Hillary's New Book "Stronger Together": A Would-be Caesar in a Pantsuit?

Not that I am a particular fan of Hillary Clinton, but the former First Lady and Secretary of State released a new book recently entitled "Stronger Together"; a fanciful trip down "what if" she had won the election and some of her policy decisions would have been . While she really needed to get over the fact that she didn't win and politics is not a static sport, so much of her statements are strictly speculative. Nevertheless, Hillary does go after her Democratic opponent, Bernie Sanders, pretty hard even though she helped rig the Primary to ensure that she handily beat the self-defined "democratic socialist".

In addition, even after securing the Primary victory, Clinton and the head of the Democratic National Committee (the DNC, like its counterpart, the RNC, runs the internal party machine), Deborah Wasserman-Schultz worked to keep Sanders' supporters from having any input into the party platform or from voicing their anger over procedures (Wasserman was fired from her position but was immediately hired by the Clinton camp). Ironically, her replacement, Donna Brazile, would be fired too. She was accused of feeding Hillary debate questions prior to a debate with Trump. Although the Sanders' camp would file a class action lawsuit, Federal judge William Zloch, would latter rule that the party could do as it pleased with respect to the primary; even rigging the outcome.

Think about that for just a moment. Let that statement simmer in your mind for just a minute. Bernie Sanders, a duly filed Democrat candidate filed to run in the Democratic Primary. He campaigned hard throughout the United States. Whether you liked his proposed platform or not (and many Millennials did), was denied a fair shot so scared was the Clinton camp and her supporters within the DNC that they were willing to rig specific primaries to ensure that Hillary won, and won big. The hope, of course, was that Sanders would get discouraged and drop out. Sanders didn't, and in fact, his message hit a cord with voters, especially younger voters. Meanwhile, Hillary's camp was hoping (to say the least) that one of the pre-vetted and pre-scripted Republican candidates would finally take out "the circus clown", Donald Trump.

The actions by the DNC, and reaffirmed by a federal judge, is that our votes aren't all that important. The party ultimately decides who it wants and then gets behind that individual. In this case, it was Hillary. In the case of the RNC, they clearly didn't want Trump. However, "The Donald" was clearly the strongest candidate based on his ability to attract crowds to speaking engagements and generate voter turnout. Although the RNC did entertain the idea of throwing out a Trump Primary victory and selecting a candidate through its executive committee (some of you will recall that Mitt Romney offered his "services" while this was being discussed), the RNC decided to hold its nose and allow Trump to become their nominee. Why? Because the Trump camp had dropped several not-so-subtle hints that their candidate would run as third party if the RNC pulled any shenanigans. The RNC knew that given Trump's popularity and ability to self-finance, they simply didn't have a candidate strong enough beat Trump. Besides, a divided conservative ticket would all but guarantee a Clinton victory in November.

It would also convey the message which the Democrats were struggling with, namely, that what the voters wanted didn't count. Both parties had sought to protect the illusion that voters still mattered, even though both parties include the provision in their by-laws to ignore the voting results and select a candidate of their own through the executive committee. Given the mood of the country, this may attract even more support for Trump, while on the Democrat side, they were hoping this would be downplayed. It wasn't, and accordingly, Sander's camp filed suit only to lose as stated before.

On a related matter, one that's sure to play a central role in any story about or by Hillary, is Benghazi. I'm sure everyone knows the story of Benghazi by now. Benghazi has gone down as one the worse attacks on the United States, not because of the number killed (there were four individuals who lost their lives), but because it was one of those situations which should not have happened, both before and the shameful cover-up by the Obama Administration, and especially by the State Department, afterwards. The official line was that it was a unplanned random attack by a small group of Libyans on the American Embassy in Benghazi. What, we were told, raised their ere was an obscure film with a anti-Islamic message. Of course, this was a complete fabrication created by Hillary's staff.

Over time, through bits and pieces, as well as the occasional admission, the public was able to piece together what really happened, despite the efforts of the Obama Administration. We now know for instance, the Hillary had (illegally) authorized gun running through the embassy, which was also done without the knowledge of Ambassador Stevens. The guns, as well as military intelligence reports, were run under the cover of the embassy to aid rebels in Syria and possibly, on to other groups in Afghanistan and perhaps elsewhere. We've also learned that the presence of radicalized Muslim fighters had been increasing over the preceding weeks. We learned that the security forces recruited locally were of dubious loyalty and that US personal were unarmed (weapons and ammo were available, however, they had been locked away in a secure vault). Repeated requests for additional security personal were largely ignored or declined by the State Department, as were requested for US personnel to be armed. As for the "obscure movie", it was so obscure that it hadn't even been shown yet. In fact, it had been produced by an independent producer who was strapped for money and was unable to finish the project.

During the attack itself, which lasted approximately seven hours, repeated requests for assistance were denied, including permission to evacuate US embassy personal to a more secure area or to the nearby airport where a charted plane was prepped and ready for takeoff. US military forces were monitoring the situation as well, and despite repeated requests to come to the aid of Ambassador Stevens and other members of his staff, were instructed to stand-down. We've learned since that the Navy had fighter planes fueled and armed and only an hour or less out from Sigonella Italy, as well at bases in Avlano Italy (U.S. Air Force and NATO) and Souda Bay Crete (US Navy).

