Hillary Supplied Guns to Terrorists [Wikileaks]

This blogpost was published in 2016 and is extracted from a discussion with Julian Assange.  

It is all the more important given the revelations of actions by the 

WEF [World Economic Forum] and the Deep State

It also explains Hillary's attack on Benghazi.

Click here for original story
[By:  Alex Newman New American]

The release of the contents of Hillary's emails, long kept out of the public eye, expose the involvement of Hillary [Obama's Secretary of State] in shipping weapons to Jihadists, including to terrorists in the Islamic State, or ISIS, according to Julian Assange's Wikileaks.

According to Assange, Hillary played a key role in funneling weaponry from Libya, which she helped destroy alongside jihadist allies on the ground, to Obama-backed terror groups in Syria.

In one e-mail, we learn that Libyan dictator Muamar Qadhafi sought to create a gold-backed regional currency -- which would have devalued the US Dollar and the Euro, and was thus among the key reasons the Deep State Globalists supported killing Qadhafi and destroying Libya.  

[Until Hillary's assault on Libya and Qadafi, he had been the key ally of the US in the War on Terror as his Intelligence network monitored and identified all Terrorist Groups, their leadership, and their tactics and strategy.

By destroying Libya and killing Qadafi, Obama and Hillary assured the Deep State Globalists that Qadafi could no longer pose a threat to Western currency, and, at the same time, NATO forces were able to seize control of Libya's store of gold [and to seize control of Libyan oil].

Further, by killing Qadafi, Brennan's CIA successfully destroyed the sole source of definitive Intelligence on Global Terrorism and its linkage to the US and the Deep State, leaving professional Intelligence analysts and operators with no reliable actionable Intelligence.

The Global War on Terrorism, could thus continue as a long term, and very profitable enterprise for US Defense Contractors and a rationale for a bloated US Military structure.

Other e-mails reveal
1) The Obama administration knowingly supported al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria, hoping to create an Islamic State.
2) Clinton knew her Libyan "rebels" were massacring Blacks as part of an "Ethnic Cleansing" campaign, along with other war crimes.
3) Complicit News Media persuaded to bury these issues, and denying such reports as "Conspiracy Theories".

[Ed Note: The Press has largely ignored, or buried these scandals, even denying their reality. ] 

WikiLeaks has released, among other documents related to Clinton tenure as Obama's Secretary of State, more than 30,000 e-mails and attachments sent to and from her private server.

Notable of the Libyan disasters are the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans, the takeover of the country by terror armies, and the brutal summary execution of Qadafi, America's most valuable US Intelligence source on terror-war.
Hillary boasted and smirked: “We came, we saw, he died”

Despite a virtual blackout by the Clinton-supporting establishment media, Clinton's involvement in the arming, training, and funding of terrorist groups in Libya and Syria has been well known to more informed segments of the electorate for years.

[Ed Note:  A shocking revelation regarding the Clinton/Israeli/NATO coalition to bring down Qaddafi was the capture of an ISIL terrorist unit in Iraq, led by an Israeli IDF [Golani Brigade] colonel (Yusi Oulen Shahak).  We have to wonder how many terrorist organizations in the Middle East are actually Israeli False Flag operations (such as the 9/11 attacks).

In recent months, GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump has been making a big issue out of it. The scandals could prove damaging to Clinton once again, especially considering her apparent
 perjured testimony  to Congress.

Last week, in an interview with Democracy Now host Juan Gonzalez, Assange outlined the importance of the work WikiLeaks was doing. Speaking of Clinton specifically, he said WikiLeaks had helped expose her gun-running to terrorists.

Assange, officially labeled as a Traitor by the Deep State, has commented:
“... those Hillary Clinton emails connect together with the cables we have published of Hillary Clinton, creating a rich picture of how Hillary Clinton performed in office, but, more broadly, how the US Department of State operates.

“So, for example, the 1,700 emails, solely about Libya, disclose the absolutely disastrous intervention in Libya, the destruction of the Qadafi government, which led to the occupation of ISIS of large segments of Libya, Libyan weapons flowing to jihadists in Syria, including ISIS. ”

 Assange further commented:
"So, you know, our civilization can only be as good as our knowledge of what our civilization is. We can’t possibly hope to reform that which we do not understand.”

Judicial Watch secured a 2012 US Defense Intelligence Agency document providing proof that the Obama administration knew all along that Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood were the “major forces driving the insurgency in Syria,” yet Obama and his allies “supported the opposition” anyway — a massive violation of federal anti-terror laws, and potentially even giving aid and comfort to America's enemies [and an act of Treason]..

The same document notes that the Obama administration and its allies backing the Islamic Jihad against Assad in Syria were hoping to establish what the Pentagon report called a “declared or undeclared Salafist [fundamentalist Islam] principality in Eastern Syria.” Today, that principality is known as ISIS, ISIL, or the Islamic State.

Editor's Note:  This information could explain the inexplicable firing of Mike Flynn as Director of DIA, and his replacement by David Shedd, a CIA operative, who announced his retirement, but then stayed on as Acting Director to control DIA's operations and reporting.  It might also explain the assassination of Breitbart - who threatened to expose 0bama's treasonous activities.

  
[We created DIA's Clandestine Service in 1984 to effectively counter CIA's Clandestine Service to address Military Intelligence collection requirements.  Shedd's tenure as Director of DIA following Flynn's firing effectively neutered the DOD Clandestine Service, returning all US Clandestine operations to the CIA.]

These facts are hardly a secret. The New American magazine first reported on the DIA document well over a year ago, when it was first released by a federal court order. More recently, Breitbart, citing Judicial Watch board member Christopher J. Farrell, confirmed that the explosive DIA document was sent to Clinton based on the recipient markings. 

