Displaying posts published in

October 2016

POLITICS Comments turned off

Steve Kates Dirty Donald and Sunshine Conservatives

By on October 11th, 2016

This US election is not about who has lived the most blameless life. It is about who can best protect our collective interests. Trump is a vulgarian, no doubt about it, but of the two presidential contenders he is the only one who grasps that the West is in peril.
“These are the times that try men’s souls: The summer blogger and the sunshine conservative will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.”

This has been a fearfully clarifying US election. There are people who declare themselves on the right side of politics, who are in truth sham defenders of freedom and our way of life, and who will be forever shunned by those of us who stood for saving the American Republic and the Western world at this moment of great peril.

The American election will determine the fate of the West. An America with open borders, unprepared, unwilling and unable to defend our freedoms from predators of every kind, from Islamic terrorists, from economic vandals, from those who masquerade their profound ignorance as concern for the environment — it is from these we must defend ourselves against or our way of life will be lost. The American Republic as it has been since 1776 will disappear. We will live to see our own fall of Rome.

Sunshine conservatives: those who pretend to represent freedom, individual rights and personal responsibility, but who refuse to stand with the only person who could make a difference. They are people whom history will recognise as the enemies of freedom, who refused to stand for the right when the moment arrived. It is Trump alone, the most improbable candidate in American political history, who provides even this sliver of hope. He is elected or Hillary is elected. There is no other possible outcome.

The mounting hostility among those supposedly on his own side is a disgrace. The array of enemies who have been uncovered from within what is nominally his own side of politics has demonstrated, better than anything else might have, that the Republican Party as it has become is a rotting curse on everything it is supposed to represent.

Those who stand with Hillary in this dark hour will have revealed they cannot be trusted and their counsel is without value. They are enemies of freedom. If you support Hillary Clinton in this election, nothing you write and say will from this time forward be worth the slightest attention. Your judgements will have been revealed as eternally worthless.

Continue reading →
NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION, POLITICS Comments turned off

Steve Kates No Sex, Please, She’s Skittish

By on October 11th, 2016

The second presidential debate was a Trump victory, no doubt about it, even though the timely leaking of his “locker room tape” should have given his opponent a clear advantage. Hillary’s problem is that she can’t go there, not with that satyr of a husband in the wings
We know who doesn’t want Trump to win. Hillary for one, along with the Democrats in general, the infamous 47% of tax-hoovers (who have probably grown to around 55% by now), to which, strangely, you can add many, if not most, of the wealthiest financial institutions across the world. There is then the media, and not just the journalists and reporters but the owners who are all-in for Hillary. And there’s a large proportion of the Republican Party which must include the #NeverTrumps who are the supposedly right-side conservative writers, bloggers and columnists, but who are part of the political establishment with no obvious allegiance to small government and the preservation of the American Republic.

And, of course, there are the dead citizens and non-dead non-citizens who will also be lining up to vote her in, along with those who vote early and often. Not to mention those who will vote for her because she is a woman irrespective of any other considerations whatsoever.

Formidable, almost impossible odds facing Donald Trump, in other words. Even after a flawless presentation against his Obama-clone opponent, in which he took Hillary apart despite each and every effort by the laughably “impartial” moderators, the bad news is that Donald Trump remains no better than 50-50 to win. But that is also the good news. He has not yet lost and might yet emerge victorious.

And why that is so is because he represents the last chance for the United States to save itself, and approximately 51% of the voting American public know it.

The supposed killer issue was a 2005 tape made of Trump discussing in crude terms his approach to women. And possibly in anyone else’s hands, this would have been the death blow it may still turn out to be. But for Hillary Clinton, married to a genuine sexual predator, this is an issue that can only be used carefully, as the blowback is so enormous. Whatever Trump has done is as nothing in comparison with what Bill Clinton has done, who was protected by Hillary in quieting the many and various “bimbo eruptions” (her term). I regret to have to deal with this, but since you’d have to have been born before 1980 to have an active memory of any of it. I will deal with only one, the story of Paula Jones, and I will include it only at the end.

I find all this repulsive, and the Paula Jones story is the least disturbing among the stories that surfaced at the time, and it is plenty disturbing since it was only one instance of what must have been nuch more common at the time. What is more repulsive is listening to others go on about Trump, as if Clinton were not orders of magnitude worse. But what is actually significant is that bringing that tape to light has enraged Donald Trump so that we ended up with the single most devastating, one-sided debate in American political history. With Bill’s past once again in everyone’s minds, Hillary could not truly exploit the tape to the full extent she might. Trump’s was a cold anger, but it was devastating.

Continue reading →
WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

The New World Order By Herbert London

By on October 11th, 2016

President, London Center for Policy Researchhttp://www.londoncenter.org/

Recently the Russian military force deployed an advanced anti-missile system and sophisticated radars over Syria. In doing so, Russia and its allies in Iran and Hezbollah realize the ability of the U.S. to assist the rebel groups in Aleppo is severely limited. Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate for president, may not know what Aleppo is, but for anyone following current events this city of 250,000 is now a “killing field.”

