Friday, September 30, 2016

Pope Issues Not So Veiled Threat to Russia and Putin

September 30, 2016
- See more at:


Pope Issues Not So Veiled Threat to Russia and Putin - Pope Francis looks on during a welcome ceremony at the Presidential palace in Tbilisi, Georgia, September 30, 2016.

Pope Francis called for respect for international law and the sovereign rights of nations as he arrived in Georgia on Friday, an implicit criticism of Russia, which keeps troops in two breakaway areas of the ex-Soviet state.

Francis measured his words carefully, in an apparent attempt not to hurt the Vatican's increasingly warm ties with the Kremlin-backed Russian Orthodox Church.
Georgia won independence in 1991 but the Kremlin's shadow still looms large. Russia, which fought a short war with Georgia in 2008, is one of the few countries that recognize the contested areas of Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states.
Speaking at the welcoming ceremony at the presidential palace, Francis, in a clear reference to the Georgian situation, said relations between states in the region "can never lay aside respect for the sovereign rights of every country within the framework of international law."
In his address minutes before the pope spoke, Georgian President Georgy Margvelashvili said there was a political desire for all people to live in dignity.
"But this mission cannot be accomplished in the light of violations of the rights of civilians and the territory being occupied by a neighboring country," the president told the pope.
While not specifically mentioning Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Francis supported the right of displaced people to "freely return to that land."
The government says about 300,000 people have been forced from their homes by the conflict over the disputed territories. Moscow has opposed U.N. resolutions backing their right of return.

(TRUNEWS Tbilisi) Georgia, which wants to join the European Union and NATO, has accused Russia of practicing "creeping occupation" by slowly moving fences delineating the breakaway areas from the rest of Georgia's territory.

"We are just 40 km (25 miles) away from barbed wire fences preventing civilian populations - neighbors, relatives, family members - from having contact with each other," the president said.

Before the trip started, Georgia's ambassador to the Vatican, Tamara Grdzelidze, told Reuters in an interview that while she did not expect the pope to use the word "occupation", she had hoped that he would defend the country's "territorial integrity".


Less than one percent of Georgia's population of about 3.7 million are Catholic. The overwhelming majority belong to Orthodox Christianity, which broke with Rome in 1054.

Under Francis, who was elected in 2013, the Vatican has made a concerted effort to improve relations with Orthodox Christians in the hopes of an eventual reunion. Earlier this year, he held a historic meeting with Kirill, the patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church.

But the Georgian Orthodox Church, one of the most conservative in the Orthodox world, is opposed to dialogue with Rome.

Some of its more hard-core members protested at the airport. They held signs reading: "Vatican is a spiritual aggressor" and "Pope, arch-heretic, you are not welcome in Orthodox Georgia".

During the Soviet period, the Kremlin oppressed the Russian Orthodox Church and viewed it with suspicion. But Russian President Vladimir Putin, who says he is a believer, has forged close ties with the Church, which has in turn backed some of his policies.

After two days in Georgia, Francis will make a day stop in neighboring Azerbaijan, which is mostly Muslim, before returning to Rome.

Reuters reporting by Philip Pullella; Editing by Mark Trevelyan
- See more at:
Russian-Syrian offensive defeats ISIS in Northern Aleppo

September 30, 2016
- See more at: 


People stand near craters and damaged buildings in a rebel-held area of Aleppo, Syria in this still image from drone footage taken on September 27, 2016. Handout via Reuters TV

Ground sources report that the Russian-backed Syrian army has captured territory north of Aleppo, including a hospital and a central district of the city.

Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and a Syrian military source: Government forces had captured territory north of Aleppo and buildings in the city center.
ISIS official: Refute claims of any additional advances north of the city by government forces that seized the Handarat camp area north of Aleppo on Thursday.
“Government forces had advanced in the Suleiman al-Halabi district of central Aleppo, but were then forced to withdraw.”
Aleppo was Syria's largest city, commercial hub, and Christian population center before the war began in 2011.
A water station has been bombed in Suleiman al-Halabi, on the front line to the north of Aleppo's Old City.
Observatory blames Assad, Syrian military source says ISIS responsible.
State media: insurgent shelling of Suleiman al-Halabi and the adjacent government-held al-Midan district has killed 15 people.
Jabhat Fateh al-Sham group: Eight fighters have been killed fighting at Suleiman al-Halabi.
Syrian military source: Government forces captured several buildings in the area and were "continuing to chase the remnants of the terrorists fleeing them".
ISIS official: Government forces had "advanced and then retreated", losing "a number of dead".
Zakaria al-Malahifji, an official for the Fastaqim rebel group, present in Aleppo: Insurgents still controll the water plant.
Observatory and Hezbollah operated television station: Government forces have taken the Kindi Hospital area adjacent to the Handarat Palestinian refugee camp.
Senior ISIS official: Denied that the government had captured the Kindi Hospital area, said Assad’s forces were shelling the rebel-held districts with artillery from a hilltop to the east of Aleppo.