GOP candidate Trump shined light on the facts yet again. 

“Hillary Clinton --- is CROOKED!” 

he wrote in a June 15, 2015 Facebook post linking to the Breitbart article that was promptly liked and shared by almost 100,000 other users. 

“Hillary Clinton received a classified intelligence report stating that the Obama administration was actively supporting Al Qaeda in Iraq, the terrorist group that became the Islamic State.” 

Indeed, the facts are now well known to informed news consumers, who are increasingly tuning out the establishment's propaganda organs in favor of “alternative” and “conservative” media outlets. Of course, the establishment media could not let the facts tarnish Clinton or Obama, both of whom can thank the mischaracterized “mainstream” media for whatever support they actually possess among the citizenry. Most media simply ignored the smoking gun. 

But in an effort to bolster the White House narrative, the increasingly discredited “PolitiFact” website asked the White House whether it was supporting al-Qaeda. Naturally, the spokesman for the White House said no. 

(If they had asked Joe Biden, who explained in detail during a speech at Harvard how Obama's anti-ISIS coalition helped al Qaeda and armed, funded, and created ISIS, they might have gotten a different answer). 

The website, which purports to debunk claims by politicians it does not like, followed up by asking a few globalists and neocon cheerleaders of Obama's machinations in Syria whether the White House was telling the truth. Misleadingly referring to the trio as “independent experts,” Politifact claimed they “agreed with the White House.” 

In reality, even the experts acknowledged the Obama support for al Qaeda and ISIS, but they claimed it was “unintended.” 

Oops! Other explosive revelations on the globalist-backed use of jihadist proxies in Libya and Syria have also emerged from Clinton's e-mails, confirming what this magazine and other media outlets have been reporting all along. 

In 2011, for example, The New American became one of the first media outlets in the world to report on the fact that Gadhafi's proposed gold-backed currency for the region was likely a major factor in the decision of Western globalists and the United Nations to overthrow his regime by partnering with al Qaeda and other jihadist terrorist groups on the ground.

(Al-Qaeda's Libyan branch was known as the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, of LIFG, and e-mails show the State Department knew this as well.) 

Declassified e-mails from the U.S. State Department under Clinton, released on New Year's Eve and compiled in searchable format by WikiLeaks, now confirm that Gadhafi's gold-currency plan was a major factor in the decision to kill him. 

In an April 2011 e-mail to Clinton from Sid Blumenthal, a globalist war-monger who has long been close to the Clinton family and served as an aide, Clinton is told that “Qaddafi's government holds 143 tons of gold, and a similar amount in silver.” 

The gold, which was accumulated prior to the Obama-backed, al Qaeda-led, UN-approved rebellion in Libya, “was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar” 

Blumenthal told Clinton, adding that the precious metals were valued at over $7 billion. 

“This plan was designed to provide the Francophone [French-speaking] African Countries with an alternative to the French [Central African] franc (CFA).” 

Blumenthal also told Clinton that this gold currency plan “was one of the factors that influenced [globalist French] President Nicolas Sarkozy’s decision to commit France to the attack on Libya.” Oil was another motivating factor. 

In short, Clinton should be very thankful to the press for covering up her record on Syria, Libya, and beyond. It reveals, among other crimes, flagrant violations of numerous federal laws, illegal support for terror groups and revolutions, responsibility for mass death and destruction, and the inner workings of how two nations were reduced to ruins with leadership from Obama and Clinton. 

If the public knew the facts, there is little chance that Clinton could run for any office. Much more likely would be nationwide demands for criminal prosecutions all up and down the ranks of the leadership — on both sides of the aisle. Top military officials have already distanced themselves from the potentially treasonous policies involving support for terror groups and overthrowing governments. 

Now all that remains is to make the American people aware so that justice can be served. 

[Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is normally based in Europe. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com.  He is also a Free-Lance contributor to the Epoch Times]

Trump-Russia Collusion Narrative Destroyed

Hope Hicks testified, in full, before the House Committee,
answering all questions regarding Trump's contact with Russia.
The Democrats now focus solely on questions she declined
which addressed other White House issues.

Since the News Media buried this report, 

hoping the voting public would not notice, 

we are re-publishing it, as written, 

to give it global coverage and offset the 

Fake News the Democrats' are reporting.  

True journalism is rare today, so we want to 

give it our full support and widest distribution!

While the press portrayed Hope Hicks’s silence as all-inclusive, 

in reality she testified at length and in detail about all aspects of 

Trump’s presidential campaign. 

How Hope Hicks’s Testimony Destroyed The Trump-Russia Collusion Narrative.
The Federalist, 24June2019
By: Margot Cleveland 

Following the Thursday [13June2019] release of the transcript from Hope Hicks’s testimony before the Democrat-controlled House Judiciary Committee, the media quickly concentrated on the questions Trump’s former communications director refused to answer.

But while the press portrayed Hicks’s silence as all-inclusive, in reality Hicks testified at length and in detail about all aspects of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. And that testimony established yet again that the Russia collusion narrative was a hoax. 

One theme of Democrats’ questioning of Hicks concerned the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russians. Several times Hicks confirmed the lack of contacts between top Trump campaign members and Russia.

 “I’m telling you,” Hicks testified, “I wasn’t aware in the campaign of any contacts with Russian officials.”

Later, when asked again what, if any, communications and contacts there were between the Trump campaign and Russian or Russian officials, Hicks noted that during the campaign she wasn’t aware of any but later learned of insignificant contacts, such as Jeff Sessions meeting the Russian ambassador at a foreign policy speech.

Hicks further testified that a Russian official’s post-election comment that Russia was “in constant communication or constant contact with members of Trump’s inner circle throughout the campaign,” “was not true.”

