Google Executve, Former State Department Employee Reveals Conflict of Interest

Jared Cohen, Google Executive, Former State Department Employee

[From article]
Hillary Clinton’s emails reveal how Google wanted to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad using a mapping tool.
At a time when America's foreign policy was to topple Assad, the tech giant - whose corporate motto is 'Don't Be Evil' - sought to encourage further defections from the leader's regime and boost the confidence of the opposition.
The plan's details were passed along to Clinton's team by a Google executive Jared Cohen, who was a senior advisor to Clinton until 2010 and is an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
The 34-year-old left his State Department position after being poached by former Google CEO Eric Schmidt to run Google Ideas, now known as Jigsaw.
The revelation comes as Google’s plans to expand Internet access in Cuba were revealed by President Barack Obama on Monday.
Obama, who is on a historic trip to the communist nation, said in an interview with ABC News: ‘One of the things that we’ll be announcing here is that Google has a deal to start setting up more WiFi and broadband access on the island.’

[. . .]
Google also planned to stealthily hand the reins over to Al-Jazeera to ensure the data is broadcast into Syria, encouraging further defections and give confidence to the opposition.
Cohen wrote: ‘Please keep close hold, but my team is planning to launch a tool on Sunday that will publicly track and map the defections in Syria and which parts of the government they are coming from.

[. . .]
Elaborating on the plan to get the information to their intended recipients, Cohen added: ‘Given how hard it is to get information into Syria right now, we are partnering with Al-Jazeera who will take primary ownership over the tool we have built, track the data, verify it, and broadcast it back into Syria.’
Cohen also include an attachment, a PDF called 'Defection Tracker', showing what the tool will look like in the email.
He added: ‘Please keep this very close hold and let me know if there is anything eke [sic] you think we need to account for or think about before we launch.
‘We believe this can have an important impact.’
Google's code of conduct famously opens with the company's corporate motto: 'Don't Be Evil'.
Parent company Alphabet, whose executive chairman is Schmidt, dropped the slogan last year, changing its code of conduct to encourage employees to 'do the right thing.'
Google Ideas was founded in 2010 by Schmidt to understand and tackle global challenges.
Cohen left his job on the State Department’s Policy Planning Committee, where he was an advisor to Condoleezza Rice and later Clinton, when Schmidt approached him to head the New York-based 'think/do tank'.
The company later became Jigsaw, with Cohen still serving as President.
Its mission is 'to use technology to tackle the toughest geopolitical challenges, from countering violent extremism to thwarting online censorship to mitigating the threats associated with digital attacks.'
Meanwhile, Jigsaw has come under scrutiny for its attempts to incite regime changes and its close ties to the State Department.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3503000/Hillary-Clinton-s-emails-reveal-Google-wanted-overthrow-Assad-map-tool.html

Does Google basically work for the White House? Internet giant revealed to have offered to help overthrow Assad as Obama reveals broadband for Cuba
Tech giant planned to visually map those defecting from Assad's regime
Tool's aim were highlighted in email from Google Ideas chief Jared Cohen
Cohen left a job at the State Department in 2010 to run Google's think tank
His plan was to encourage more to defect and give confidence to opposition
Google planned to give ownership of the tool to network Al-Jazeera
The network would ensure the information found its way into Syria
It comes as it emerged Google has a deal to expand Internet access in Cuba
By KHALEDA RAHMAN FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 11:51 EST, 21 March 2016 | UPDATED: 17:17 EST, 21 March 2016

Nonsensical Foreign Policy, Destructive To US Security, Public Safety

Essay analyzed:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/262307/fighting-isis-plays-isis-hands-daniel-greenfield

FIGHTING ISIS PLAYS INTO ISIS’ HANDS?
Is letting ISIS kill us our only hope of beating ISIS?
March 28, 2016

Daniel Greenfield

[From article about essay]
Because terrorism has no religion. Even when it’s shouting, “Allahu Akbar”.
***
Obama initially tried to defeat ISIS by ignoring it. This cunning approach allowed ISIS to seize large chunks of Iraq and Syria. He tried calling ISIS a JayVee team in line with his recent claim that, “We defeat them in part by saying you are not strong, you are weak”. Unimpressed, ISIS seized Mosul. It was still attached to the old-fashioned way of proving it was strong by actually winning land and wars.
Then Obama tried to defeat ISIS by arming the Islamist allies of Al Qaeda and now a lot more American weapons are in the hands of Islamic terrorists. Some of them are even in the hands of ISIS.
Europe and the United States decided to prove that we were not at war with Islam by taking in as many Muslims as we could. Instead of leading to less terrorism, taking in more Muslims led to more terrorism.
[. . .]
There’s a reason that the counterintuitive strategies for fighting Islamic terrorism by not fighting Islamic terrorism don’t work. They make no sense. They never did. Instead they all depend on convincing Muslims, from the local Imam to Jihadist organizations, to aid us instead of attack us by showing what nice people we are. Meanwhile they also insist that we can’t use the words “Islamic terrorism” because Muslims are ticking time bombs who will join Al Qaeda and ISIS the moment we associate terrorism with the I-word.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/03/following_the_logic_of_the_obama_administration_on_isis.html

March 29, 2016
Following the logic of the Obama administration on ISIS
By Thomas Lifson

Pat Buchanan Recalls Eisenhower on NATO, Agrees With Trump

President Dwight David Eisenhower, the general who managed allied armies and won World War II

With dumbed down politicians, voters and journalists everywhere, Buchanan shows there are some with historical knowledge left. Even at prestigious Harvard University at a lecture at their Center for International Affairs (now the Center for Government and International Studies), by a NATO general, the scholars reacted with shock when I repeated what is reported here. In 1949 Eisenhower said if NATO exists in ten years it will be a failure. Here it is 65 years later and it is only getting bigger and becoming a more dangerous bureaucracy. This statement by Eisenhower is reported in every biography of the great President. Yet few today know what he said. The elitists who mock Trump will not recognize the wisdom of Ike. They mocked him also.  