(BEIRUT, LEBANON) Syrian government forces and ISIS/Al-Nusra affiliated opposition fought battles in the center of Aleppo and north of the city on Friday, a week into a Russian-backed offensive by the Syrian army to take the entire area, a war monitor and sources on both sides said.

There were conflicting accounts on the outcome of Friday's fighting. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and a Syrian military source said government forces had captured territory north of Aleppo and buildings in the city center.

Rebel sources however denied there had been any additional advances north of the city by government forces that seized the Handarat camp area north of Aleppo on Thursday. A rebel official said government forces had advanced in the Suleiman al-Halabi district of central Aleppo, but were then forced to withdraw.

The Syrian military and its allies launched a Russian-backed offensive one week ago aimed at capturing rebel-held districts of eastern Aleppo that are home to more than 250,000 people.

Aleppo, Syria's largest city and commercial hub before civil war began in 2011, has been divided into government and opposition sectors for four years.

A water station was bombed in Suleiman al-Halabi, on the front line to the north of Aleppo's Old City, dealing a further blow to a water system already badly damaged during the offensive.

The Observatory blamed government forces. A Syrian military source, however, said rebels had blown it up and state media later said that insurgent shelling of Suleiman al-Halabi and the adjacent government-held al-Midan district had killed 15 people.

The Islamist Jabhat Fateh al-Sham group, formally known as the Nusra Front until it broke its formal allegiance to al Qaeda in July, said that eight of its fighters had been killed fighting at Suleiman al-Halabi.


The Observatory, a Britain-based war monitor, reported heavy bombardment by government forces and "back and forth" fighting in the Suleiman al-Halabi neighborhood.

The Syrian military source said government forces captured several buildings in the area and were "continuing to chase the remnants of the terrorists fleeing them".

The rebel official however said government forces had "advanced and then retreated", losing "a number of dead". Zakaria al-Malahifji, an official for the Fastaqim rebel group that is present in Aleppo, said the insurgents still controlled the water plant.

In the fighting north of Aleppo, the Observatory and a television station operated by Hezbollah said government forces had taken the Kindi Hospital area adjacent to the Handarat Palestinian refugee camp, a few kilometers (miles) from the city. Hezbollah is a Lebanese group fighting alongside the army.

But rebel sources denied that the government had captured the Kindi Hospital area, saying fighting was still going on.

A senior rebel official also said that government forces were shelling the rebel-held districts with artillery from a hilltop to the east of Aleppo.

This article was contributed by Reuters
- See more at:

US To Suspend Syria Diplomacy With Russia, Prepares "Military Options"

Source: Zero Hedge 

Published: September 29, 2016

In the most dramatic diplomatic escalation involving the Syrian conflict in the past years, yesterday John Kerry issued an ultimatum to Russia, in which he warned his colleague Lavrov to stop bombing Aleppo or else the US would suspend all cooperation and diplomacy with Russia.
24 hours later, this appears to be precisely what is about to take place, leading to an even greater geopolitical shock in Syria.According to Retuers, the United States is expected to tell Russia on Thursday it is suspending their diplomatic engagement on Syria following the Russian-backed Syrian government's intense attacks on Aleppo, U.S. officials said on condition of anonymity.
Why now and what happens next? According to US officials, the Obama administration is now considering tougher responses to the Russian-backed Syrian government assault on Aleppo, including military options. According to Reuters, the new discussions were being held at "staff level," and have yet to produce any recommendations to President Barack Obama, who has resisted ordering military action against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in the country's multi-sided civil war.
However, now that diplomacy with Russia is set to end, this will give the greenlight for Obama to send in US troops in Syria, with Putin certain to respond appropriately, in what will be the biggest military escalation in the Syrian proxy war in its five and a half year history.