“I’m not aware of anybody that regularly interacted with Mr. Trump that was a decisionmaker that advised him on a frequent basis that had, ‘regular contacts’ with any Russian officials,” Hicks stressed.

Hicks, who had previously worked for the Trump organization, also testified that she was not aware of any financial ties between Russia and the Trump Organization during the campaign. Nor did Hicks have any knowledge of any “foreign government providing cash or any other thing of value to Mr. Trump during the campaign,” or of any conversations during the campaign about Trump traveling to Russia (other than for the Miss Universe Pageant), or meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Hicks further told the committee that she only “became aware that the Russian government was attempting to interfere in the 2016 elections” when the story hit the press.

Nothing on the DNC Hack Or Trump Tower 

Democrats on the Committee nonetheless pushed the Russia collusion narrative by attempting to portray an email Hicks received from the editor-in-chief of the Russian internet newspaper Vzglyad as evidence of a Russian conspiracy.

Joe Neguse

Democratic Representative Joe Neguse flipped to the much-referenced Robert Mueller report to read the special counsel’s finding that “one day earlier the publication’s founder and former Russian parliamentarian Konstantin Rykov had registered two Russian websites, Trump2016.ru and DonaldTrump2016.ru.”

But Neguse’s attempt to implicate the Trump campaign in Russia’s online efforts to interfere in the election failed badly.

Hicks noted: “I don’t recall receiving the interview request”; I received hundreds of interview requests, sometimes daily.”

Because Trump had no intention of participating in the interview, Hicks explained, she was not concerned about the identity of the outlet, and hadn’t even realized until after the fact that the email had come from a Russian.

Concerning the WikiLeaks hacks, Hicks made clear that the only discussion the campaign had was “...speculation about if there would be more emails or information released, but that was prompted by things in the media” and it wasn’t with certainty that more leaks would happen, but “with speculation and skepticism.”

“No” Hicks stressed, Trump did not talk about WikiLeaks or the hack, nor did anybody else in the campaign, other than what was discussed in the public domain. Hicks also testified that during the campaign she had heard nothing about Roger Stone and his supposed relationship with WikiLeaks or its founder Julian Assange, or about WikiLeaks’ “divulgence of information about the emails of Hillary Clinton and Mr. Podesta” beyond media coverage.

In short, Hicks stated that during the campaign, Trump never indicated that he knew ahead of time that WikiLeaks was responsible for the Democratic National Committee hacks or that he had knowledge that additional information would be released.

Hicks also confirmed that before the election she had not been told that anyone at the Trump campaign had been offered information about Hillary Clinton.

The Trump Tower meeting was another focus of committee questions:
Hicks told the committee that she did not know about the Trump Tower meeting or Donald Trump Jr.’s emails about that meeting until after Trump was elected president. She had also never heard “... any discussion from any Trump Organization employee or Mr. Trump about an ongoing effort to pursue a potential Trump Tower Moscow at that time...” another thread woven into the Russia collusion hoax.

Hick’s responses during last week’s hearing also provided fresh insight into Trump’s behind-the-scenes response to news of Russian interference. Hicks noted that the campaign only “... became aware that the Russian government was attempting to interfere in the 2016 elections...” when the story hit the press. The president’s former confidant added that any conversations she was privy to during the campaign concerning Russia interference in the election mirrored what Trump said publicly.

The Trump Collusion Narrative Is a Red Herring 

Then, when asked what specifically Trump said during the campaign about public reports that his team was coordinating with Russia, Hicks relayed that Trump called it “nonsense.”

Trump believed that the Russia collusion conspiracy “...was something that the Clinton campaign had made up to deflect from the information that they viewed as harmful to their candidate, to their campaign...” Hicks explained.  She also testified that she agreed with his assessment and that the “... unsubstantiated claims that [the Trump campaign] were coordinating with Russia was an attempt to distract and deflect.”

Trump's former communications director added that the Trump campaign obviously knew there was no collusion, but admitted that had she been working instead for the Clinton campaign, she “probably would have taken a similar strategy.”

Hicks further noted that, whether the Russia collusion hoax was being peddled by the “Clinton campaign or speculated about in the media,” her discussions with candidate Trump focused on how to respond to the false claims.

Hicks also shared details of her conversation with Trump following his late-July 2016 off-the-cuff remark:
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Hicks explained that she informed Trump that “... some in the media had taken the expression quite literally, and that they were concerned he was encouraging foreign governments to, you know, locate those emails, and that that was obviously something that the media felt was extremely inappropriate and demanded a response from Mr. Trump and the campaign as to what exactly he meant by that.”

Hicks stated that, “... both from Trump’s remark and her discussion with him after,” she understood the comment as a joke. When pushed about what Trump had said, Hicks conveyed that he noted
“it was intended as a light-hearted comment.”

Trump Was Concerned About Paul Manafort 

In practice, however, Trump took concerns about Russia’s meddling seriously, Hicks explained.

Paul Manafort

For instance, according to Hicks, after the media began questioning Trump’s campaign chair, Paul Manafort. Trump, not realizing
Manafort’s close relationship with Richard Gates, asked Gates to keep an eye on Manafort.

Trump questioned some of Manafort’s “past work with other foreign governments, foreign campaigns...,” and stressed that “none of that would be appropriate to be ongoing during his service with the Trump campaign...” Hicks elaborated. He also asked Gates to let him know “if anything led him to believe that was ongoing.”

Mike Flynn

When, following Trump’s election, then-President Barack Obama raised questions about Michael Flynn to Trump, Hicks explained that warning tainted Trump’s view of Flynn going forward.

Trump “... was a bit bewildered that, you know, of all the things that the two of them could have been discussing,” it was Flynn that came up.

(This detail also raises the question of Obama’s motivation and his efforts to sour the president-elect’s relationship with Flynn.) 