[From article]
I am “not isolationist, but I am ‘America First,'” Donald Trump told The New York times last weekend. “I like the expression.”
Of NATO, where the U.S. underwrites three-fourths of the cost of defending Europe, Trump calls this arrangement “unfair, economically, to us,” and adds, “We will not be ripped off anymore.”
[. . .]
For the Donald’s ideas are not lacking for authoritative support.
The first NATO supreme commander, Gen. Eisenhower, said in February 1951 of the alliance: “If in 10 years, all American troops stationed in Europe for national defense purposes have not been returned to the United States, then this whole project will have failed.”
As JFK biographer Richard Reeves relates, President Eisenhower, a decade later, admonished the president-elect on NATO.
“Eisenhower told his successor it was time to start bringing the troops home from Europe. ‘America is carrying far more than her share of free world defense,’ he said. It was time for other nations of NATO to take on more of the costs of their own defense.”
No Cold War president followed Ike’s counsel.
[. . .]
The conservative coalition that had united in the Cold War fractured. Some of us argued that when the Russian troops went home from Europe, the American troops should come home from Europe.
Time for a populous prosperous Europe to start defending itself.
Instead, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush began handing out NATO memberships, i.e., war guarantees, to all ex-Warsaw Pact nations and even Baltic republics that had been part of the Soviet Union.
In a historically provocative act, the U.S. moved its “red line” for war with Russia from the Elbe River in Germany to the Estonian-Russian border, a few miles from St. Petersburg.
We declared to the world that should Russia seek to restore its hegemony over any part of its old empire in Europe, she would be at war with the United States.
[. . .]



Recall. Ike did not intervene to save the Hungarian freedom fighters in 1956. Lyndon Johnson did not lift a hand to save the Czechs, when Warsaw Pact armies crushed “Prague Spring” in 1968. Reagan refused to intervene when Gen. Wojciech Jaruzelski, on Moscow’s orders, smashed Solidarity in 1981.
These presidents put America first. All would have rejoiced in the liberation of Eastern Europe. But none would have committed us to war with a nuclear-armed nation like Russia to guarantee it.
[. . .]
While Trump is focusing on how America is bearing too much of the cost of defending Europe, it is the risks we are taking that are paramount, risks no Cold War president ever dared to take.
Why should America fight Russia over who rules in the Baltic States or Romania and Bulgaria? When did the sovereignty of these nations become interests so vital we would risk a military clash with Moscow that could escalate into nuclear war? Why are we still committed to fight for scores of nations on five continents?
Trump is challenging the mindset of a foreign policy elite whose thinking is frozen in a world that disappeared around 1991.

http://buchanan.org/blog/trump-right-nato-125052

Is Trump Right About NATO?
Monday - March 28, 2016 at 8:12 pm

Patrick J. Buchanan

Nobody Here But Us Chickens, Couldn't Have Been Me

[From article]
President Barack Obama has accused Britain and France, and unnamed others countries, of being "free riders," unwilling to put "skin in the game."
It was startling to read the article by Jeffrey Goldberg and his candid interview and portrait of President Barak Obama in the issue of Atlantic Magazine of March 10, 2016. It is an unusual criticism, if in less brutal language than that of the Soviet dictator, but nevertheless an unprecedented attack on two supposed allies, Britain and France. The two countries, Obama implied, were trying to involve the U.S. in conflicts in which U.S. interests are not at stake.
[. . .]



As a candidate in the presidential elections, Obama pledged to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Throughout his presidency Obama has sought to avoid committing U.S. forces in foreign conflicts if possible, though he recognized the danger of al-Qaeda and threats to the State of Israel. As Jeffrey Goldberg reports it, Obama argued that the first task in international affairs of a U.S. president is "don't do stupid s***." Others might more appropriately see this as the rationalization for the refusal by the U.S. to exercise leadership as it has done since 1945.
Obama's international priorities are unusual. For him, ISIS is not an existential threat. But he views climate change as a threat to the entire world, and one that affects all the other problems we face. Seemingly less important, and almost an afterthought, is the long-term problem of "terrorism when combined with the problem of failed states."
[. . .]



Obama is right that Libya is still a "s*** show." It is a failed state with no real working government, with a large part of the country controlled by a variety of competing militias and terrorist groups. Obama blamed the failure on the degree of tribal division in Libya that was greater than his analysts had expected. Parenthetically, one wonders who these "analysts" were, since the tribal rivalries in Libya have been discussed in all serious commentary on the country.
More important, Obama blamed France and Britain for the present mess.
[. . .]
Surprisingly, Obama's chestnuts were pulled out of the fire by the decision of President Vladimir Putin to work for the successful removal of Syria's chemical weapons arsenal.
[. . .]