The Army too had fighters fueled and armed sitting on the runway waiting for permission to launch. At the time of attack, we learned that two CIA operatives at nearby communications station within the embassy did had some light firepower to hold off the attackers briefly. Meanwhile, one of the individuals was "painting" targets in anticipation of a rescue which never came. We have since learned that flying in the vicinity was an AC-130 returning from a mission (an AC-130 is an ultra modern version of what we used to called "Puff the Magic Dragon" AC-47). The pilot had also been monitoring the situation and requested permission to lay down suppression fire until the cavalry came. He too was ordered to leave. In addition, the US had drones flying overhead during the attack. In the end, Ambassador Stevens, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Tyrone Woods were left to die. Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette, Commander of Carrier Strike Group 3 and US Army General Carter Ham, Commander of United States African Command, were both relieved of command by President Obama for their insistence on sending a relief operation to the embassy on the recommendation of Leon Panetta, Secretary of Defense.

There was obviously so much more to Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State and, of course, to run for President. However, even when taken as a whole, her record isn't great. Something happened to Hillary Clinton since the days when she was a bright idealist; one filled with passion for women's and children's issues; of when she served as an aide on the House Judiciary Committee's Impeach Inquiry Staff during the Watergate Hearings. Somewhere along the way, she was corrupted by the very system she, and other of our generation, sought to change. Her idealism became cynicism and ultimately, perhaps the end really did justifies the means. Perhaps the hand of History will write that Hillary Clinton was another reminder of Lord Acton's maxim that "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" . I think her book, and any that follows, will be her attempts to rewrite history in order to justify her actions or perhaps her lack of actions not just for posterity's sake as much as for herself. I believe too that it shows how far government has strayed from the ideals of our Founding Fathers.


Sales of Hillary Clinton's New Book Are Off To A Slow Start



Court Concedes DNC Had the Right to Rig Primaries Against Sanders



Benghazi: Military Commanders "Relieved of Duty"


Contractors say Clinton State Department silenced them on Benghazi security lapses

The Syrian Equation

It used to be that war was a rather simple affair. In the beginning, someone grabbed a big stick or rock and went swinging at the other person. Over time, it got a bit more complicated. A king or other leader would dispatch some knights and occasionally the king would even join them in battle. Then it got to the point where the leaders would stay behind and direct operations through as a series of decreasingly important leaders until you reached the guys doing the actual fighting. Sometimes these individuals would be sent enmasse against a battery of guns or cannons and hence the term "cannon fodder". Despite the changing tools or tactics of war, usually the goal was the same---beat your enemy to a bloody pulp and break their will to fight.

Of course, the objective was also usually the same; capture land, specific resources or assets on behalf of some powerful and greedy individual or group. At first, that might be a king or council of lords or barons. Nowadays, it's corporate powerbrokers working hand in mailed glove with the government. The masses are usually sold the same story--we're in danger of losing something such as national honor or our perceived freedoms or perhaps some territory (which happens to be controlled by some uber-rich individuals) and so, amid catchy music and waving flags, the masses go off to fight and die for "God and Country", while in truth, someone wants control over an oil or gas field, minerals, fresh water, fertile land, seaport or trade route. Seldom do their children venture off to war to fight, suffer, be maimed, or to die. And that brings me to a situation in the Middle East which potentially could affect all of us. I would argue that it already does.

Syria. An ancient country, known primarily in antiquity as the mighty Assyria; a military and economic powerhouse. It was the home of the oldest population of Christians---the Chaldean Christians who, until recently, had lived in basic peace for the last 2000 years. It was also the Yazidis, a Kurdish people, who one of the oldest ethnic groups in the world; possibly going back to old of the most ancient civilizations, Mesopotamia. Their principal religion, Zoroasterism, pre-dates Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. It's believed that the concept of cosmic duality---angels and demons---first arose with Zoroasterism. Since 2011, Syria has been engaged in a bloody civil war which, as of now, shows no signs of ending. However, one could argue that Syria's troubles started before then. Some would say it began in 1948 with the creation of Israel, which resulted in five wars initiated by Syria and her regional allies, Jordan, Egypt, plus whoever else wanted a piece of the action. However, none could best Israel and at the end of the Six Day War, Israel had captured Jordan's West Bank including Jerusalem, Egypt's Sinai Peninsula and Gaza Strip, and Syria's Golan Heights. But, one could equally argue that their troubles began earlier, with the fall and breakup of the Ottoman Empire following its defeat at the end of World War I. The Ottomans were allies of the Triple Entente, which included the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Imperial Germany. After the end of war, France and Britain assumed control of former Ottoman territories and, frankly, created countries based on their own national interests with little or no regard for historical or natural boundaries, tribal or religious ties. They even went further by picking who would run these artificial countries on their behalf (such as Saudi family, the Hashemite Clan in Transjordan---later Jordan, and so forth). Regardless, I don't believe there was one single cause which triggered the present situation in Syria. Nevertheless, there was one incident which could be described as the "spark" which ignited the powder keg which had been accumulating for decades, and that was the Arab Spring.

The Arab Spring was bound to happen, thanks in large part to the social media which interconnect peoples the world over. It also provided them with access to uncensored history and current events, the free exchange of opinions and information and a link to likeminded people throughout the world and a means to organize. As a result, individuals living under some of the most repressive regimes in the Middle East were faced with a people who now had a means to fight back. Of course, no dictatorship ever willingly gives up power. As a result, various nations shipped in weapons and "military advisors", provided "humanitarian" assistance, and air support which included imposed "no fly zones" over an otherwise sovereign nation. While it worked in a few countries, it either fizzled out (or was violently suppressed by security forces) or backfired in others. Syria was one of the "others".