Hicks’ testimony also negated several other Democratic and media talking points on Russia interference and collusion. While Democrats attempted to portray Trump as unperturbed by Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections, Hicks countered, “I think he was concerned, but I think he was simultaneously concerned that folks with a political agenda were going to weaponize that assessment to try to undermine the legitimacy of this election.”

Misrepresenting the Truth for Political Gain 

Ted Lieu [CA-D]

Hicks similarly exposed how the media misrepresented information to further the Trump-Russia collusion narrative, when Representative Ted Lieu attempted to do the same during the hearing.

“In 2008, Donald Trump, Jr., was quoted as saying ‘In terms of high-end product influx into the US, Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets. We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia’” Lieu quoted to Hicks.

Hicks acknowledged that she had spoken with Trump Jr., about this statement, but only to ensure “the media wasn’t misrepresenting the remark or presenting it in any misleading way.”

Hicks obliterated many of the Russia-collusion talking points pushed by Democrats and the media for the last three years.

“And how was the media mischaracterizing Donald Trump, Jr.’s remarks?” Lieu quizzed.

The media “made it seem like there was Russian money coming into the Trump Organization in a way that was inappropriate or somehow sinister when Trump Jr., was merely describing the kinds of clientele that were purchasing luxury apartments, both in New York City, Chicago, and in South Florida.  They’re a luxury, globally recognized real estate company,” Hicks explained, so “it would be odd if [the Trump Organization] weren’t selling to people just because they’re affiliated with Russia.”

By the end of her nearly eight hours of testimony last week, Hicks had obliterated many of the Russia-collusion talking points pushed by Democrats and the media for the last three years, even more expertly than Mueller did in his special counsel report.

As one Democrat noted during the hearing, Hicks was “... with [Trump] every day,” during both the primary and general election.
She would have known had the campaign colluded with Russia.
Yet her testimony made clear there was no Russia strategy, significant contact, collaboration, or collusion, which is why when Hicks was asked whether she thought the President “might be angry about [her] testifying before Congress today...”
her ready reply punctuated her significant—but unreported—testimony:
“I think the President knows that I would tell the truth, and the truth is there was no collusion. And I’m happy to say that as many times as is necessary today.”


----------------------

Margot Cleveland is a senior contributor to The Federalist. 

Cleveland served nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk 
to a federal appellate judge and is a former full-time faculty 
member and current adjunct instructor at the college of business
at the University of Notre Dame. 

The views expressed here are 
those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

Trump Pulls Troops Out of Syria and Afghanistan

Mattis, a superb combat warrior, disagrees with a  superb strategist
They're both right! 

We may take a bit of flack from pseudo-hawks and NeoCons, but we support Trump's decision 100%.

Old Military and Intelligence guys have wondered at the rationale of keeping our troops in the Middle East.
Saddam is dead,
Osama bin Laden is still dead.

We have no stake in the Middle East other than to assist governments to stabilize, which does not include the massive presence of Central Command Forces. Nor does it require keeping massive US Military forces in Europe under the European Command -- a relic of the Cold War. Let the Europeans fund and populate NATO; we're tired of taking their lip and funding their exquisite tastes.

As necessary, we have the capability of transporting a fully equipped combat division, with combat support aircraft from the US to a crisis site within hours via our Transportation Command's  C-5 and
C-17 cargo planes.  We can deploy supersonic bombers and fighters from the US to arrive over the Middle East with minimal flight time with maximized combat effectiveness.

We should learn from history [an odd idea, now, isn't it?]

We've been involved in these faux wars for decades, the purpose of which always remains vague - other than to support the Military-Industrial Complex -- as detailed by General/POTUS Eisenhower.

As the Soviet Empire was crumbling, we sat with Bill Clark, then the Assistant Secretary of the Army [General Mark Clark's son] as he bemoaned the future/demise of the Military without a defined enemy.

Specifically, without a definable enemy, we would have no reason to maintain a large, standing Military; and if a new global crisis arose, how could we mobilize in time to meet that crisis?

We've spent a few years in combat in a variety of countries, supposedly to "defend our country", only to learn the enemies we fought were once our friends, and our current friends were once our enemies.

Worse, we learned our "leaders" [e.g., Kissinger, Bush-1, W, Robert Gates, Obama, Billary] were the actual enemy we've come to know as the Deep State, all leading us into senseless wars.

After we [personally] were able to defeat the insurgency in Northeast Thailand, we gloated until we learned the insurgency had been sponsored by the Chinese who coopted the anti-government movement protesting the government's confiscation of farmlands in order to build a hydro-electric dam, funded by our very own Agency for International Development [USAID].  The dam construction devastated famers by claiming their fertile land and relegating this once prosperous group to generations of poverty and government subsidies.

But, the "greater good" prevailed as the region received electricity -- although few could use it.

That revelation in 1974, got us to thinking about our major Military commitments.

China and Vietnam [Ho Chi Minh] were some of our greatest supporters in WW2, establishing OSS spy networks (which we inherited during the Vietnam War) and recovering our downed pilots; but now, that enemy, Japan - the invading force, is our close ally in the Pacific, and China is now our enemy.

Ho Chi Minh worked in England and in France, and on the docks in Baltimore, so he was fluent in English as well as the US culture.

He led the movement for independence from France and formed the Indochinese Communist Party, and following WW2, sought Eisenhower's support for Vietnam's independence - which Ike declined.

LBJ initiated the war with North Vietnam by sending our warships into their territorial waters, drawing fire, thus convincing Congressional hawks to declare war.

As it turns out, the Tonkin Gulf Resolution was drafted a full six months before the attacks on US vessels occurred.

