists are walking straight into our country, and a lot of them!

While they’re looking the other way at a created diversion, the terrorists slip right across the border!  Then, they infiltrate and quietly set up safe houses in major cities! These people from the Middle East and South Africa have a plan, and we don’t even know what they are doing!  We are wide open—literally sitting ducks—while they are building an entire army inside of the USA!

“These bones have been buried, but now they are starting to come out! There’s old operatives that are starting to talk about some of the operations that they were involved with that coincide and prove what I am telling you today!” —Tosh Plumlee

{listen intently from 29:14 onward…he starts to flesh out the Mid East terror connection and explains the terrorist’s diversionary tactics…as hapless kiddies (through paid propaganda disbursed into Central American countries by Washington’s self-invested players) are shipped en mass and abused as pawns…but don’t confuse the real kiddie victims with teen MS 13 etc gang members slipping through, as they work in concert with Mid East terror contractors! – http://vimeo.com/100280872}

PRECIPITOUSLY, the overriding question for this blogger is: how “efficient” have Obama’s mouthpieces been as they opine about the “poor” kiddies seeking entry into America – riddled with infectious diseases no less ! – at the same time that they facilitate Islamic jihadists along the way? Mind you, some of these very same teen kiddies are part of the notorious MS 13 gang, you know, the narco-terror link cited above! How coincidental is that? Mind boggling.

Could it get any scarier? A Machiavellian nightmare for everyone who cares about the survival of America. The free world. 

BUT it gets worse. So sorry…

AS reported bJosey Wales: 

RED LINE WARNING: This is a live beheading broadcast to the world by ISIS, VERY GRAPHIC! 

YOUTUBE dhimmis took down the heavily censored video but here it is, uncensored, on Liveleak – How many of these ISIS fighters are now entering America preparing for Caliphate?  That is the question I have not heard anyone asking yet. 

They are sending a message to the west. 

The American people need to understand that the leader of the ISIS was released from U.S. custody in Iraq by President Barack Obama during his Iraqi troop draw down last year.

The CIA has organized this ISIS terror group. Then they open America’s southern boarders for man power, weapons and supplies can be moved into America with no resistence. 

Then Obama releases the GITMO 5 to join their Islamic brothers and bring Jihad to America. 

Now Obama opens America’s southern borders for a free flow of illegal immigrants from all over the world to walk right into the United States as they please. 

The quickest way to destabilize a country is to divide it’s citizens with government propaganda, (Children in need humanitarian aid)  then open the borders of that country for refugees to enter unabated as Obama is doing for his puppet masters to America. 

How many of these ISIS fighters are now entering America preparing for Caliphate?  That is the question I have not heard anyone asking yet. 

Fox News’s Jeanine Pirro Jeanine Pirro told the nation that ISIS’s leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was in US custody, and released in 2009 during President Obama’s Presidency:

 

“The head of this band of savages is a man named Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, the new Osama Bin Laden. A man released by Obama in 2009, who started ISIS a year later.”

 

– This came a few days after Pirro called for the President to be impeached for the prisoner swap that led to the release of Bowe Bergdahl.

Fox’s Megyn Kelly went a little further, and described the circumstances under which al-Baghdadi was released:

 

“We are also learning more about the leader of the terror group, a man described as the new Bin Laden, the heir to Bin Laden. It turns out he had been in U.S. custody until 2009, over in Iraq, when he was then turned over to the Iraqi government as part of our troop drawdown. And then he was released.”

 

– The implication being that the President has a history of releasing dangerous prisoners, including one who went on to form the group currently slaughtering its way across Iraq. Indeed, Michael Daly writing for The Daily Beast took up the story and went further:

 

“When Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi walked away from a U.S. detention camp in 2009, the future leader of ISIS issued some chilling final words to reservists from Long Island.”

 

– The chilling words were reported by Army Col. Kenneth King, the commanding officer of Camp Bucca in 2009 and said to be al-Baghdadi telling the camp as he left, that he would:

 

“See you in New York.”

 

– The source of the story, Colonel King goes on to express his anger at the release of al-Baghdadi in 2009:

 

“We spent how many missions and how many soldiers were put at risk when we caught this guy and we just released him.”

 

– The story went international, with The Daily Mail over here in the UK taking it up and capitalising the words “set free” for extra effect:

 

“Revealed: How Obama SET FREE the merciless terrorist warlord now leading the ISIS horde blazing a trail of destruction through Iraq.”