Media Black-out: Militarized Police Raid Dakota Protest To Break Up Peaceful Prayer Circle


Media Black-out: Militarized Police Raid Dakota Protest To Break Up Peaceful Prayer Circle

Source: Claire Bernish

Heavily-militarized police decked in riot gear and armed to the teeth, arrived by MRAP and other military-grade vehicles to a Dakota Access Pipeline construction site — not to crack down on a violent and destructive riot — but to break up … a peaceful prayer gathering.
Members of the Standing Rock Sioux and other Native American Nations and their supporters had gathered to pray and sing songs at the construction site Wednesday, when Morton County, North Dakota, Sheriff’s Office deployed an insanely disproportionate response to break up the unarmed and otherwise wholly peaceful gathering.
Witness and participant Thomas H. Joseph II broadcast the inexplicable law enforcement action using Facebook Live. In his post to the social media platform, noting women and children’s lives were threatened by the crackdown, he wrote:
“We gathered in prayer, un-armed, prayed, sang songs, and attempted to leave. No threats, No vandalism, No violence was taken on our part.”
At least 21 people were arrested in the needless clash — but divergent accounts from law enforcement and witnesses show continued misperceptions about the insidious pipeline which has drawn national attention despite a dearth of corporate media coverage.
Despite repeatedly proven claims from the over 7,000 water protectors — the term preferred over ‘protesters,’ since the pipeline slated to run beneath the Missouri River threatens to contaminate the tribal water supply and that of some 18 million people — that they are unarmed, both corporate and state response has treated them as terrorists.
A post to Facebook from Sacred Stone Camp — which, in April, became the first of a growing number of encampments intended to peacefully block pipeline construction crews — stated North Dakota law enforcement “deployed armed personnel with shotguns and assault rifles, military vehicles, and what looks like an aerial spray on peaceful Water Protectors gathered in prayer.”
“We had a really nice ceremony,” said a Sicangu Lakota grandmother in video footage from the scene. “Then we looked and over that way, there were a few police and the next thing we knew there were 40 police all in riot gear.”
Video indeed shows a number of armored vehicles blocking the road, as officers fit more for the streets of war-ravaged Aleppo advance on the gathering, and a helicopter hovers overhead.
Police swarmed the group — as water protectors and attendees stood calmly with hands clearly raised — and began indiscriminately accosting people while ordering everyone into their vehicles.
At least one officer pointed his weapon at an unarmed person, when, as the Morton County Sheriff’s Department alleged afterward in a statement, “a protester on horseback charged at an officer in what was viewed as an act of aggression.”
Video would seem to dispute this claim, as a number of people ride horses around the scene, but none appears to charge directly at any of the militarized cops.
Police admitted to the militarized deployment via a statement posted on social media, but clarified — amid doubts from those at the scene — the small plane was only a local crop duster spraying in the area.
Under the pretense the water protectors were trespassing on private property — and although those in attendance were only blocked and accosted once they began to disburse — the Morton County Sheriff’s Office acknowledged it sent armored vehicles, specialized equipment, and “less lethal ammunition using bean-bag rounds” to force people from the area.
However measured law enforcement’s official statements appeared, witnesses to the absurd and unnecessary action painted an entirely different picture of the incident.
As Red Warrior Camp alarmingly summarized in a statement on its Facebook page:
“Today Native ceremonies conducted along the Dakota Access Pipeline route were disrupted by militarized police. We have continued to declare ourselves to be non-violent and unarmed, the police, acting as private security and protectors of the corporations and their nefarious and destructive interests, responded in full force with armoured vehicles, shotguns, assault rifles, snipers, helicopters, tear gas, resulting in 21 confirmed arrests. There are also reports coming back that the police were snatching people’s phones and other recording devices, deleting pictures and video without permission and in direct violation of North Dakota laws. This response, these actions on the part of the police are clear evidence of the egregious and ongoing escalation of the violations of our Indigenous and Human Rights.”
Although corporate media has largely ignored the massive occupation and movement to halt Energy Transfer Partners’ construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline, major outlets were forced to address the issue when, at the beginning of September, mercenaries hired by the company brutally attacked unarmed water protectors — including women and children — with vicious dogs, pepper spray, and tear gas.
As Native Americans and activists peacefully chanted “water is life,” a private security firm — linked to notorious international firm G4S, which once employed the Orlando Pulse nightclub shooter — unleashed dogs indiscriminately into the crowd to maul and maim anyone in their path.
That attack took place after a Standing Rock Sioux historian, who had only recently been permitted onto private property outside the reservation to survey the land for culturally and historically significant sites, discovered construction crews in essence used court documentation as a guide to decimate those sites in area 20 miles removed from ongoing pipeline construction.
Outraged water protectors flocked to the scene in protest, but although they remained peaceful and brought no weapons, the private security firm’s henchmen initiated the brutal attack.
Now, it appears, North Dakota law enforcement has picked up where private security left off — acting in the interests of Big Oil against peoples native to the land.
The ongoing dispute — in pure number of Native and indigenous peoples from around the country and world, and in callous and brutal governmental response — has been deemed the largest standoff between Native Americans and the U.S. government in over 100 years, evidencing continued exploitation of and violence by the same forces who historically committed genocide in battles over the same land.
“We are constantly fed the narrative that the police are armed and active in the protection of the public,” Red Warrior Camp’s statement continued. “Are we not the public? Are the violations of our rights so easily and repeatedly acceptable? Are you paying attention? The United States of America is occupying Indigenous Land and when their occupation and ruination of our lands and waters is challenged they respond with unprecedented violence, with kidnapping our brothers and sisters protecting us and our territories. They are incarcerating our Warriors, our Women, our Youth. Today’s ceremony should never have been interrupted, no arrests should have been made and certainly the military machine should not have been called in in response to our prayers.”
Federal and state courts along Dakota Access Pipeline’s planned 1,172-mile route have halted construction in a number oflocations and permitted Native Americans to continue camping, provided they assume responsibility for any resulting issues of liability.
Water protectors from around the world at the various camps have repeatedly pleaded with the Obama administration to issue a permanent stoppage of construction. Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Chairman David Archambault II even appealed to the United Nations to intervene, telling reporters “just because something is legal, does not make it right.”
“The world needs to know what is happening to the Indigenous peoples of the United States,”  he told the U.N. Human Rights Commission in Geneva in mid-September.
“This pipeline violates our treaty rights and our human rights, and it violates the U.N.’s own Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. I hope the U.N. will use its influence and international platform to protect the rights of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.”
Indeed the world — if not mainstream media, Big Oil, or the U.S. government — is watching, and sees how the State effectively dismisses the rights of Native Americans in favor of corporate profits. But the water protectors refuse to back down until the Dakota Access Pipeline project is forever tabled and can no longer threaten sacred sites and precious water supplies — no matter how violent the crackdowns on peaceful people become.
“We have no fear,” the Red Warrior Camp concluded its statement, “why should we when we speak and act the truth?”