Obama has given various explanations for his failure to take action, but two are particularly interesting. One is the failure of Prime Minister Cameron to get consent of the British Parliament. Indeed, Cameron did not get the consent of the House of Commons, but this was in part due to the campaign of Labour leader Ed Miliband in August for Labour M.P.s to vote against U.K. air strikes.
The other is his rationale that the scope of executive power in national security issues is very broad but not limitless. This is a surprising argument from the president who has had no hesitation in issuing executive orders, so far 226, in domestic policy.
[. . .]
It is clear that for President Obama, the Middle East is not an area for U.S. priority. Equally, he does not advocate a leadership role in international affairs, even if it is sometimes expressed, though also sometimes denied, as "leading from behind." None of this excuses his blaming other countries and politicians for problems or deficiencies in the international arena. They are not pulling anyone's chestnuts out of the fire.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/03/obama_on_foreign_policy_apocalypse_dont_blame_me.html

March 14, 2016
Obama on Foreign Policy Apocalypse: Don't Blame Me
By Michael Curtis

Feckless White House Led To Destruction of Syria, Middle East Stability

From article]
It is hard to remember that that the Syrian War began during those hopeful, halcyon days of the dawning of the “Arab Spring” in March, 2011, when some young, idealist Syrians wanted to overthrow the brutal stranglehold of Bashir Assad. Mr. Assad’s security forces plowed down these teenagers painting murals with revolutionary slogans on a school wall, and hundreds of thousands took to the streets in support of them, but Assad’s forces mowed them down as well. In an attempt to expel Assad’s security forces, and to defend themselves, opposition forces were forced to take up arms.
The conflict quickly escalated into a sectarian, ethnic, and religious one. The government has long been controlled by the Alawite minority which is closely related to Shia Islam, and has therefore long been aligned with Iran, which has sent the IRGC and Hizb’allah into Iran. And Russia, hungry to reassert itself on the global stage, quickly became allied with this constellation.
While waiting, to no avail, for the U.S. cavalry to arrive, some of the legitimate Sunni opposition became hardened and disillusioned with the United States. We now have brutal jihadists in the form of ISIS taking advantage of the chaos and taking over huge segments of Syria. Some of the original Sunni opposition battled ISIS, and some have either willingly or through the threat of death, joined ISIS, which has claimed to have established a “caliphate” in Syria.
We now have a completely chaotic situation of several “wars within a war” with a new spinoff group of Al Qaeda, the Al Nusra Front, Kurdish Forces, and a whole array of other spinoff groups forming and quickly jumping into the fray.
The chaos has been further complicated this past Saturday when Turkey began shelling Aleppo. Of course, Erdogan is hiding behind the pretense that Turkey is fighting terrorists, which for Erdogan means the Kurds, who are perhaps some of our staunchest and most valiant allies in the region.
The Obama administration made a similar error in November when it trusted Putin to coordinate with it in the fight against ISIS,
[. . .]
It has been agonizing to watch this spiraling descent into hell in which many good, innocent people, as well as some very venal actors, have been caught up. The New York Times on Saturday cited a report from the Syrian Center for Policy Research saying there is an estimated 470,000 fatalities. The war has created a staggering refugee crisis, with at least 5 million refugees pouring into Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, Germany, Belgium, Sweden, France, Italy, Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, and Hungary, totally changing the demographics of these nations.
President Bashir Assad, together with his Hizb’allah forces have completely surrounded the town of Madaya, outside of Damascus, cutting them off from all known food sources.
[. . .]
It is almost impossible not to feel rage, when one remembers President Obama’s sacrosanct “red line” of August 20, 2012, when he stated that “there would be enormous consequences if we started seeing movement on the chemical weapons front”. And exactly one year and one day later, on August 21, 2013, Bashir Assad launched a chemical attack on Ghouta.
[. . .]
President Assad tested President Obama’s mettle, and he failed miserably. This colossal failure signaled in neon lights to the international community this president’s complete lack of resolve.
As part of this colossal failure, President Obama made an arrangement for Russia’s President Putin to have the chemical weapons transferred out of Syria. Putin of course jumped at this willingness for international prestige and legitimacy, while he was planning the takeover of the Ukraine.
[. . .]
My favorite moment in recent history was the Cedars Revolution in Lebanon, during the spring of 2005. That is when Lebanese Christians were not afraid to take to the streets, and forced 14,000 Syrian soldiers and intelligence agents to withdraw from Lebanon.
That is because someone then sat in the Oval Office who demonstrated concern for the rights of religious minorities, and was not afraid to use force to back up that concern.
And because of Obama’s retreat from the world stage, we now have almost half a million dead Syrians, and the worst humanitarian and refugee crisis since World War II.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/the_syrian_descent_into_hell.html