The US and other coalition nations had previously invaded the big bully on the block, Iraq and its "Hitler wannabe", Saddam Hussein, following his invasion of Kuwait, which he claimed a historical right to (in reality, he wanted the oil fields and access to the gulf). Hussein also claimed that the US was previously aware of his intentions and that he had the green light to proceed based on the promise of favorable deals with US and certain oil companies. At first, Hussein thought the US was bluffing in its announced invasion, however, he soon learned better and quickly defeated. Some whispered that this was more about the "liberation" of Kuwaiti oil and royal family than about the people of Kuwait, and they were likely right. A trade embargo was put in place along with national "no fly zone". Then came 9/11 and America's subsequent invasion of Afghanistan to remove Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, and the Taliban. Then there was the "great lie" about having weapons of mass destruction (nukes) and a second invasion which resulted in the occupation of Iraq (Hussein did have chemical weapons and showed a willingness to use them such as in 1988 when chemical tipped bombs were used on Kurdish villages, resulting in the deaths of at least 100,000 Kurds. He also had used chemical weapons against the Iranians, resulting in several hundred thousand deaths though the actual number may never be known). Throughout this we continued to fight local terrorists (which, ironically, we helped to create, train, and arm years earlier to fight the Russians after they invaded Afghanistan). These groups, which included Al Qaeda, sought to spread a radical form of Islam throughout the region. When this proved unsuccessful (thanks mostly to successful drone attacks which eliminated their leadership and technical skills personnel plus the death of Bin Laden), more radical groups broke off and began a program of brutal murders coupled with video cameras. Among these included ISIS, whose expressed intent to global conquest and forced imposition of their version of Islam and the establishment of a world Caliphate.

While it's highly unlikely they'll be successful, they have been successful with mass shootings, bombings, and other terrorist's acts outside the region, including Asia, Europe, Russia, and the US. However, most of the "thanks" (note sarcasm) has been due to incompetent "leadership" and flooding of so-called "refugees" whose aim is to disrupt the social and economic system, demanding changes to a country's religious freedoms, values, and traditions, plus the commission of violent crimes including assaults and mass rapes. Embedded with these "refugees" has been trained terrorist cells, whose job includes not just destruction and murders, but also recruiting and training of others. In Libya, ground zero of the Arab Spring, the country has never fully recovered and US involvement (not to mention illegal gun running, which resulted in the burning of the embassy plus the death of the ambassador and three security personnel) has proven to be a fertile recruiting ground for radical Islam. Meanwhile, military occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan continues to struggle along in Iraq and Afghanistan along with continuing global terrorism while the Obama Regime has made several attempts to convince the American People that we need boots on the ground in Syria for the usual excuses---to promote democracy, potential weapons of mass destruction, prevent expanding Russian influence ( however, Russia has been a close ally since the 1950's), and probably denying air space access to Santa Claus. This now brings us to the present day.

The Assad Government has been under attack since around 2011/2012. Their enemy has been various groups of rebel fighters; mostly radical Muslims, including Al Qaeda, intent on imposing mandatory Sharia law, of which ISIS is the prime player. They have been guilty of the mass murders of Christians, Kurds, Yazidis, and Muslims who are secular or not of the same sect (some Kurds, Christians and Yazidi women and young girls have been sold into slavery, including sex slavery where they daily endure mass rapes). They have also been beating and murdering women who fail to follow their definition of Sharia as well as gays, agnostics, atheists as well as anyone who fought for Assad. Typically they are beheaded enmasse, burned or buried alive, stoned, shot, drowned in cages, crucified, throw off roofs, hanged, beaten to death, or skinned alive(at least they're creative. You've got to give them that at least). There are a few very small groups who which to implement some form of democratic republic, but they're pretty much small fry. On Assad's side is the military and a few pro-government guerilla groups who have been promised various reforms. Many of these groups are from outside the country and came to Syria as something of a Islamic mercenary.

As an ally of Assad and Syria for close to 60 years, Russia has been providing military hardware, medical supplies (including medivac to hospitals in Russia), food, clean water, sanitation supplies, and so forth. Recently, however, Russia has announced that it intended to provide air support for Assad's troops which includes bombing of enemy targets (supply depots, military caravans and transportation routes, troop clusters, etc). They have also introduced low level air cover through the use of various fighters and helicopters. In addition, Russia has provided heavy artillery, tanks, trucks, and other vehicles along with military advisors. On the other side, the US has been supplying arms, ammo, as well as other equipment along with medical equipment. Recently though, the situation has changed with US aircraft providing air support in the form of bombs, air cover, as well as technical assistance which includes reports on Syrian military and auxiliary troop movements, etc. This is in part why Russia stepped up its involvement. Now bear in mind that Russia is supporting a long standing ally, and their focus has been on groups like ISIS while are support is not based on any long standing connection with Assad or Syria, plus our aid has been going to the rebel groups which includes Al Qaeda and ISIS---yes, that ISIS. So, on one hand we are fighting ISIS here in the US and elsewhere while at the same time we are providing them with hard and soft support. I believe the proper response would be "WTF?".

Now, to raise the ante in this global poker match, Russia has announced that it intends to introduce troops to provide backup support for Assad's troops (one has to wonder if this includes Russia's famous Spetsnaz special forces units. They are among the very best in the world). Meanwhile, Iran has offered Russia the use of one of their northern airbases in which to launch its bombing operations and supply support in Syria. Iran is already active in the area, and has been for decades. Iran trains and supplies the terrorist group Hezbollah in Lebanon with everything from small arms to heavy artillery and some rather powerful intermediate range missiles capable of hitting almost anywhere in northern and central Israel, including Tel Aviv, Haifa, and Jerusalem. Hezbollah also exerts a rather powerful influence on the Lebanese government. In addition, Iran provides similar equipment to the terrorist group Hamas who are located in and control Gaza. Lastly, Iran has been working overtime to undermine US efforts in Iraq in order to create a Tehran friendly government in Bagdad.