While we valiantly fought that war until 1975, Henry Kissinger, without the knowledge of Nixon, was selling us out to the Chinese in 1972, in exchange for a trade agreement.

But, throughout that war, we were often reminded of the heroin trade, via the Golden Triangle, through US Military transport, to the US.  Some folks are convinced that trade was sponsored or conducted by the CIA.

Iraq, for decades before we invaded to depose Saddam, was our closest Middle East Arab Ally [see our colleague, #Rick Francona's book "Ally to Adversary"], as well as our principal oil supplier.

Dick Cheney's Defense Contractors made a fortune exploiting the war -- and our soldiers, and we then had a generation of soldiers succumb to the Gulf War Syndrome [attributed to the oil vapor from burning wells, or, depleted uranium munitions, but in fact, derived from the Anthrax vaccine immunizations in 1990 by order of the Department of Defense on all Army troops who "might" be deployed to Iraq -- Bush's friends in the Pharmaceutical Industry profited mightily from that requirement -- even though it had not been through more than one (incomplete) trial.

Theoretically, the US would use oil sales from Iraq to pay for that war, but, in the end, the oil fields went under the control of other countries, and the US got not a cent!  On the other hand, US Defense contractors made fortunes.

Estimates by Reuters put the estimated total cost of the Iraq War at more than $5.6 Trillion.  
The war killed an estimated 150,000 Iraqi civilians, with unconfirmed estimates ranging up to 600,000, including security forces, insurgents, journalists, and humanitarian workers!  Bush demonstrated US power by publicly executing Saddam by hanging him, by the neck, until dead.
[Rumor has it that W faced that same sentence in Gitmo in December, 2018]

The social impact in Iraq included the reinvigoration of Islamic militants, reversal of women's rights, and a weakened an already precarious healthcare system.  The multi-billion reconstruction effort was regarded a failure as most of the monies spent on security was lost to waste or fraud.

Keep in mind that the basis of George W Bush's invasion of Iraq was based on his announcement that Saddam Hussein held "Weapons of Mass Destruction" [WMD] a claim discounted by Rick Francona who was/is an expert on the region and acted as General Schwartzkopf's personal Arabic interpreter and Intelligence Advisor.

Schwartzkopf, opposed by Dick Cheney later became critical of the rationale behind the war once he learned the "WMD" claim was fraudulent and handed in his retirement papers rather than remain on Active Duty.  No evidence was ever substantiated of WMDs in Iraq.

Our legacy in Iraq was, perhaps, to create the subsequent regional terrorist factions which represent our current global threat.

The Afghans were our closest allies in their battles against the Soviets, as we helped create and aided the Mujahiden; but, there were even allegations that the CIA created Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, via Operation Cyclone, -- and then, once the Soviets were defeated, we abandoned our Afghan colleagues, allowing religious zealots to control the Taliban who were then dubbed terrorists; they're now our enemy because bin Laden was reportedly hiding out in Afghanistan.

In spite of the Special Operations assault on bin Laden's Pakistan hideout and his assassination, he has been repeatedly reported in sightings vacationing in the Caribbean with his family.

The faux assassination of bin Laden was conducted by Admiral McRaven's Special Operations units under the guise of Operation Neptune Spear as a public relations event for then-POTUS Obama.  McRaven reportedly was one of the flag rank officers who signed on to Obama's requirement that they agreed to fire on US Civilians if so ordered.

Contrary to all Intelligence protocols, bin Laden was killed and his [supposedly his] mutilated body was dumped in the ocean, sparking Muslim outrage throughout the world, and leaving professional Intelligence officers bewildered that he was not taken captive [he was unarmed] and interrogated to obtain his knowledge of regional and global terrorist groups.

Notably, SEAL Team Six, the lead on the bin Laden assault, later suffered 38 casualties, to include 15 participants of the bin Laden raid when their Chinook helicopter was shot down on August 6, 2011IN [Extortion 17] -- not long after members of the Team lampooned Obama as in Clint Eastwood's Empty Chair soliloquy.

Loading 38 SEALs aboard a chopper in a combat zone strains credulity, but, apparently, the orders came down from McRaven -- an officer we all respected until too many of these incidents surfaced, and he has recently become a highly vocal critic of President Trump.

The chopper was allegedly shot down by a Surface to Air [SAM/MANPAD]


But, why are we in Afghanistan now?

Most experts remain bewildered, other than the US now tacitly protects the poppy/heroin trade.

And, we learned that ISIS, our Enemy-du-Jour, has been led and funded by senior officers of our closest Mid-East Allies, apparently so we would have an officially recognized enemy.

Later, we learned that Benghazi was all about covering up Hillary's arms deals with ISIS and al Qaeda by overthrowing Qadafi and transferring the contents of Libyan armories to al Qaeda -- who just might be tempted use those weapons against US forces.


Of late, we received from an anonymous donor, the complete [unclassified] war-plan designed by [former General] Wesley Clark [Clinton's protege and commander of the Military raid on Waco] in which Clark planned a war between Ukraine and Russia, into which US forces would be inserted and engaged.
[It was difficult to determine who would have been the enemy in that war, but US engagement would guarantee profits for our Defense Contractors.]

In Central America, a grouping of 'banana republics" and a hotbed of corruption, the US built up the Southern Command [SouthCom] headquarters from a Military retirement vacationland to a highly energized and blossoming combat command, focused on defeating the communist threat to Nicaragua, which Jimmy Carter had turned over to the Sandinistas by pulling support from the "evil despot", Somoza - [a West Point graduate] and allowing communist Daniel Ortega to come to power and who then ushered in the Cubans and Soviets -- who presented The Threat.