February 18, 2016
The Syrian Descent into Hell
By Sarah N. Stern

White House Implementing Middle East Strategy Discarded By George Bush

[From article]
In the wake of 9/11, the Bush administration struggled to define the enemy and to decide how to defeat it. Even though 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis and the Saudis were involved in the planning and financing of the attack, President Bush allowed the Saudis to fly out of the country in the next 24 hours when all other air traffic had been shut down.
No doubt that Bush had decided to maintain good relations with the Arabs, and Saudi Arabia particularly, just as the US had done for half a century. This policy led Bush to say on Sept 17, 2011 to the Islamic world, “The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don't represent peace. They represent evil and war,” in a speech as sycophantic as any President Obama has ever delivered.
[. . .]
And so began the bifurcation of Islam into the peaceful Muslims on the one hand and the radicals who hijacked the religion on the other.
[. . .]
By December 2011 Obama fulfilled another campaign promise to withdraw the remaining US troops from Iraq. The vacuum created undid the achievements of the surge and allowed for the rise and dominance of ISIS.
Obama also turned to Rumsfeld’s plan of regime change, which Bush declined to endorse. What Rumsfeld had in mind was to support the opposition in each country and help them depose the dictators. What Obama decided to do was to replace the dictators who were secular with the Muslim Brotherhood or other Islamists.
Remember that Rumsfeld proposed his plan before the victory in Iraq turned sour. What was learned was that there is no unified opposition and no desire for democracy. Obama ignored this lesson and believed that the Muslim Brotherhood could impose itself on all the opposition thereby creating stability.
[. . .]
Gaddafi also abandoned terrorism. As a result relations with the U.S. and the EU improved considerably. He managed to rule his country well and provide for his people.
Nevertheless Obama, together with Britain, France and Qatar, decided he had to be deposed. A trumped up charge of an impending massacre was sufficient to justify military action to remove his regime and ultimately bringing about his death. Libya has not returned to stability, as the various tribes keep fighting for turf.
[. . .]
Mohammed Morsi, representing the Muslim Brotherhood, was elected president in June 30/12. He lasted a year in office until the military, headed by Gen El Sisi, the man he put in charge, took over and arrested him and once again banned the party. This did not go down well with Obama, who was counting on the Muslim Brotherhood to rule the country. Obama is working to reinstate them somehow and is not supporting El Sisi, just as he didn’t support Mubarak. El Sisi then turned to Russia and Israel, further distancing America.
[. . .]
Russia is now in charge and running the show in Syria. Obama has become a bit player. He is still mouthing platitudes in support of a peace process and a unified Syria. There is no way that Iran or Russia will agree to elections because the Alawites, who are the backbone of the Syrian regime, are only about 20% of the population. But they would agree to severing Alawite Syria from the rest. Russia wants to retain her naval base on the Mediterranean and her airfield nearby. Iran wants to keep Alawite Syria as an ally because the Alawites are Shiites and because it gives them a land connection to Hezb’allah who are also Shiites.
[. . .]
Bush promised to get rid of all terrorists and regimes that harbor them. Obama decided to take down Gadhafi, Mubarak and Assad to stop dictator-supported terrorism. But rather than support the opposition to replace them as Rumsfeld had proposed, he backed the Muslim Brotherhood, identified by Britain and others as an Islamic terrorist group. He ended up with chaos in Libya, the Egyptian army in control of Egypt, Russia now in charge of Assad, all of whom are threatened by ISIS and other Islamist groups who are fostering much more terrorism that the dictators ever did. He has put Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the Sinai in the crosshairs of both Iran and ISIS. The Dictators didn’t plan to conquer the West. The Islamists do.
So far everything the Bush and Obama administrations have done has made it worse for the West. The US has not figured out who the enemy is nor how to deal with the threats.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/12/america_has_jumped_from_the_middle_east_frying_pan_into_the_fire.html

December 27, 2015
America has jumped from the Middle East frying pan into the fire
By Ted Belman

Former Defense Secretary Laments Character Assassination From White House

Ex-Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel

[From article]
Former Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel revealed in an extensive interview published Friday that he had approved plans to strike Damascus with Tomahawk cruise missiles after Syria’s Bashar al-Assad crossed the “red line” by using chemical weapons – but President Obama told him to stand down.
The interview with Foreign Policy comes nearly a year after his acrimonious exit from the Obama administration. Still smarting from the circumstances of his departure, Hagel told Foreign Policy that the White House tried to “destroy” him even after he resigned.
[. . .]
The former Pentagon chief said that decision in 2013 dealt a big blow to US credibility.
“Whether it was the right decision or not, history will determine that,” Hagel told Foreign Policy. “There’s no question in my mind that it hurt the credibility of the president’s word when this occurred.”
[. . .]
Meanwhile, Hagel fumed over how “certain people” were “vilifying me in a gutless, off-the-record kind of way” as he left the administration.
This was a reference to White House officials criticizing him anonymously to news outlets, including saying he didn’t speak up at key meetings.
“They already had my resignation, so what was the point of just continuing to try to destroy me?” he told Foreign Policy.

http://nypost.com/2015/12/18/hagel-white-house-tried-to-destroy-me-after-i-resigned/

Hagel: White House tried to destroy me after I resigned
By Fox News
New York Post
December 18, 2015 | 4:04pm

Thomas Sowell: White House Not Protecting The Nation

[From article]
The president struck a familiar chord when he emphasized that we shouldn’t blame all Muslims for the actions of a few. How many people have you heard blaming all Muslims?
Even if 90 percent of all Muslims are fine people, and we admit 10,000 refugees from the Middle East, does that mean that we need not be concerned about adding a thousand potential terrorists — even after we have seen in San Bernardino what just two terrorists can do?
The first responsibility of any government is to protect the people already in the country. Even in this age of an entitlement mentality, no one in a foreign country is entitled to be in America if the American people don’t want them here.
[. . .]



When it comes to matters of life and death, that is no time for the kind of glib, politically correct rhetoric that Barack Obama specializes in.
Obama may think of himself as a citizen of the world, but he was elected President of the United States, not head of a world government, and that does not authorize him to gamble the lives of Americans for the benefit of people in other countries.
[. . .]
The history of millions of European immigrants who came here in centuries past was fundamentally different from what is happening in our own times.
First of all, those immigrants were stopped at Ellis Island to be checked medically and otherwise, and were allowed to get off that island to go ashore only after they had met whatever legal standards there were. Otherwise, they were sent back where they came from.
More fundamentally, people came here to assimilate into the American society they found, not to become isolated enclaves of aggrieved foreigners, demanding that Americans adjust to their languages, their values and their ways of life.
[. . .]