 

– The UK’s Daily Telegraph proposed their own explanation as to why al-Baghdadi was released in 2009:

 

“One possible explanation is that he was one of thousands of suspected insurgents granted amnesty as the US began its draw down in Iraq.”

 

– So to summarise, according to the right winged press and TV networks, Al-Baghdadi – the leader of ISIS in 2014 – was released from US custody in 2009, handed to the Iraqis, probably due to an amnesty granted to insurgents at the behest of the Obama administration. That’s the narrative. And yet, the problem with the entire story here, is it isn’t actually true. Any of it.

Politifact researched the claim and found it to be entirely false, and worse for US conservatives; al Baghdadi was actually released in 2004, when a Republican was President. A year later, a US intelligent report tells us that the Pentagon considered al-Baghdadi to be incredibly dangerous:

 

“He would kidnap individuals or entire families, accuse them, pronounce sentence and then publicly execute them.”

 

THIS American-Israeli cannot stress enough: if NOT for Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s purposeful upending of the Middle East, starting with Egypt, the illegal war in Libya would not have borne its intended fruit; the empowerment of the ISIS, their commonly stated moniker. Or, as the Islamist-in-Chief regularly calls them, the ISIL. Now, this is not a distinction without a difference. How so? Intrinsically, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant expressly encompasses ALL of the Levant, including Israel! Think about what the heretofore leader of the free world is signaling. Championing. 

CONSEQUENTIALLY, under the guise of amnesty for all the so-called “dreamers”, Obama’s goons have masked the real agenda of the radical left and Islamic helpmates: the storming of America with third world peoples, all the while every manner of terrorist – narco-mules or what not – slip through.

INDEED, this is NO fairy tale!

CIA’s BRENNAN, A CONVERT TO ISLAM, PUSHED TALIBAN TERROR RELEASE! WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?(EXPLOSIVE VIDEO)Commentary By Adina Kutnicki


John Brennan: Pushed for the release of five Taliban leaders since 2011.

John Brennan: Pushed for the release of five Taliban leaders since 2011.

ON matters of grave import, this site checks with its own trusted sources before reporting on explosive information, even though often drawing its own (blog) commentary conclusions. So, as a matter of record, back in February 2013, it was cited: yes, John Brennan indeed converted to Islam and there was no reason to believe otherwise.

In line with this information, the following commentaries were noted and they have now come full circle:

Circle One:

But to truly understand how the circle formed between the Islamist-in-Chief and his choice for Director of the CIA, one must also go back to the oh so “mysterious” death, one which took place during Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s first term.

Circle Two:

Not only that, but in what alternative universe is it acceptable for the Commander-in-Chief’s CIA pick to eschew the Bill of Rights? Indeed, in a fully primed anti-American one – that universe!

Circle Three:

Which brings us back to another ! “mysterious” death, that of investigative reporter Michael Hastings. How many understood Brennan’s related footprints and fingerprints?

Circle Four:

Hence, unraveling the patch quilt connection between Obama’s “mysterious”, non-transparent past and Brennan, sitting atop the CIA, comes into sharp relief.

Therefore, demanding the release of Taliban commanders, under the reign of Barack HUSSEIN Obama, appeared to be only a matter of time. An anti-American Commander-in-Chief colludes with an equally Islamist-driven CIA Director, a match made in anti-American hell!

CIA Director Accused of Converting To Islam Pushed For Release of Taliban Commanders

The outrage over the exchange of five top level Taliban commanders for Bowe Bergdahl, a deserter at best and traitor who helped the Taliban murder his fellow soldiers at worst, is palpable. The role of CIA Director John Brennan in pushing for this deal could bolster the claims made by former FBI Agent John Guandolo last year that Brennan converted to Islam while a station chief in Saudi Arabia in the 1990′s, as relayed byShoebat.com.

According to the Daily Beast, Brennan – along with another interesting figure – have been pushing for the release of these five Taliban terrorist commanders since at least 2011:

For years, CIA Director John Brennan and White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough were part of a small group of Obama administration officials who believed that five relatively high-ranking Taliban commanders could be released under certain conditions with manageable risk of harm to American interests. For years, senior defense and intelligence officials disagreed—and were poised to block a potential trade for the Taliban five and American hostage Bowe Bergdahl.

By 2014, many of the skeptics had left the Obama administration; Brennan, McDonough, and their allies assumed new roles at the very top of the Obama administration; and the White House and its allies at State were able to convince their replacements to sign off on the deal.

“All of us on the National Security team were unanimous in supporting and recommending that we take this opportunity,” National Security Advisor Susan Rice told CNN Friday. But for years, that was not the case and Brennan and McDonough were opposed to other senior officials.