We were assigned as the Special Intelligence Advisor to SouthCom, a thinly staffed regional headquarters which could respond to any regional crisis, and watched it mushroom into a bloated, top heavy bureaucracy which justified its existence by toppling our host and ally, Noriega with a massive invasion, built a huge Military force in Honduras and El Salvador, created a war zone in El Salvador, and essentially destabilized an entire sub-continent by becoming the common enemy of all, and a seeming ally of the Drug Cartels, thanks to Bush-1, Clinton, Bush-2, and Obama.

The US militarized El Salvador, Honduras, and Costa Rica, and headquartered Army and Air Force bases in each country, and supported Panama's Noriega as a "benevolent despot", who profited by accepting payments from the KGB, the CIA, Army Intelligence, -- and the Chinese.

[We managed HUMINT programs in CentAm following a by-name request by the CIA DDO-LA [D Clarridge] and the former DCI [V Walters] to restructure both the CIA and the Military Intelligence HUMINT operations in Latin America]

Noriega was also a drug runner and arms dealer; but, then we created an intelligence program that revealed that Noriega was not just a tin-horn dictator, but masterminded a global network of hundreds of front companies through which he moved drugs, arms, and laundered money -- a sophisticated network CIA/Deep State coveted, so Noriega was declared evil, and the US invaded Panama, and the CIA took control of all the Noriega Front Companies to carry on their global, Black enterprises.

But, all that is hidden in the background, and Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria are sort of enemy strongholds, but, we're not sure who are the good guys, or the bad guys.

So, now, who will the US have to identify and combat "The "Threat"?
Afghanistan for another 10 or 15 years? or Syria, for another 10 years!

We have the highly skilled and specialized Special Forces [the Special Operations Commmand (SOCOM) designed for insertion into hostile zones to address "Terrorists".

We have a Cyber Command which theoretically can combat hacking by all our Cyber enemies, and even the Russians, if we can admit that the US targets the successor to the USSR
[the Cyber Command apparently includes Spookdblog as an enemy since they have bombarded our residences with impulse waves, hacked our cell-phones and texted Clapper's threats to us, along with excerpts of our highly classified Officer Evaluation Reports (OER)-- just to let us know they could do it.]

Notably, there are several other Unified Commands [AfriCom, SouthCom, Strategic Command, etc.,] which serve no purpose other than to create command slots for unnecessary generals and bureaucrats, and to fund NATO.

But, let's not forget the Defense contractors who provide that expensive support for our Military forces deployed in those regions. The massive expansion of our Military and Intelligence organizations under Bush and Obama have created a huge financial burden, and a bloated Military hierarchy unseen in the history of the US -- even at the peak of World War 2.

These Commands waste manpower and equipment, and create the scenarios for regional wars - usually backing the wrong elements; they augment their forces by deploying National Guard units from the US at great expense. It's time to rethink our Military from top to bottom.

Do we need to remain in Afghanistan or Syria?

Lots of senior Military officers will state adamantly that the US must live up to its commitments in both areas of operation [AO].  But, precisely what commitment is there?

1) Afghanistan: 
After 17 years, our accomplishments consist of:
   a) Trillions of dollars spent,
   b) Deployment of countless National Guard units in six month deployments barely long enough
        to familiarize them with the environment before coming under attack,
    c) Countless suicides during, and after deployments, abominable leadership, massive
        post-deployment illnesses,
    d) Assassination of US personnel by Afghan allies, and
    e) Absolutely no positive results other than protecting Poppy fields for local drug lords,
    f) Bad guys control most of the country and the Afghan Government [our Ally] controls
        a few acres
    g) Most Afghans regard us as their enemy

2) Syria:
We've only been engaged in Syria for seven years, since 2011, and here's a list of accomplishments:
   a) Roughly 500,00 people are dead
   b) Dozens of countries are involved
   c)  Many [exact number unknown] terrorist groups are involved -- on both sides
   d)  Syrian President Assad is backed by Iran and Russia [our current "enemies"] and Pakistan
   c)  Opposition to Assad includes
        (1) hundreds of "militias" from an estimated 85 countries,
        (2) Syrian Democratic Forces [Kurdish-led coalition of Arab and Kurdish Militias],
              (a) led by the Kurdish Worker's Party (PKK)
              (b) regarded by the US and the UK as a Terrorist group although the US provides
                   them air support against ISIS]
              (c) BUT, Turkey fights the Kurds fearing they will use a victory to declare an independent
                    state along the border
        (3) Miscellaneous Arabs, Sunnis, Christians, Druze, and Kurds],
        (4) Islamic extremists -- some of which have been declared terrorists,
              including the Syrian version of al Qaeda [armed by Hillary from Libyan
              military warehouses]
        (5) ISIS- supposedly local Islamic extremists, although manpower derives from a variety
              of countries including Canada, the US, Australia, Israel, the UK, Iraq, etc.
        (6) Official backing by outside nations includes the US, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, Turkey
       

Mr Trump has stated he will pull out of Syria, but, given the complexities listed above, he faces a great deal of opposition from Allies, the Democrats, the Pentagon, the GOP, and all those who anticipate profiting from the continuation of this conflict.

Essentially, Trump is removing his "Boots-On-The-Ground" units and still maintaining a protective shield by creating a "No-Fly-Zone" in the Northeast of Syria which is rich in Agriculture, Water, and Energy resources - the target of all the Bad Guys.

The US can remove its primary units deployed by Obama, but tactically, can still respond, as needed from other Middle East areas, or,  from the US with Special Operations units and A-10 Warthogs, the close-air support aircraft Obama was intent on eliminating.

Assuming the reports of satellite enabled weaponry [Star Wars], bad guys [if accurately identified] could be targeted and blasted into oblivion in seconds using the Directed Energy Weapons developed back in the 1970s, or lasers developed during the 1960s, now significantly enhanced, with targeting via sophisticated technology developed since then.