When terrorists are at war with us, we cannot simply declare that war to be over, whenever it is politically convenient, as Obama did when he withdrew American troops from Iraq, against the advice of his own generals. That is what led to the rise of ISIS.
Our only real choice is between destroying ISIS over there or waiting for them to come over here and start killing Americans.

http://humanevents.com/2015/12/08/the-presidents-speech/

The President’s Speech

Thomas Sowell

Tuesday Dec 8, 2015 10:45 AM

John Kerry's Misguided Response About Palestinian Terror

[From article]
About midnight, on October 21st, a man wielding a knife lunged at a border patrol officer. The assailant was shot four times.
Did you hear about this incident? Probably not. That’s because the incident took place took place not somewhere in Israel, where all incidents of this type are recorded and broadcast around the world, but at the border crossing in Calexico, California, just across the border from Mexicali, Mexico.
The reason the man was shot by a Border & Patrol Protection officer and, subsequently, died from his wounds, should be obvious. People wielding knives and lunging at police—or anyone else, intend to injure or kill and it is essential to stop those attacker immediately—before they do their harm and people are killed.
This incident did not make international headlines. There was no outcry and no rage for the poor guy even after details emerged and we learned that he was on a bicycle and jumped off it to perpetrate his attack and that he was denied entry into the United States and that was why he went on his rampage.
There is a double standard here.
If this incident would have happened in Israel, the country’s many critics would be screaming about the murder of innocent people riding their bikes. The Palestinian propaganda machine would have turned the truth upside down to convince the world that the killer was the victim.
[. . .]
This is a war where lies and false rumors are the ammunition of the propagandists. And Israel is losing.
[. . .]
The vast amount of Palestinians who have been injured during this terror spree were the terrorists themselves. And they were injured or killed in the midst of the act of terror. Israel is killing terrorists—not innocent teenagers.
[. . .]
Sometimes, a man’s got to do what a man—or woman—has got to do. And shooting someone who wants to take your life is as correct and appropriate a response at the border between California and Mexico as it is in the clash between terrorist Palestinians and Israeli citizens.

http://observer.com/2015/10/double-standards-and-double-speak-pits-the-us-against-israel/

Double Standards and Doublespeak Pits the US Against Israel
By Micah Halpern

10/26/15 7:36am

Mark Levin: White House Legacy Will Be War

[From article]
Speaking at the Values Voters Summit on Saturday, Levin accused the Obama administration of planting the “seeds of war” with the Iran nuclear deal, which Levin said was a “joke” and a ‘”sham” because it will enable Tehran to not only acquire nuclear weapons but develop their ICBM technology to allow them to “put nuclear warheads on missiles and hit our continent.”
Levin said Obama and Congress, by surrendering its treaty power, have “sown the seeds of war.”
He said he doesn’t want war but believes “it’s unavoidable.” And though the Iran deal may be Obama’s legacy, Levin said “in the end his legacy is war.”
“I think it’s going to take a very strong president to undue what this president and this Congress has done to the United States of America and our allies,” Levin said.

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/09/27/mark-levin-on-iran-deal-obama-legacy-will-be-war/

MARK LEVIN ON IRAN DEAL: OBAMA LEGACY WILL BE WAR
by BREITBART NEWS

27 Sep 2015

Difficult Decision Time, White House Hibernates

[From article]
You can play it either way, but "a plague on both their houses" didn't cut it in 1941, and it doesn't cut it in 2015.
The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of 1939 gave Hitler room to conquer Western Europe without fear of an attack on his rear. Stalin was a committed member of the pact until Hitler broke it, at which point Stalin brazenly pivoted to the Allies and demanded rights as a) a full partner and b) an aid recipient. FDR might have said, "Boy, watching Adolph and Uncle Joe battle it out would be great – fascists vs. communists, and no American boots on the ground."
[. . .]
FDR made a great many difficult and ugly decisions – aside from interning Japanese-American citizens and not bombing the railroad tracks to Auschwitz. In this context, he made two for what he thought was the greater good: ignoring Stalin's crimes, and committing all the resources necessary to achieve the unconditional surrender of Axis forces. He put the American economy on a war footing, drafted millions of soldiers, and dropped tons of bombs that often didn't distinguish between military forces and civilians. He believed that the faster the war ended, the better it was for the civilians and everyone else. It wasn't a perfect understanding – particularly for the Jews waiting for deliverance. But it was his understanding, and Truman concurred. Dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a calculated decision to take the casualties, including civilians, up front.
[. . .]
The Cold War was the diplomatic way of boxing in the USSR until it collapsed.
That is not a tactical proposal for coming to grips with the dual horrors of ISIS and Iran. It is a strategic one.
The United States, President Obama, has to decide who the primary enemy is and how best to stop that one. Vladimir Putin posits that ISIS comes first, and requests – begs – the West to take on Sunni jihadists while giving Shiite jihadists a pass.
[. . .]
It is untenable for the U.S. to continue to dither.
[. . .]
Spending half a billion dollars training small groups of Syrians who lie when they pledge to fight ISIS rather than Assad; failing to provide weapons to the Kurds, who constitute the only serious fighting force south of Turkey; doctoring CENTCOM intelligence; and hectoring Putin – as the president did and continues to do – are also doomed to failure.
[. . .]
Thomas Hobbes is the prophet. "Where there is no common power, there is no law, where no law, no injustice. Force, and fraud, are in war the cardinal virtues. No arts, no letters, no society, and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death: and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short."
If that works for you, fine. Otherwise, it is time to choose and get on with the war that is already raging around us.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/09/hitler_or_stalin_the_case_for_choosing.html

September 30, 2015
Hitler or Stalin? The Case for Choosing
By Shoshana Bryen

U.S. Syria Policy Misguided; Russia Has Better Perspective

[From article]
What Vladimir Putin is up to in Syria makes far more sense than what Barack Obama and John Kerry appear to be up to in Syria.
The Russians are flying transports bringing tanks and troops to an air base near the coastal city of Latakia to create a supply chain to provide a steady flow of weapons and munitions to the Syrian army.