Now, to makes things a bit more interesting, China, also an ally of Iran and its chief arms provider, has agreed to introduce soldiers and military equipment on the ground in Syria (China is having its own problem with a rising radical Islam in its western provinces). Not only does this include fighting troops (about 40,000), but tanks, trucks, artillery, and air support. Air support you say? How is that possible? China is thousands of miles away. Well, those questions are quite simple to answer. You see, China has an operational aircraft carrier. The US Pentagon and the CIA as well as some European intelligence agencies said it would take years for China to develop an aircraft carrier and years longer to develop aircraft capable of operating from an aircraft carrier as well as properly trained pilots. Well, in short, they were wrong. Wildly wrong. China was years ahead in their development of not only an aircraft carrier, but both the planes and pilots, and the supporting ships needed for a task force. Now do you want to guess where that task force is headed? If you guess the eastern Mediterranean off the coast of Lebanon, you'd be right.

Meanwhile, little ole Israel is sitting there between not just a few million Arabs who despise them, not to mention several well armed terrorist groups, an Iran which is intent of developing nuclear tipped missiles capable of reaching Israel, a serious civil war on its northern border, an unstable Egypt on its southern border (thankfully the Egyptian military just ousted the terrorist umbrella organization, the Muslim Brotherhood who had hijacked the pro-democracy movement during Egypt's "Arab Spring"). Plus you have a growing ISIS presence in Libya thanks to Hillary Clinton's misadventures there. Then there is Turkey, a traditionally secular nation, which is inching more and more to radical Islam. Lastly, but surely the most important, you have three of the four global superpowers (the forth being India) with an active military presence amid active terrorist groups.

Then there is a intellectually and morally weak US president with questionable loyalties to Israel, America's allies, and even the American People. My oh my. I see nothing about this situation which makes me feel comfortable. But this is the situation that we find ourselves. For the first time ever, more Americans trust the Russian president, Putin, than the American president. We have a president supporting the very terrorists who are murdering Christians, Jews, gays, women, and just about everyone else not just in the Middle East, but in Europe, Asia, Russia, and the US while at the same time supporting them against Assad while Putin is trying to stop them while they're still mostly in the Middle East. The same US president who is determined to bring these "refugees" to the US just as Europe did; much to their regret and in defiance of the majority of the American People or discussion with Congress.
So, there you go. Now it's up to you to come to your own decision about what's happening and what can or should be done about it. One thing for sure though---the system is broken beyond repair.

We are a defacto Oligarchy; a neo fascist nation complete with a spreading surveillance apparatus and a growing militarized police state. This Oligarchy lives under one set of laws while we live under another. They work hand in mailed glove with the government (with the government being the junior partner here). They control the media. There is only six companies which own 96% of all media--radio, TV, internet/social media, newspapers and magazines. That means they control what we hear and see. They try to control events though spin. They try to manipulate public opinion and direct issues. They own the banks and financial institutions. They own the oil and gas companies. They own the defense industries. They, in effect, own us too. We are their economic serf. Our debt is our chains. Our credit rating is the lock. This isn't about wealth. They already own 96% of that. Their aim is control. Control is power. The next question is really simple actually. What do you want to do about it?



The Syrian Civil War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_civil_war


Putin Confirms Russian involvement in Syria's civil war
http://www.timesofisrael.com/putin-confirms-russian-involvement-in-syrias-civil-war/


Iran, Russia, China, Syrian plan 'largest' war game'
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Iran-Russia-China-Syria-plan-largest-war-game


World's richest 1% Control Half of Global Wealth
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/01/20/264241052/oxfam-worlds-richest-1-percent-control-half-of-global-wealth

Hillary Clinton's "Night of the Long Knives"?

For those of you unfamiliar with World War II history, especially the early years, and the reference in the title, let me give you a brief history lesson so that that we can move on with main subject of this article. The "Night of the Long Knives" was a party and political purge conducted by Hitler and other leading Nazis, including the usual suspects, Goering, Goebbels, Himmler, Hess, and Joseph "Sepp" Dietrich June/July 1934. The purge was against the Nazi paramilitary SA (aka "the Brownshirts") and its leader Ernest Rohm. However, it also included the Left wing members of the Nazi Party, the so-called "Strasserites", led by Gregor and Otto Strasser (Otto survived by leaving the country), former Chancellor Kurt von Schleicher, along with other political, business, social and religious leaders who opposed the Hitler Government.

All told, some 85 were either murdered or forced to commit suicide plus the thousands were arrested although officially, only seven were said to have been killed and few dozen held for "questioning". The purge was essentially as the behest of the traditional army leadership and leading industrial and business leaders which feared the SA as well as the popularity of Rohm, by Nazi leadership. Also, they wanted Rohm and other SA leaders gone due to reported incidents of unprovoked assaults and brawls (that is, those that were unsanctioned), heavy drinking, and homosexuality. It was, however, also believed that Rohm had a great deal of dirt on Hitler and other members of the Nazi leadership, including Goebbels and Goering, that was being leaked to the press and Hitler wanted it silenced.

Now, you may be wondering what this has to do with Democratic Party nominee Hillary Clinton? Well, just this. A lot of people connected in some way to either Hillary or the DNC keep dying, especially under mysterious circumstances. Take for instance 54 year old Clinton researcher and political author Victor Thorne. He was found dead with a "self inflicted" gunshot to his head on August 1, 2016, which also happened to be his birthday and may have involved a gun caliber he didn't own. Then there was attorney Shawn Lucas who filed a class action suit against the Democratic National Committee (or DNC for short) for fraud, resulting from the Hillary email exchanges with then DNC Chairperson Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to fix the nominee process and primaries in order to block Bernie Sanders. Lucas, who was in his mid 20's, was found dead in his bathroom of undetermined causes by his girlfriend on August 2, 2016. Then there was Vincent Fleck. Vincent was believed to be the individual who may have leaked Hillary's medical records which appear to indicate that she may be suffering from dementia. Fleck's death in his swimming pool was caused by a unspecified "event". The death came just 24 hours after Hillary's medical records were leaked to the public. Interestingly, Vincent was the father of Dr. Daniel Fleck, who is Hillary's personal physical therapist. Did he drown? Slipped and hit his head? Who knows?