Thursday, September 29, 2016

Bill Warner, PhD: Reasoning about Islam

Published on Sep 27, 2016
The first key is do not use the Koran and Allah, because the Koran is structured to be hard to understand. Instead, use the Sunna of Mohammed. The Koran says 91 times that Mohammed is the perfect Muslim and he is very easy to understand. We find Mohammed in his traditions, the Hadith, and his biography, the Sira.

When we use Mohammed to explain Islam, we do what the Koran commands. Some Muslims might say that a particular hadith may not valid (meaning they don’t like what it says), but know that almost every hadith that I use is called Sahih (authentic), since I use Bukhari and Abu Muslim.

Sometimes you meet a Muslim who rejects all of the Sunna, so how do you use Mohammed? Simple, the Koran by itself cannot be understood by any person, without knowing the life of Mohammed. No Mohammed equals no understanding of the Koran.

Actually, there is an oddity about the Koran. It is said to be the perfect, exact words of Allah. However, the perfect Koran cannot be understood without knowing Mohammed. However, the life of Mohammed and his traditions were written by people who never met him, but wrote down what they heard from others. In a court of law, this is called hearsay. Hearsay is usually not admissible in our courts. So the perfect book cannot be understood without evidence that cannot be used in our courts. Odd, isn’t it?

Tommy Robinson launches the UK branch of the German anti Islam group Pegida _ '' The Report ''

Tommy Robinson launches the UK branch of the German anti Islam group Pegida _ '' The Report ''

Tommy Robinson - Fans

For reasons that nobody knows, Two likes to go on the railroad tracks

                           For reasons that nobody knows, Two likes to walk on the railroad tracks

Pope Labels Alternative Media a Weapon of Destruction

The popa-dopa is an active advocate/affiliate of Islamic State. 'the religion of peace' 
This also relates to the shut-down of Micheal Savage, and the tightening of the internet noose around everybody's throat.

Pope Labels Alternative Media a Weapon of Destruction

September 29, 2016
Pope Labels Alternative Media a Weapon of Destruction
Pope Labels Alternative Media a Weapon of Destruction - Pope Francis speaks as he leads the weekly audience in Saint Peter's Square at the Vatican September 21, 2016.

Journalism based on gossip or rumors is a form of "terrorism" and media that stereotype entire populations or foment fear of migrants are acting destructively, Pope Francis said on Thursday.