Syrian President Bashar Assad

Syrian President Bashar Assad, an ally of Russia, has lost half his country to ISIS and the Nusra Front, a branch of al-Qaida.
Putin fears that if Assad falls, Russia’s toehold in Syria and the Mediterranean will be lost, ISIS and al-Qaida will be in Damascus, and Islamic terrorism will have achieved its greatest victory.
[. . .]
Putin is looking out for Russian national interests.
And who do we Americans think will wind up in Damascus if Assad falls? A collapse of that regime, not out of the question, would result in a terrorist takeover, the massacre of thousands of Alawite Shiites and Syrian Christians, and the flight of millions more refugees into Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey — and thence on to Europe.
Putin wants to prevent that. Don’t we?
[. . .]
Our problem has been that we have let our friends — the Turks, Israelis, Saudis and Gulf Arabs — convince us that no victory over ISIS can be achieved unless and until we bring down Assad.
[. . .]
Syria could swiftly become a strategic base camp and sanctuary of the Islamic State from which to pursue the battle for Baghdad, plot strikes against America and launch terror attacks across the region and around the world.
[. . .]


Vladimir Putin, President of Russia
In making ISIS, not Assad, public enemy No. 1, Putin has it right.

http://buchanan.org/blog/putin-friend-or-foe-in-syria-124083

Putin: Friend or Foe in Syria?
Thursday - September 17, 2015 at 8:41 pm
By Patrick J. Buchanan

White House Wants To Give Away Control of Internet To Censor Nations

[From article]
One of these is the "great Internet giveaway" — Obama's effort to surrender effective control of the World Wide Web to a group of multinational corporate interests and nonprofits (or if that fails, a United Nations bureaucracy).
President Obama's Commerce Department — specifically the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) — wants to take the Web's most essential operational functions and cede them to the "global Internet community." Among these core functions are the resources provided by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), which coordinates all of the Internet's globally unique identifiers (domain names, number resources, protocol assignments, etc.). This is literally the nuts and bolts of the web; its essential underlying architecture. Currently, the U.S. Department of Commerce contracts out responsibility for IANA to a Los Angeles-based nonprofit called the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).
This relationship has secured a free and open Internet for nearly two decades, driving innovation and preventing censorship of content. Why would Obama want to undo that? According to Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R), a staunch supporter of Internet freedom, the proposed giveaway is yet another attempt by the administration to undermine U.S. sovereignty — in the process, "jeopardizing the freedoms of billions of citizens the world over.

[. . .]

Obama's administration — always on the lookout for ways to circumvent Congress and the Constitution — has rebuked this obligation, claiming "no government property or assets are involved in the contract" with ICANN. Really? The most recent government contract with ICANN clearly states that "all deliverables under this contract become the property of the U.S. government."
That means Obama's intended transfer is subject to federal property laws, which Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), former chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.) have correctly concluded requires affirmative congressional approval — not Walden's wink-and-nod attempt to surrender the future of the Internet to the likes of China, Russia and North Korea.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/technology/245704-gop-cannot-give-in-to-obamas-great-internet-giveaway

June 22, 2015, 12:00 pm
GOP cannot give in to Obama's 'great Internet giveaway'
By Rick Manning, contributor

Resettlement, Asylum Claims Admit Criminals And Terrorists Assisting Destruction of US

[From article]
Hatched by the U.N. and the American Left, the resettlement agenda is dedicated to erasing our culture, traditions and laws, and creating a compliant, welfare-dependent multicultural society with no understanding of America’s constitutional framework and no interest in assimilation.
[. . .]
refugee resettlement costs are currently running at well over $10 billion per year.
But this is not the worst of it. The vast array of organizations feeding on government grants for the refugee program are aggressively promoting a campaign to soften up American communities to help “welcome” refugees and immigrants. Welcoming America, a nationwide network of 18 state operations with 52 partner cities in over 30 states, seeks fertile ground to “seed” refugees and immigrants in “welcoming” communities, while weeding out those “pockets of resistance” that object to being saddled with the myriad problems refugees bring.
[. . .]
Their migrations are not for the purpose of assimilating peacefully in a new host nation, adopting as their own its traditions and legal systems. Rather, Mohammed’s followers, in keeping with the example established by their prophet, are driven first to colonize and then to transform non-Muslim target societies – whether through violent means or via stealthy, pre-violent ones favored by the Muslim Brotherhood when it is not powerful enough to use violence decisively.
[. . .]
As its 1991 strategic plan entitled “The Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal of the Group in North America” declares, the Brothers’ mission in America is to wage “civilization jihad” so as to “destroy the Western civilization from within.” By aiming very explicitly at changing the demographics, legal systems and governments of such infidel states in an incremental process, the civilization jihadists advance their ultimate objective – global submission to Shariah and the reestablishment of a caliphate to rule according to it.