Let's not forget 27 year old DNC staffer Seth Rich. He was murdered in a park as he allegedly was walking to meet FBI officials with some information he wanted to share about Hillary back in July 2016. Interestingly, the killer or killers took nothing whatsoever from Rich. He was found with his wallet, money, watch, jewelry, and even his cell phone. What makes this even more intriguing is that according to Julian Assuage, the founder and President of WikiLeaks, Rich was one of his informants. That means Seth Rich must have had unique access to specific information regarding Hillary Clinton and DNC, and possibly disgraced former DNC Chairperson, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. Wasserman, as you may recall, was fired just as the DNC Convention was getting under way for conspiring to rig the Primary and nomination process to ensure Bernie Sanders was blocked according to leaked emails, which presumably came from Rich.

There are others such as Joe Montano, age 47, who was beaten and shot shortly after WikiLeaks began publishing excerpts from deleted Clinton and DNC emails. He was also the aide to Hillary's running mate, Tim Kaine (pictured left. John Ashe, former President of the United Nations General Assembly, who was awaiting trial in a bribery matter related to the Clinton Foundation. His cause of death was a crushed windpipe as a result of a barbell being dropped on his throat in June 2016. All told, there has been 67 known deaths tied to the Clintons. I've included a link below for you to look at.

Now, whether or not the Clintons are responsible, either directly or indirectly, with all these deaths, there can be no argument that 67 close associates is a lot of people. There are others who genuinely claim to be afraid that they be next because of what they know or have spoken out about; a few have even left the country. What we do know is that Hillary Clinton has shown a concerted willingness to lie, be it to Congress, the FBI, the corporate media or the public as well as to hide or destroy evidence (her numerous deleted emails as a case in point), her repeated refusals to follow established security procedures which allowed foreign powers to easily eavesdropped in on, which included classified information, which they've publically acknowledged! Russia's Putin even offered to provide the FBI with copies of Hillary's deleted emails during their investigation of her! Seriously! Though to avoid national and even global embarrassment, the FBI declined Putin's offer, they were still able to gather enough information to nail Hillary with 110 potential felony charges, yet still decided not to prosecute. Why?

There is the now public knowledge of her efforts to fix the Democratic Party primaries to keep Bernie Sanders out and then to manipulate convention rules to block Sanders or his supporters. And as if that wasn't enough, the DNC employed "white noise" machines to drown out Sander's supporters and hired individuals off the streets to fill seats and wave Hillary signs after they forced Sander's supporters to leave the convention floor. Finally, there is her complicit involvement with the deaths of Ambassador Stevens and three others in Benghazi as a result of illegal gunrunning through third parties to Al-Qaida and ISIS in order to topple the Assad Government. Again, confirmed through the recovery of deleted emails thanks to some very dedicated hackers.

Let's not forget the Clinton Foundation, which has received billions of dollars (and is the recipient of 96% of Bill and Hillary's charitable contributions). Key among these very generous donors were the Who's Who among media moguls, international banks and financial services companies, major drug and agribusiness companies, and so forth. However, what's more of interests is the tens of millions received from Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, as well as from Australia, the Dominican Republic, and Norway, not to mention several wealthy individuals, NGOs, and foundations. But the most interesting part I thought was that most of this came while Hillary was still Secretary of State. Huh. Guess no possible conflict of interests there. Of course, I'm sure their donations were all above board and no favors would be offered or sought.

The deaths mentioned above are far more than a tragedy. They represent beacons of light by which we should examine these individuals who want back in the White House. The other events---the lies, the illegal gunrunning, the deaths, and ease by which treason was committed---highlight her character. I suspect that before November arrives and we go to the voting booths, much more will come out, and there is just as likely to be more "undetermined" deaths and "accidents". Perhaps her failing health will solve the problem for all of us, or perhaps Donald Trump's off the rail rhetoric will. But one thing is for sure, while this appears to be more the politics of ancient Rome, this is certainly not my America and I doubt it's yours either.


Julian Assuage Drops Bombshell Involving Murder on Hillary Clinton (Video)
http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=45927


Anti-Hillary Researcher, DNC Attorney Found Dead
http://ih8hillary.com/2016/08/08/anti-hillary-dnc-attorney-found-dead/


Another One! Father of Doctor Treating Hillary Clinton for Dementia Dies Under Mysterious Circumstances
http://trendingnewsguide.com/2016/08/13/another-one-father-of-doctor-treating-hillary-clinton-for-dementia-dies-under-mysterious-circumstances/


Smoking Gun Docs Show What Hillary Clinton Knew Benghazi All Along
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/breaking-smoking-gun-docs-show-hillary-clinton-knew-benghazi-along-whoa/


Benghazi: Gun-running, Murder, Terrorists, Cover-Ups
http://gerarddirect.com/2012/12/13/benghazi-the-story-that-refuses-to-go-away/


Foreign Governments Gave Millions to Foundation While Clinton Was Secretary of State
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/foreign-governments-gave-millions-to-foundation-while-clinton-was-at-state-dept/2015/02/25/31937c1e-bc3f-11e4-8668-4e7ba8439ca6_story.html


Clinton Foundation Failed to Disclose 1,100 Foreign Donations
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-04-29/clinton-foundation-failed-to-disclose-1-100-foreign-donations

Under the Wire: Marie Colvin's Last Assignment, A Book Review

War. It terrifies us. It freezes our very souls. Yet, through our better angels, it can call us to bear witness to its inhumanity and speak out against the carnage while giving voice to those silenced by the vacuum of destruction and death through words and images. War correspondent Marie Colvin was one of those better angels for whom hundreds could tell their stories, and it was through the masterfully told book "Under The Wire: Marie Colvin's Last Assignment", that her fellow war journalist and close friend, Paul Conroy, bears witness for her, lost friends, and comrades born of war. In a gripping and all too real adventure, Conroy takes us from the relative tranquility of a Beirut bar into the coldly calculating meat grinder of Assad's ongoing war; a war which knows no distinction between rebel or child or, ultimately, journalists.