In the ancient words of Walt Kelly's POGO,

"We have met the enemy, and he is US!"

Trump has an uphill battle to fix this.

Deep State Targets Tesla

Elon Musk: Serial Entrepreneur, and Threat to the Deep State

Just as Nicholas Tesla was targeted and destroyed
 by the Deep State when he came up with ideas and 
inventions which would improve the lives of humanity 
-- and provide free electricity and communications, 
so too is Elon Musk now being targeted since he
abhors wasteful and overly expensive inefficiencies.  
In this story line, follow the money, but recognize 
Elon Musk can, and will, dislodge the Deep State.

Click here for related story
Business Insider, ByLine: Matthew DeBord

Elon Musk settled with the Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] on charges filed over his abandoned attempt to take Tesla private. Musk will have to step down as the chairman of Tesla, and will be barred from that position for three years. He will remain Tesla’s CEO. The SEC charged Tesla with “failing to have required disclosure controls and procedures relating to Musk’s tweets.”  

We are curious what role Melissa Hodgman, Director of the SEC's International Division, played in this bizarre attack; you might remember she is married to Peter Strzok, the corrupt, and now former Director of the FBI's Counter-Intelligence Division; her role has been to block any investigations into Hillary's money laundering operation in the Clinton Foundation.  

[Other than working with his girlfriend to undermine Trump, Strzok's notable success was in destroying the FBI's long term Operation Ghost Stories which identified and arrested a Russian SVR Sleeper Agent program by allowing the escape/release of the eleven spies arrested.]

Musk and the company will pay separate $20 million fines that will “be distributed to harmed investors under a court-approved process.   Tesla is being forced to appoint two new independent directors to its board. The company must also hire a lawyer to monitor Musk’s communications, including his tweets.

Musk's crime?

He tweeted that he was "... considering taking the company private."
He didn't, but that's irrelevant as far as the corrupt SEC is concerned.

Back in 2010, Musk's initial public offering of the Tesla stock was $17 in 2010; today, it sells for $300, a modest increase that made its investors millionaires.


[We're curious as to how investors were harmed by Tesla's chronic speculation, captured this time in an eight word tweet]

Musk is a perceived enemy of the Deep State, which derives its wealth primarily from the Transportation industry, i.e., Detroit's internal combustion industry, the oil industry, the financial industry, and the Defense and Space industry.

Musk has challenged each of the industries.

Tesla Semi; non-diesel

His electric vehicles have spawned dozens of US and international electric vehicle competitors; the only barrier seemed to be the limitations of 2,000 year old battery technology, so he created a company to make 21st Century batteries for electric vehicles, to include the Tesla Semi trucks  which could travel long distances without expensive diesel fuel costs
[currently about $150 Billion per year, which could cut into Warren Buffet's $34 Billion petroleum movement system of railroads].


The financial industry is leery of Musk because he can manufacture affordable vehicles and finance their sales through his own company at reasonable interest rates.  As opposed to Detroit's products which languish on car lots, Tesla vehicles are sold on waiting lists because demand is so great.

Automobile dealerships, a mainstay of the financial industry selling car loans of $30,000 to $150,000 at high interest rates, will gradually disappear with the dominance of electric vehicles since the need for mechanical maintenance is eliminated with electric motors which need only simple lubricants; no more expensive maintenance and overhauls of automobile drive trains consisting of thousands of moving parts [there are about 13,000 moving parts in the drive train of the average gasoline propelled car today; an electric propelled automobile has a motor with nine moving parts; do the math].  Electric vehicles will still need financing, but their mechanical and physical life spans are indefinite as the structures are now carbon-based and the motors simply don't wear out.

GM's EV-s, all in working order, were destroyed

GM figured this out in 1995 after they had created the EV-1 and EV-2, wildly popular leased vehicles - which needed no maintenance.

So, GM's Chairman, Rick Wagoner, revoked the leases, confiscated all the vehicles, and destroyed them all, not even giving one to the Smithsonian for historical purposes.

Musk's exceptional drive has produced a number of extraordinary ventures, most of which have made him, and his investors, quite wealthy.

His first venture was a software company called Zip2, which provided News Media resources with research capabilities. He sold out to Compaq Computer for $307 Million -- his share was $22 Million.

His next venture was X.com, an on-line bank which eventually became PayPal, which blind-sided the banking industry as it made transactions electronic and simple; he eventually sold the company for $250 Million.

Further down the road, he studied "rocket science" in his spare time and created SpaceX on the basis that rockets were unnecessarily overpriced.  His ventures included buying Russian rockets, developing a re-usable rocket; his reusable rockets were 100 time cheaper than those purchased under existing government contracts. He then secured a NASA contract for  $1.6 Billion to resupply the Space Station [after the Space Shuttle program was ended by Obama in 2011].  This program evolved into the BFR [Big Falcon (Fucking) Rocket] program which has evolved into the Interplanetary Space Flight program with reusable rockets.

This venture caused him a great deal of opposition since the Deep State is unwilling to give up control of the Space Industry, funded by billion dollar NASA contracts, and promoted by Trump's Space Force.

On a number of early launches, Musk's rockets inexplicably exploded on the pad or shortly after lift-off, as we would later learn via sabotage, or via snipers who could puncture a fuel tank from a mile away.  Musk and Trump solved this problem by launching from a highly restricted Military base, entry to which was only for fully identified, by-name personnel.

The Deep State has been squeezed out, for now, but will likely launch propaganda campaigns to denigrate Musk's efforts -- which promise to deliver astronauts to Mars, and the Moon in the immediate future.

Having successfully launched his Interplanetary program, Musk turned his attention again to his electric vehicles, addressing the limitations of battery life; so he built the GigaFactory, a lithium-ion battery factory in Nevada to power his vehicles and homes with solar-energy Powerwalls [a stationary home/business energy storage unit.