[author's book]
The Red-Green Axis: Refugees, Immigration and the Agenda to Erase America (Civilization Jihad Reader Series Book 4) Kindle Edition
by James Simpson

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/06/refugee_resettlement_a_clear_and_present_danger_to_our_nation.html

June 15, 2015
Refugee Resettlement: A Clear and Present Danger to Our Nation
By James Simpson

US Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) Wants Benefits to Americans In Trade Agreements

[From article]

“It is time to begin a vigorous analysis of our conduct of trade,” Sessions said. “Do our policies and TPP concede too much to our mercantilist competitor allies?”
According to the Alabama lawmaker, there has not been enough consideration of the impact of trade agreements on the American worker and American incomes — so long as consumer prices decline with the deals.
“At bottom, we must ask whether or not our aggressive trading partners, using a mercantilist philosophy, may be gaining unfair advantage. These countries—good nations, good allies—are not religious about free trade,” Sessions said. “In general, while they assert their desire is for expanded free trade, their actual policies seek fewer U.S. exports to them using non-tariff as well as tariff barriers. Our trade competitors use currency manipulation, subsidies, and other actions to expand their exports to us. Their goal is, naturally, to seek full employment in their countries while exporting their unemployment to the United States.”
[. . .]
“This refusal by many to acknowledge the mercantilist policies of our trading competitors has gone, it seems to me, from promoting healthy trading relationships to an ideology, even to the nature of a religion,” he said.
Sessions pointed out that while he too is in favor of less expensive products and has voted for trade agreements in the past, the trade deal before Congress is unsettling to him.
[. . .]
Overall, Sessions concluded trade agreements should benefit the American people.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/19/sen-sessions-more-skepticism-of-trade-pacts-needed-should-not-lose-one-job-to-trade-deal/

SEN. SESSIONS: MORE SKEPTICISM OF TRADE PACTS NEEDED, SHOULD NOT LOSE ONE JOB TO TRADE DEAL
by CAROLINE MAY

19 May 2015

Domestic and Foreign White House Policies Destroying America

[From article]
As two of mankind’s great religions prepared to celebrate  Easter and Passover, terrifying  events on a single day involving a third religion revealed the perilous state of the world, circa 2015.
It was early last Thursday in Kenya when Islamists belonging to an al Qaeda franchise stormed a college, slaughtering nearly 150 Christian students. Survivors said hostages who could recite the Shahada, the Islamic creed, were freed unharmed while all ­others were murdered.
That same day, two Muslim women in Queens were arrested on charges of plotting to detonate a bomb in New York. They are said to be supporters of the Islamic State, with one woman allegedly telling an ­undercover FBI agent: “It’s war, it’s f- -king war.”
[. . .]
The war is on, it’s a world war, and because her side is more determined to win, nobody is safe.
Obama’s goal of bringing Iran in from the cold is, like much of his presidency, a vision divorced from reality. His hollow rhetoric echoes the appeasers who sought to stop Hitler in 1939 by giving him what he wanted.
This latter-day Chamberlain will be no more successful. Armed, expansionist ideologies must be stopped because they cannot be ­accommodated.
[. . .]



The paths to victory in both World War II and the Cold War were hardly smooth, but the West was blessed with leaders whose will was as mighty as our war machines.
They had the wisdom and compassion to make the world safe for democracy, which eventually took root around the globe. Scores of millions of people were liberated and a relative golden age of peace and prosperity marked the seven decades since, especially the last 25 years.
That era is over. It officially ended on 9/11, when war came to America, just as Pearl Harbor ended the fiction that fascism was somebody else’s problem.

http://nypost.com/2015/04/05/its-war-out-there-obama/

It’s war out there, Obama
By Michael Goodwin
New York Post
April 5, 2015 | 12:14am

NGOs Misguided Policies May Bring On New Cold War

[From article]

Reportedly, [US Department of] State funneled $350,000 to an American NGO called OneVoice, which has an Israeli subsidiary, Victory 15, that collaborated with U.S. operatives to bring Bibi down.
If we are now secretly pumping cash into the free elections of friendly countries, to dump leaders President Obama dislikes, Americans have a right to know why we are using Cold War tactics against democracies.

[. . .]

Hopefully, after looking into OneVoice and V15, the Senate will expand its investigation into a larger question: Is the U.S. using NGOs to subvert regimes around the world? And, if so, who decides which regimes may be subverted?
[. . .]
And if we are now using NGOs as fronts for secret operations to dump over regimes, we are putting all NGOs abroad under suspicion and at risk.
Not in our lifetimes has America been more distrusted and disliked. And among the reasons is that we are seen as constantly carping at governments that do not measure up to our standards of democracy, and endlessly interfering in the internal affairs of nations that do not threaten us.
[. . .]
Nor is it Moscow alone that is angered over U.S. interference in its internal affairs and those of its neighbor nations.
President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi of Egypt has expelled members of U.S. NGOs. Beijing believes U.S. NGOs were behind the Occupy-Wall-Street-style street blockages in Hong Kong.

http://buchanan.org/blog/are-ngos-agents-of-subversion-15774

Are NGOs Agents of Subversion?
Tuesday - March 24, 2015 at 1:39 am
By Patrick J. Buchanan

Alan Dershowitz Upset That Congressional Democrats Plan To Boycott Speech by Netanyahu