Paul Conroy is a freelance photographer, who often works for the British newspaper, The Sunday Times. It is his job to convey to the world the frozen images in the mists of survival against an onslaught of unimaginable ferocity. In doing so, Conroy shows the world both the savagery of war and the human will to persevere. Marie Colvin was an award winning correspondent for The Sunday Times and author who covered the killing fields of Chechnya, Timor, Libya, and Sri Lanka, where she lost an eye and gained an eye patch and solidified her near mythical no holds barred reputation as a world class journalist. Theirs is a select few who routinely risked their lives in some of the world's most dangerous places to expose what governments, dictators, and tribal leaders deny, cover up---the massacres; the genocides; and the wholesale slaughter thousands of innocent victims.

Conroy's book, "Under the Wire: Marie Colvin's Last Assignment", calls out for our condemnation of war's inhumanity, while sharing with the reader the dedication of those who risk everything to bring the truth behind the offical statements and press releases. We owe it to ourselves to read this book; to learn the reality behind those 10 second sound bites and flickering images on our nightly news. But be warned. Once you start down this journey with Mr. Conroy, you won't be able to stop; you won't want to stop. Each page will drive you forward to the next. You'll be sweep away by the images created through this brilliant telling of Marie's and Paul's descend into a hell known as Baba Amr.

This is one of those rare books that you will want to share with your friends. But by the end, Paul Conroy's "Under the Wire" will have changed you. You'll understand consequences of modern warfare for what it really is. It will make you want to delve deeper into what you see and hear in the media and learn what's really happening in the world. So come along with Paul Conroy and become a witness to the greatest tragedy the world has seen in generations.


Weinstein Books

www.weinsteinbooks. com

319 pgs.

What Difference Indeed Ms Clinton

I guess I don't get it. For months, the US Ambassador in Libya, Chris Stevens, was sending cables, emails, and making phone calls to just about anyone who would listen about the unstable situation there, especially in Benghazi, where he and his staff had little in the way of US provided security (some former Navy Seals who weren't allowed to load their guns), and Libyan provided security personnel (can you guess how their loyalty ran if things got rough?) and other than some routine security measures (lights, alarms, etc), they were separated only by 10 foot wall. Yet, under questioning, a very defiant Secretary Clinton, shifted the blame for the deaths of Ambassador Stevens and three aides to lack of adequate funding for security. Never mind that no one---apparently--bothered to read the cables or anything else being sent. Clinton even cited 4+ million emails coming into the State Department in the course of a year for the lack of oversight. Really Hillary?

Her job, as the Secretary of State, is the overall administration of that department, both directly and through her staff, including the Under Secretary and US Envoy, Susan Rice. The buck stops with her. It's her responsibility to see to it that cables marked "urgent", especially from a US embassy in what should be a highly monitored country like Libya where a nasty little dictator was recently overthrown in civil war and shot, and where the Moslem extremists have been allowed to gain a substantial foothold in the new government, would warrant a bit more attention than most would you agree?

Through it all, Ms Clinton seemed actually put out at having to be there; as if, somehow, her actions were beyond questioning. Even her remark, "What difference, at this point, does it make?" seemed to imply an elitist "let them eat cake" attitude. As a matter of fact, it does make a difference. It makes a difference to our allies who see us speak but do nothing. In the Middle East, action speaks louder than words. Action equates respect. Here, our embassy, a part of US soil, is attacked and our personnel murdered. Obama spoke serious. He acted serious. He made serious sounding promises. But he didn't act, and nor will he. If our allies can't trust our resolve, what do you think our enemies are thinking? Two words come to mind--paper tiger.

I'll tell you who else it makes a difference to. The American People. We expect better of our leaders. We expect our personnel to be safe. We expect our military be allowed to do their job and yet, our military units, despite being "locked and loaded" and on the tarmac, were told to stand down. The commanding officer of US forces in the region, General Carter Ham, was even relieved of command Defense Secretary Leon Panetta when General Ham insisted on sending a rescue team in (one, by the way, specifically trained for this kind of action). A nearby CIA station was highlighting by laser an enemy mortar crew shelling the embassy in the mistaken hope that a US aerial support would come to their aid. Instead, by highlighting the target, they also exposed themselves to the enemy mortar crew who then targeted and killed them. In addition, Rear Admiral Charles Gauette, commander of Carrier Strike Group Three, was relieved of command for what the Obama Administration called "inappropriate leadership judgment" for providing General Ham with intelligence and logistic assistance in preparing a rescue operation. Inappropriate my hind end.

And I'll tell you who else thinks it makes a difference, the families and friends of those who were murdered. Can you imagine how they must still feel knowing their government could have at least tried to save them and didn't? How no serious attempt at bring those to justice has even been attempted? How Obama, Clinton and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta could even look their families in the eye is beyond me. They both deserve an Oscar for their performance.