Russian bombs have converted this “hold out” city of Sunnis into the contemporary Cologne of World War II. And all that Secretary Kerry can say is we will cancel further talks with the Russians. A U.N. aid convoy was bombed during the so-called ceasefire and there was barely a murmur of disapproval from the international press corps. Russian forces are engaged in a blitzkrieg – all out destruction of those rebels opposed to Assad. Admittedly some of those in the opposition are ISIS supporters, but Russian bombs are intended for any group opposed to Assad.

Since the civil war began in 2011 twenty-three million Syrians have been displaced. Many are “temporary” residents in Lebanon, Iraq and Libya. Many have crossed the Mediterranean into Europe, altering the continent for the foreseeable future. As noticeable as the demographic shift in Europe, is the indisputable fact that Russia has used the civil war in Syria to become the “strong horse” in the eastern Mediterranean. Not only have the Russians reinforced their naval facility in Tartus, they have built a major air base in Khmeimim and an airport in Latakia. These military installations not only check possible Sixth Fleet intervention, but now challenge NATO’s hold on its southern flank.

There came a time, only a decade ago, when Israel had regional air superiority. That claim can certainly be questioned today. Israel may be able to defend herself against most threats, but when Russian air power is put into the equation and the U.S. sits on the sidelines accepting the new world order, threat assessments have changed.

With Shimon Peres’ death, Israel lost one of its founders and spiritual leaders. He was also Israel’s primary dreamer, a person who with his final breath believed that peace could be achieved in the Middle East through a broad based economic development program. At some point his dream may be realized, but not now. President Obama’s appeasement orientation has made life in Israel precarious. A tilt to Iran through the lifting of sanctions and financial assistance has given Shia leaders the resources to pursue their imperial aspirations in the region. Those aspirations include the arming of Hezbollah with missiles- many quite sophisticated- that can reach every Israeli population center. Iran has engaged in saber rattling, but its attention is presently on Syria, Yemen and Lebanon. But that will change, and when it does Israel must be prepared. It is, of course, one thing to oppose Iranian air assets, but quite another matter to defend against Russian aircraft. This explains why President Netanyahu has spent so much time with Vladimir Putin. Israel recognizes the “strong horse” as well as the disappearing horse.

Continue reading →
MEDIA Comments turned off

Open letter response to The Washington Post by Matthew Tyrmand

By on October 11th, 2016

MATTHEW TYRMAND IS A JOURNALIST BASED IN POLAND AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF OPEN THE BOOKS….RSK
To the Editorial Board of the Washington Post:

This past Friday evening you posted an editorial under “The Post’s View” entitled “Donald Trump is normalizing bigotry.” In this post you utilized my Breitbart column (“WaPo’s Anne Applebaum Embarks on Kremlin-Style Disinformation Offensive Vs. The Antii-Globalist Right”) to give credence to the thesis in your post’s title. The column I posted earlier in the week at Breitbart.com exposed some of the lesser known cross currents (for non-Poles) of recent Polish political history and your columnist’s (Anne Applebaum) connection to the previous government.

As I know the editorial board is aware, Mrs. Applebaum is married to the former Foreign Minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, whose party was ejected from power in a clean democratic election in 2015. This election resulted in a diametric changing of the Polish political guard and delivered an unprecedented unilateral mandate to govern without coalition to the Law & Justice party for the first time in modern Polish history (I highlight this since your columnist has not). But well before the rotation of parties in government, Mr. Sikorski was dismissed from his ministerial position after it became apparent to all that he too was embroiled in the “Aferatosmowa” hidden tapes scandal that decimated many Civic Platform, Sikorski’s ruling party, careers and reputations and paved the way for the dramatic turnover in government. This is not something Mrs. Applebaum has ever disclosed despite the distinct pertinence this has with regard to covering Poland and especially in writing about the new government whose leading figures’ enmity with Mr. Sikorski’s turfed-out party is well known in political circles. This is in clear violation of this paper’s “Standards and Ethics” as defined in the described “Conflict of Interest,” Section A, opening lines: “This newspaper is pledged to avoid conflict of interest or the appearance of conflict of interest, wherever and whenever possible.” as well as by the final lines of Section A: “We avoid active involvement in any partisan causes- politics, community affairs, social action, demonstrations- that could compromise or seem to compromise our ability to report and edit fairly.” Any columns referencing Poland would need to have Mrs. Applebaum’s detailed marital disclosure to avoid a violation of these statutes. I have not seen any disclosures.

In utilizing my column as proof of bigotry you failed to link to the column but rather chose to link to a Mediate analysis of it (“Breitbart Attacks WaPo Columnist For Being A ‘Jewish, American Elitist’”),reducing the opportunity for your readership to ascertain for themselves if this highly charged allegation was accurate. You used the words “repeatedly” and “gratuitously” to describe the frequency of my reference to her “Jewish origin.” In a 1400 word essay the word “Jewish” appeared exactly twice and with no over or under tone attached (most who read would have to agree). Any such perceived “dog whistle” is resultant from a reader’s prejudices, NOT from the author’s intent. This supposedly “gratuitous” bigotry was a descriptor applied in one small section (two consecutive sentences) that was relevant to the debate for the primary reason that in her September 19th Washington Post column (“In Poland, a preview of what Trump could do to America”) she suggests the sitting defense minister, Antoni Macierewicz (a bitter rival of her husband’s, also glaringly undisclosed) is an anti-Semite by stating that he has “given credence to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”

Continue reading →