The logic Brennan used when making his case was suspect as well. Moreover, two figures that have by and large been Obama loyalists even objected to the deal:

Back in 2011, the idea these five prisoners could be released safely was opposed by Leon Panetta, who served in Obama’s first term as secretary of defense and director of the CIA. James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, was also opposed. But Brennan and others argued that the Taliban five were primarily focused on fighting against other Afghans and never had a record of attacking Americans outside of their own country. They had extensive ties to al Qaeda, but were focused on their own civil war, not international jihad.

As Shoebat.com has reported, when it comes to U.S. national security, Brennan has often demonstrated a desire to defer to the umbrella group under which the Taliban essentially resides.

Also in 2011, Muslim Brotherhood agent and attorney Farhana Khera sent Brennan a letter imploring him to create a task force that would “purge” the training materials used to educate law enforcement and homeland security officials. Materials deemed offensive to Muslim Brotherhood individuals and groups (America’s enemies) would be taken out. Not only did Brennan promptly respond to Khera but he granted her much of what she wanted.

Earlier this year, Shoebat.com relayed and analyzed the findings of Seymour Hersh and discovered that Brennan’s successor – David Petraeus – was in charge of a weapons trafficking operation run out of Benghazi that was designed to ship weapons to Syrian rebels. The country of Qatar funded this operation in conjunction with Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

It’s rather obvious that the agenda of funding the rebels has remained in place. As such, Brennan is clearly interested in aiding in the effort. Earlier this week, Shoebat.com reported on the likelihood that the five Taliban commanders released to Qatar would actually become assets for that country’s interests in Syria.

Based on these new developments relative to the controversial release of Bowe Bergdahl – along with Brennan’s interest in pushing for it – the interview with Guandolo during which he made the explosive claim that Brennan converted to Islam takes on added significance. Here are the relevant portions of it:

interviewed Guandolo nearly a year after he made that shocking claim. If you listen, you will know that Guandolo is adamantly sticking by his story.

DO pay sharp attention to the embedded interview by Tom Trento, another of this site’s contacts.

IF anything, and even though it appears as if the criminal regime of Obama Inc. will make good on its plans to bring down America, the fact of the matter is that a large (patriotic) segment of the population (as well as other westerners, ex pats included) now know why so many anti-American decisions have co-opted the People’s House.

In fact, one such geo-political analyst who holds Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s (Islamic) feet to the fire, none other than Caroline Glick, is an American-Israeli whose voice is heard around the world. Deservedly so.

And if Glick’s op-ed in the Jerusalem Post doesn’t expose the Islamist-in-Chief’s mendacity, heralding the release of Talibans killers as “justifiable” policy, well, little else will suffice:

What was it about the Bergdahl trade tipped the scales? Why is this decision different from Obama’s other foreign policy decisions? For instance, why is the public outraged now when it wasn’t outraged in the aftermath of the jihadist assault on US installations in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, in which US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were murdered? Politically, Obama emerged unscathed from failures in every area he has engaged. From Iraq to Iran to Syria to Libya to Russia and beyond, he has never experienced the sort of across the board condemnation he is now suffering. His political allies and media supporters always rallied to his side. They always explained away his failures.

So what explains the outcry? Why are people like Senator Dianne Feinstein, who have been supportive of Obama’s nuclear appeasement of Iran, up in arms over the Bergdahl swap? There are three aspects of the Bergdahl deal that distinguish it from the rest of Obama’s foreign policy blunders.

First, the Bergdahl deal was conducted in an unlawful manner and the White House readily acknowledged that it knowingly broke the law by not informing Congress 30 days in advance of the swap. This brazen lawbreaking angered Obama’s loyal allies in Congress who, like Feinstein, were insulted by his behavior.

Second, Obama initiated the story and made himself the sole owner of the swap.

Obama didn’t have to make the Bargdahl swap a story about his foreign policy. He chose to. As commentators have argued, if Obama had simply ordered the Defense Department to issue a press release announcing the swap the story probably wouldn’t have caused more than the normal amount of controversy.

And whereas Benghazi was a story about jihadists attacking, and Obama was pilloried – and defended – for his response to an act of aggression initiated by US enemies, Obama presented the Bergdahl swap as his brainchild. So it is impossible to blame anyone else for this move, or wish it away.

As the administration saw it, the public would rally around the leader over this feel-good story.