Now, with Hillary Clinton exiting the political stage, at least for now, the Senate begin the vetting phase of her replacement, Massachusetts Senator and presidential candidate, John Forbes Kerry. Kerry is fine choice if you don't mind that he was Vietnam protestor who denounced the US government; referring, in a televised testimony to the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs in 1971, that the US government was guilty of "war crimes", or that he threw away his medals (including a Bronze Star, Silver Star, and three Purple Hearts) or that he lied about his actual experience in Vietnam (remember the "Swiftboat" controversy?). Despite being a Yale graduate and member of the secretive "Skull and Crossbones", Kerry appears to be just another rich liberal bureaucrat. Just what we need looking after US interests abroad. It almost makes me long for the days of Henry Kissinger. Almost.

Violence in the Streets

Like most Americans, I've been closely following events in the Libya and the other Arab countries. Much has been made of the violence directed primarily toward American embassies (but English, French, and German as well), and the coldblooded murder of our Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens plus three others (the capture and murder were even shown live on Libyan TV).

The Obama White House attempted (and is still attempting) to link the violence to a previously unknown and poorly made movie "insulting" the Moslem prophet, Muhammad. At the same time, local media shows Moslems apologizing for their fellow Moslems and expressing how ashamed they are of the acts of barbarity, and all the while, their governments doing little to stop (and in some case, actually encouraging) the protests. We had our own President Obama actually apologize to those who stormed the walls of our embassy in Cairo.

Now, let's think about this for just a bit shall we? Our State Department allegedly claims the attack in Libya was "spontaneous". The Obama White House claims it was "spontaneous". However, the attack came on the 11th anniversary of the 911 terrorists attack. Reports out of our embassy indicated "strange behavior" days before by the locals, as well as by the Libyans security personnel working within the embassy compound. Ambassador Steve even tweeted a few hours earlier that he expected to be killed that night. None of our security personnel were allowed to carry live rounds. When the attack came, it came with RPGs, grenades, automatic weapons, and appeared to be well organized, especially since the compound was completely seized within a few hours.

Later, officials in Libya concluded this was a pre-planned staged attacked. Local Al Qaeda leaders said it was staged, and called for more protests (which they got), along with instructions to murder Americans where you find them. But Obama says it all has to do with the movie. I have to wonder why Obama would seem so insistent to deny the obvious? Could it be because they ignore the all the warning signs? Could it be because this was the promised revenge for taking out the chief thug, Osama bin Laden? Could it be because he has no plans for a response? Perhaps there's some other reason like campaigning and not doing his job to protect Americans. After all, embassies are considered "national soil" and an attack on an embassy carries the same diplomatic weight as an attack on that country. Why too would Obama snub one of our staunchest allies and the only democracy in the region, Israel, while at the same time, engage active conversation with the Moslem Brotherhood, who control Egypt and Libya?

Second, we're told repeatedly (usually after some act of bloodshed) that Islam is a religion of peace. Most of the Moslems I've known are very peaceful, reflective individuals. So who are these thousands of people burning American flags, beating up, jailing, or murdering Americans? Who are these people destroying property, throwing rocks, planting bombs, and blowing themselves and innocent men, women, and children up? Who are these people who are angry at perceived insults directed toward Allah and Mohammed but feel free to attack Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and destroy or burn their sacred structures and texts? Why are their governments unwilling (or unable) to stop it? Willing accomplices I often wonder. Why did we spend all this time, money, and lives, to save Afghan and Iraqi lives; rebuild both countries, only to see them cowardly murder their benefactors? Where are all the outranged non-extremists? Why are they always a few camera ready "apologizing" and not doing something to stop the violence?

Why do "peaceful" and "enlighten" Moslems still engage in "honor murders" of their wives, sisters, and daughters? What religious culture makes men so afraid of the women, they make the women hide themselves? Why are Moslem women still treated like property, with little or no rights? Why do girls going to school fear having acid thrown in their faces, and why don't their families or the local authorities do something about it? After all, the perpetrators are often well known by all. But, then, this is their responsibility, not ours.

Perhaps groups like Al Qaeda are right. All they want is for the West to leave them alone and party like it's 979. Frankly, I have no problem with that. We could stop the $11.6 billion in humanitarian and economic aid we send to the Arab/Moslem nations too. After all most of these nations don't even support us in the United Nations. The trip back to 979 won't take long. I'm sure we could find something to do with that money here at home. But there's the little matter of oil and of Israel. The West , for all its economic wealth and materialism, is a junkie; a bodybuilder on steroids. Our drug of choice is oil. Think of it as industrial grade opium. We have lots of other options---solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, thermo, battery, and more, but we like oil. The problem is that the world is quickly running out. Global oil production peaked about 15 years ago, but there's still lots of money to be made before the bottom falls out (and we're not even discussing global warming). Despite all the bluster from the US and the West about democracy and human rights, it's really all about the oil. President Jimmy Carter promised Americans in 1976 after OPEC's oil embargo that we would be energy independent in 20 years. We're more dependent than ever, and with Wall Street controlling Washington, not much is going to change until we break the link. China, India, and other emerging nations are trying to get their fix too. Mother Russia seems to be the most secure of the world powers with its vast and still largely untapped fields in Siberia. Global warming is proving to be a short term boon for the Bear.

As for Israel. sorry folks but it isn't going anywhere. You better come to terms with it. The best the terrorists and other fanatics can hope for is a long drawn stalemate, but I'm afraid what will happen is a nuclear, chemical or biological strike against Israel. If that should happen, in its final act of defiance, Israel will take out every aggressor nation in the region. The Sons of Abraham will die with their hands around each other's throats. Embraced at last. There will be no messiah to deliverer the survivors, unless cockroaches have a messiah. They will be the meek who inherit the earth, or at least a portion of it. Just imagine. All three Abrahamic religions believe in a god of love, compassion, and peace, so what do we do? We hate and butcher in His name. Wouldn't He be proud of us, His creation? Apparently God does make some mistakes.