Democratic Congressman

[From article]
"As a liberal Democrat who twice campaigned for President Obama, I am appalled that some Democratic members of Congress are planning to boycott the speech," wrote Dershowitz in the opinion piece.
"This controversy is not mainly about protocol and politics — it is about the constitutional system of checks and balances and the separation of powers. Under the Constitution, the executive and legislative branches share responsibility for making and implementing important foreign-policy decisions.
[. . .]
"Congress has a critical role to play in scrutinizing the decisions of the president when these decisions involve national security, relationships with allies and the threat of nuclear proliferation."
[. . .]
Leading Democrats are concerned that Netanyahu will use the speech to persuade congressional Democrats and the public against supporting the administration’s current nuclear talks with Iran, aimed at curtailing the Islamic Republic’s nuclear weapons program.
But Dershowitz wrote, "Congress has every right to invite, even over the president’s strong objection, any world leader or international expert who can assist its members in formulating appropriate responses to the current deal being considered with Iran regarding its nuclear weapons program.
[. . .]
"Indeed, it is the responsibility of every member of Congress to listen to Prime Minister Netanyahu, who probably knows more about this issue than any world leader, because it threatens the very existence of the nation state of the Jewish people."
He continued, "Congress has the right to disagree with the prime minister, but the idea that some members of Congress will not give him the courtesy of listening violates protocol and basic decency to a far greater extent than anything Mr. Netanyahu is accused of doing for having accepted an invitation from Congress.
Dershowitz also said that Obama "should urge members of Congress to do their constitutional duty of listening to opposing views in order to check and balance the policies of the administration."

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Alan-Dershowitz-netanyahu-speech-congress/2015/02/24/id/626522/

Dershowitz: Democrats' Boycott of Netanyahu 'Appalling, Irresponsible'
Tuesday, 24 Feb 2015 09:11 AM
By Drew MacKenzie

White House Works At Worsening His Legacy

[From article]
Now, for the first time, the King and his consults, the Crown Prince and myriad other Sunni royalty must not discount the option of tacit cooperation with Israel. Sure, it’s fun to rail against Zionists and their lapdogs in world finance and Hollywood, but the Saudis know as well as anyone that a Shia minority with the power of a nuclear bomb is a thousand times the threat Israel would ever be.
[. . .]
The last words that these Christian men utter are “Ya Rabbi Yesou”, or “My Lord Jesus” in English. Then, the barbarians of ISIS decapitate them in front of their in-house film crew.
As Pope Tawadros, leader of the Coptic church, and Pope Francis, the Catholic pontiff of one billion souls, both pray for the slain, the ISIS butchering is digitally immortalized.
[. . .]
No, no, this isn’t Islam, “and we are not at war with Islam” the Infant harps. Obama plugs his ears and pronounces with a tone of authority that doesn’t quite square with his ignorance in stating that “we are at war with people who have perverted Islam.” Very bold words for someone who is not an Islamic scholar.
[. . .]
They laugh as Zarif recalls his latest humiliation of John Kerry, of his manhandling of the Secretary of State from the world’s single Great Power, of his expert use of taqiyya -- the Shia precept of justifiable deceit in the face of peril -- in keeping the Americans at the negotiating table. Zarif and Khameini double over in laughter after watching our State of the Union Address, because they could see Obama the Fool at his very best. The Ayatollah may well have busted his guts guffawing when he heard President Obama insist that his “…diplomacy is at work with respect to Iran, where, for the first time in a decade, we’ve halted the progress of its nuclear program and reduced its stockpile of nuclear material.”
[. . .]
Obama the Impotent says to the American public that he is an alchemist, taking an impossible scenario and manipulating it to conform to his desires, changing iron ore into sparkling, shimmering gold. Really, any impartial observer can see that he’s instead cultivating a nice, fat field of horse manure. The core problem that the President has is that foreign policy isn’t a high gloss campaign commercial, or a speech given in front of a teleprompter, and Middle Eastern despots aren’t his media cheerleaders, or vapid college kids
[. . .]
At home, in the Oval Office, a seat is occupied not by a leader, but by a man who should have never ascended beyond the harmless provincial position of the Illinois State Senate.
[. . .]
Across the globe, prime ministers and potentates rightfully doubt the seriousness of a leader who hits 18 rounds at the greens after James Foley, an American, was decapitated by a legion of benighted butchers who believe that they are doing the work of Allah. Obama’s final term has been unique in its unwitting combination of incompetence and idiocy.
[. . .]
Even after the adoring chorus of press adulation dies down to a whisper, as the present becomes the past, proper historians will always remember the current president as Obama the Impotent, the Infant, the Fool.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/02/obama_the_impotent_the_infant_the_fool.html

February 23, 2015
Obama the Impotent, the Infant, the Fool
By Alexander Grass

Imperative For Netanyahu To Speak To US Congress

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyau Speaks About Iranian Nuclear Engery

[From article]

More than 70 years ago, Franklin Delano Roosevelt refused to bomb the train tracks to Auschwitz, thereby failing to stop the mass slaughter of our people.
Now, Barack Obama seems equally disinclined to stop the ayatollahs' march toward building a nuclear Auschwitz, with all that might entail.
If the American president does agree to a feeble deal with Iran, he might as well sign his name at the bottom as "Barack H. Chamberlain."
But while his legacy will merely be tarnished, our future and that of America too will permanently be at risk. That is a message that the American people need to hear. And no one is better suited to deliver it than our premier.

http://www.michaelfreund.org/16033/obama-iran

Barack H. Chamberlain and Iran
by Michael Freund
Jerusalem Post
February 5, 2015