These ventures would undercut the battery companies, which have produced batteries which  are archaic [3,000 years old in design], expensive, and have a life span of about five years.

Cancer Transmission Systems?

They would also undercut the electric utility companies by providing consumers with an alternative to buying ever-more expensive electricity by government-protected monopolistic utilities which produce electricity and deliver it to consumers in the least efficient and highly vulnerable manner.

There is reportedly a high correlation between exposure to the Electrical Magnetic Fields [EMF] high tension power lines and cancer.  Electric utilizes have spent considerable money "debunking" these theories, but, it seems there is now pretty much of an inexplicable epidemic of cancer.

There's a considerable amount of money to be lost if Musk succeeds in creating electricity that is "off-the-grid", and naturally, the Deep State is reluctant to all the disruption of the "status quo". Expect a massive propaganda campaign to malign Musk's program.

But, lest you think Musk was slacking off, he came up with still another innovation; i.e., the Hyperloop passenger/freight train which replaces railroad trains with a high speed [700 mph], efficient, and comparatively inexpensive process.

Hyperloop Concept

The Hyperloop is a sealed tube, or system of tubes, through which a "pod" can travel without air resistance or friction -- at very high speeds.

The pods would be pressurized capsules which ride on "air bearings" driven by linear induction motors and axial compressors.

All that sounds complicated, but, think in terms of the vacuum tube system many banks still use in drive-through lanes to deliver your cash from the teller in the window.  Sixty years ago, that was the preferred system for office complexes and department stores.

This is a great idea which would provide a viable alternative to our crowded, expensive, uncomfortable, and inefficient airways   which are highly vulnerable.  Once again though, the Deep State is highly resistant to innovative technology which could slaughter their cash cows.  Railroads, though massively inefficient and slow, are basically passenger-unfriendly and highly profitable freight carriers.  Warren Buffett would be resistant, although rail would be the preferred carrier of dangerous loads of oil, coal, and explosives.

Nonetheless, opponents have already produced "studies" which call this technology impractical and vulnerable to disruption from power outages and "terror attacks".

Some may remember how the high-speed MagLev trains conceived in the 1980s were derailed in the US by Deep State nay-sayers to protect the airlines and rail monopolies -- but those constructed in foreign countries work just fine, until mysterious accidents caused them to shut down.

Musk's Tunnel Boring Machine

The question arose on how the HyperLoop would move through non-existent paths.

Naturally, Musk had an answer - his Boring Machine Company, which produces machines capable of boring tunnels through any material [e.g., rock]  at 50-60 feet per day, with a diameter up to nearly 60 feet.

Currently, Musk has a variety of tentative contracts for boring his tunnels, into which he can insert his Hyperloop trains; since these might cause the disruption and obsolescence of existing transportation systems, we can guarantee a great deal of political opposition to arise from Deep State functionaries.

Stay tuned for more adventures of Elon Musk, the man from the future.

POSTSCRIPT:

Since we wrote this blog post last month, we've been traveling abroad  and have visited museums of science and technology which broadened our awareness of potential implementation of Musk technology, to include coordinating new, virtually indestructible carbon fibre products which could be used in Musk's space programs.

Notably, on our return, we learned that two of NASA's spacecraft "... ran out of hydrazine fuel!" - limiting their maneuverability, thus preventing them from gathering further information in our Solar System, even though their solar batteries were/are still functional.  The "single point of failure" on each system was the "reaction wheels" which adjusted the camera/telescope visual field.

1)  The Spacecraft DAWN, launched in 2007, probed the Asteroid Belt between Mars and Jupiter, after which it continued on to circle and gather information on the protoplanets Ceres and Vesta.  Currently, DAWN remains in an uncontrolled orbit, 22 miles above, and circling Ceres, completely dysfunctional.

2)  The Kepler orbiting telescope, launched in 2009, had run out of hydrazine fuel two days earlier, eliminating its ability to orient and gather space data.  The official explanation for its failure however, was eroding reaction wheels.

3)  The Hubble orbiting telescope. launched in 1990, remains in orbit and fully functional, 14 years after George W Bush attempted to force it into low orbit and self-destruct; his rationale was that the more sophisticated Webb telescope would quickly replace it.  The Webb telescope has been delayed multiple times and has recently been delayed again until 2021, somewhat beyond its original projection.  Maintenance and servicing of the Hubble had been conducted by astronauts transported by the Space Shuttle program, which President Obama terminated in 2011, leaving no replacement for the Shuttle, and no US transport to the Space Station or any other destination.


We're not sure what NASA has been doing, or why its emphasis seems to be on degrading our space exploration program.  Certainly, the demise of the DAWN and Keppler spacecraft due to fuel issues had to have been foreseen.  Had not the scientific community risen up in rebellion against Bush's decision to destroy the Hubble telescope, the US would have little capability to monitor issues beyond our stratosphere -- while Russia, China, and India launch their space vehicles to the Moon and beyond.  We have to wonder about this retreat from competition from our potential adversaries - an apparent goal of both Bush and Obama.

So, what does all this have to do with Elon Musk?

Well, Musk has repeatedly demonstrated his innovative spirit in creating solutions to bewildering challenges.  His rocketry has proven reliable and inexpensive.  One of his Tesla vehicles is now hurtling through space toward Mars, simply because Musk thought it would demonstrate he could accomplish just about anything space related.

We suspect he could probably launch a refueling vehicle and apparatus to salvage both DAWN and Keppler -- using robotic processes.  He could likely launch a space vehicle to land astronauts on the Moon were he so inclined.

We trust Mr Trump has Musk in mind for some key role in his Space Force -- which might be a suitable replacement for NASA.