The West, along with China, India, and the rest of the world will finally be rid of its addiction like a junkie going cold turkey, but at least it will be free. It then will be forced to deal with the long cold nuclear nightmare of massive starvation, disease and radiation; all for greed. Greed is good, but Humanity is better.
Back home, Obama's agenda is nothing short of the social re-engineering of America. He claims our Founding Fathers were flawed, and therefore, our Constitution is flawed. He believes in social and wealth redistribution. He even said so. He believes is socialism at best, but we seem to be headed for an American version of Stalinism. I'm sure the end justifies the means. For the victor, it always does. But it's not just America, it's the rest of the world too. We are quickly moving away from the era of individualistic freedom and toward a corporate feudalism in America with a yet to be determined socialistic or fascist tilt. But there is still theocratic dictatorship or communism with a capitalist mask for the rest of the world too. So, what will it be folks? Tyranny by dollar? Tyranny by religion? Tyranny by dogma? Or will it yet be freedom for all? It's your call.

Libya: Too little too late?

Ok, things are officially (in my opinion) getting out of hand. After weeks of doing nothing, Obama finally has decided to impose a joint “No-Fly” zone in Libya, in conjunction with several allies. This will mark the third Moslem nation that the US and its allies will be engaged in militarily. Fodder for the Moslem extremists and their propaganda machine if you ask me.

Weeks ago, the Libyan people took to the streets in opposition to strongman and kook, Muammar Gadhafi. What were first protests turned into an armed uprising. The rebels managed, with popular support and hidden arms stashes, to push the Libyan armed forces almost all the way back to Tripoli. Not able to rely on his military, Gadhafi hired mercenaries from neighboring countries (most notably Algeria. Some of his own pilots refused to bomb fellow citizens. They were shot for their humanity). Thus, with a relentless air and missile assault, the rebels started on their long retreat with Gadhafi’s mercenary forces targeting civilians, hospitals, and whatever else they could find. Obama’s only comment at the time was that “noose was tightening around Gadhafi”. Really? How about a reality check Mr. President?

So, now that the rebels have been pushed back to Benghazi and nearly wiped out as viable fighting force, and after ignoring weeks of pleas from rebels leaders, civilians, and international relief organizations, Obama has finally decided to step up to the plate and lead; or rather, follow the lead of such nations as Britain, France, and Denmark. Gadhafi requested a cease fire, but instead used the occasion to launch a bloody assault.

Although the US is now attempting to impose a “No-Fly” zone, principally over the last major rebel stronghold, Benghazi, along with our allies, the question becomes whether or not our inaction over the last few weeks has done irreparable damage to the pro-democratic resistance movement. Can the will of the people be won back to the side of rebels? Can they attract new fighters to replace those whose lives were wasted? Can they replenish their military supplies? What about basic survival for the general population, such as food, water, and medical assistance?

No doubt that if Gadhafi’s assault can be stopped (especially the indiscriminate bombings and missile strikes), international relief efforts (already stretched to the breaking point), may be able to offer some assistance. The Libyans themselves are both disappointed and angry with the US and the UN for their inaction (and who can blame them?). Weapons and military supplies can always be replaced. But will there be anyone to take up the arms and start the assault on Gadhafi anew? Can they count on Western support? Given our actions to date, you can’t fault them for having doubts.

Meanwhile, the situation in other Middle Eastern countries (think oil producers) such as Yemen, Oman, Bahrain, and Syria continues to go from bad to worse. In Yemen, military sharp shooters have been ambushing and murdering protestors. In Bahrain, neighboring Saudi Arabia has sent troops to put down protestors, who apparently also have order to shoot to kill. Syria too has dealt heavy handedly with their pro-democracy protestors. Obviously these repressive dictatorships don’t plan on going quietly into the night.

Israel remains in an uneasy situation. Three times now, arms bound for her enemies having been intercepted. One has to wonder how much is getting through. Counties like Iran are obviously using the confusing situation to re-supply their surrogate armies like Hezbollah. Iran also continues with its nuclear program despite toothless sanctions imposed by the United Nations. With a global economy still in the proverbial tank, and the US engaged in two wars, Afghanistan and Iraq, the pro-democracy groups couldn’t have picked a worse possible movement to lash out at their government. The cold truth is that there is little the West, and especially the US, can do to help in the short run. The “No Fly” zone should have been implemented sooner and countries like France and Britain should have acted with or without a US commitment. The “leader of the free world” has proved time and again that he has feet of clay. All this could result in pro-democratic groups being replaced in places like Tunisia and Egypt by religious extremists with the support of Iran.

I look for Gadhafi to ultimately prevail and brutally eliminate his opposition. What is the West going to do about? Impose another sanction? He’s got oil. We need him more than he needs the West. After all, he can always do business with China. The same came be expected in Yemen, Oman, and Bahrain. Their backward governments will prevail for much the same reasons, and quite possibly the same results. The instability of the region will make oil and gas nearly as valuable as food and water, but unbearably more expensive. Gone will the mobile society. Terrorist groups, using mostly the homegrown variety, will launch campaigns within Western countries to focus their attention (and resources) inward. Similar attacks will hit other longtime enemies, such as India. China and Russia may find that they aren’t as immune as they think they are. When fighting for God, political ideology counts for little.

Iran will continue to stir up trouble until it has at least three nuclear warheads and a reliable delivery system. Confident in the West’s lack of leadership and political inertia, as well as the support of a large, vocal, and potentially destructive Moslem minority, Iran will make good its threat and hit Israel. This will be the culmination of all out assault on the non-Moslem world which began in 1979 with the Iranian hostage crisis. Such madness is not concerned with retaliation which will surely come after much wringing of hands by the West. After all, in their eyes, it was ordained by Allah.