Obama obviously believed that the Bergdahl trade would help him to surmount his opponents’ criticism over the Veterans’ Administration scandal and other issues.

And this is where his failure to understand the disposition of the American people comes into play.

The third aspect of the swap that distinguishes it from his other foreign policy failures is that by organizing the ceremony at the Rose Garden, and making it a story about himself, Obama denied his supporters the tools they have used in every other instance to explain away his failures and justify his counterproductive decisions.

Obama sailed into office by presenting himself as a non-ideological pragmatist. Obama recognized that the public was tired of foreign policies based on ideology. George W. Bush lost public support for the war in Iraq, and for his foreign policy goal of bringing freedom to the Islamic world more generally, when his ideologically charged rhetoric of American exceptionalism stopped matching the situation on the ground.

A year after Bush declared an end to major combat operations in Iraq, the sight of US military contractors being lynched in Fallujah soured the public on American exceptionalism. In Obama, they hoped that they found the antidote to Bush – a man who promised to replace ideology with hard-nosed pragmatism.

In the event, Obama turned out to be even more driven by ideology than Bush was. Obama is the anti-Bush not because he matches Bush’s ideology with pragmatism. He is the anti-Bush because he matches Bush’s grand foreign policy based on American exceptionalism with his own grand foreign policy based on American moral deficiency.

He made this clear most recently at his commencement address at West Point last month where he stipulated that “American influence is always stronger when we lead by example. We can’t exempt ourselves from the rules that apply to everybody else… .”

As to American exceptionalism, Obama sneered, “What makes us exceptional is not our ability to flout international norms and the rule of law; it is our willingness to affirm them through our actions.”

But while Obama’s critics have pointed out the radicalism at the heart of his foreign policy from the outset of his presidency, his supporters were always able to explain it away.

Obama’s appeasement of the Iranians was pragmatic.

We don’t want a war there, they say.

His support for the Muslim Brotherhood is not radical. It too is pragmatic, they soothe.

And so on and so forth.

As for Benghazi, in the fog of war, the media preferred its commitment to Obama’s reelection over its responsibility to report the truth of what happened.

Obama’s success in getting away with serial foreign policy failures, and his success in hiding the radical ideological basis of his decisions has always owed to his supporters’ ability to plausibly deny both the failures and the ideological motivation for his actions.

His Rose Garden announcement made such spin all but impossible. Americans are not particularly interested in foreign policy. But there are a few things that they won’t buy.

They won’t buy that a man who comes to the White House sporting a Taliban beard and praising Allah in Arabic is a normal American father.

They won’t buy spin that describes a deserter as an exemplary soldier.

They don’t want to free five senior terrorists and mass murderers in order to buy Bergdahl’s release.

In believing that the public would side with him and Bergdahl and Bergdahl’s dad against critics of the deal, Obama showed that for all his propaganda prowess, he doesn’t understand the public.

The public didn’t oppose the war in Iraq because they thought the US is morally deficient. They opposed the war in Iraq because Bush wasn’t winning it. And the public believed that Bush’s push for the abstract goal of democracy lay at the heart of the failure on the ground.

For nearly six years, Obama and his supporters have managed to fend off allegations that his foreign policy is even more ideological – and far more radical – than Bush’s by channeling the public’s aversion to pie-in-the-sky rhetoric and obfuscating facts. But the Bergdahl announcement at the Rose Garden ended all of that.

The reason Obama is being denounced for the Bergdahl swap is because he orchestrated a radical spectacle. Try as he may to castigate critics of the deal as partisan and cynical, Obama cannot pretend away the fact that the ceremony he arranged and oversaw was an open celebration of an American defeat, by the US president and the unsympathetic parents of an accused deserter.

And worse still for Obama’s protestations of pragmatism, his decision to take sole ownership of the swap revealed his ideological myopia. Only someone blinded by a worldview in which America is morally deficient could have thought that Americans would join him and the Bergdahls in celebrating an American defeat.

And now everyone knows what makes him tick.

MOST inherently, either via impeachment or court-martial – whatever gets the job done – this much is for sure: Barack HUSSEIN Obama is the first head that has to roll. In tandem, several top players have to fall in line too, including Brennan and a gaggle of others. And even though the (mega) damage done to the nation may never be fully reversed, it doesn’t obviate the necessity for national honor to be restored. 

FOR if the POTUS absconds from prosecution (as well as his henchpeople), even though he perpetrated high crimes and misdemeanors, is America, any longer, governed by the rule of law? Furthermore, if allowed to go unpunished, what makes America any different from so many nations ruled by juntas