Francis, who made his comments in an address to leaders of Italy's national journalists' guild, said reporters had to go the extra mile to seek the truth, particularly in an age of round-the-clock news coverage.
Spreading rumors is an example of "terrorism, of how you can kill a person with your tongue", he said.
"This is even more true for journalists because their voice can reach everyone and this is a very powerful weapon."
In Italy, a number of newspapers are highly politicized and are regularly used to discredit those with differing political views, sometimes reporting unsubstantiated rumors about their private lives.

(TRUNEWS Vatican City) - In 2009 several media outlets owned by the family of then-prime minister Silvio Berlusconi came under fire from the journalists' guild over stories questioning the trustworthiness of a magistrate who had ruled against a company owned by the Berlusconi family.

The stories were filled with insinuations about the way he dressed, including the color of his socks, and the way he took walks in the park.

Francis, who has often strongly defended the rights of refugees and migrants, said journalism should not be used as a "weapon of destruction against persons and even entire peoples".

"Neither should it foment fear before events like forced migration from war or from hunger," he added.

Last year, the right-wing newspaper Libero headlined its story on the Paris attacks that killed about 130 people: "Islamic B*stards".

Watch TRUNEWS host Rick Wiles as he tells Pope Francis "Tear Down That Wall!"

Another right-wing newspaper, Il Giornale, headlined a story last year on the chaotic situation in Libya and the risk that militants might sneak into Italy with migrants: "ISIS is coming. Let's arm ourselves".

Pope Francis has been building alliances with emerging "accepted" media, including a recent audience by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

Reuters reporting by Philip Pullella; Editing by Gareth Jones
- See more at:
‘Plan B’ Reemerges in Discussion of Russian War Scenario

“Let me just say what we already know,” Corker said in closing. “There is no Plan B.”

September 29, 2016
- See more at:

Tony Blinken, Deputy Secretary of State, testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Thursday that the Obama Administration does not currently have a plan for stopping the turmoil terrorizing the Syrian people as a result of the 'civil war'. - See more at:

Tony Blinken, Deputy Secretary of State, testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Thursday that the Obama Administration does not currently have a plan for stopping the turmoil terrorizing the Syrian people as a result of the 'civil war'.

“I’d like to understand what Plan B is,” Chairman Bob Corker told Blinken. “The mysterious Plan B that has been referred to since February, the Plan B that was supposed to be leveraged to get Russia to quit killing innocent people, that would get Assad to stop killing innocent people. Just explain to us the elements of Plan B.”

“Two things, Mr. Chairman. In the first instance, Plan B is the consequence of the failure as a result of Russia’s actions of Plan A,” Blinken said of the recent breakdown of the US-Russian brokered ceasefire. “What’s likely to happen now, if the agreement cannot be followed through on and Russia totally reneges on its commitments, which it appears to have done. This is going to be bad for everyone.”

“I want to hear about Plan B,” Corker reiterated. “I understand all the context here.”

“I think, sir, this is important because Russia has a profound incentive in trying to make this work,” Blinken continued. “It can’t win in Syria, it can only prevent Assad from losing. If this now gets to the point where the Civil War actually celebrates, all of the outside patrons will throw in more and more weaponry…”

Corker then interrupted Blinken a second time.

“All of us understand that,” he stated. “What is Plan B? Give me the elements of Plan B.”

“Two things, again. The consequences I think to Russia as well as to the regime will begin to be felt as a result of Plan A not being implemented,” Blinken reiterated. “Second, as I indicated the President has asked all of the agencies to put forward options, some familiar, some new, that we are very actively reviewing.”

“When we are able to work through those in the days ahead, we will be able to come back and talk about them,” he admitted.

“Let me just say what we already know,” Corker said in closing. “There is no Plan B.”
(Or, it could be that there IS a Plan B, they just ain't saying!)

This article by Christian Datoc originally appeared on The Daily Caller
- See more at:
Al-Nusra commander: US, Israel, Saudi’s back ISIS

September 29, 2016
Al-Nusra commander: US, Israel, Saudi’s back ISIS
Still from Facebook video. © Jürgen Todenhöfer / Facebook

Jabhat al-Nusra unit commander Abu Al Ezz told Koelner Stadt-Anzeiger newspaper journalist Jurgen Todenhofer that the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia support and arm terrorist groups in Syria.

“Yes, the US supports the opposition [in Syria], but not directly. They support the countries that support us. But we are not yet satisfied with this support.”
Jabhat al-Nusra unit commander Abu Al Ezz: Militants should be receiving more “sophisticated weapons” from their backers to succeed against the Syrian government.
“The fight is difficult. The regime is strong and gets support from Russia.”
“[Jabhat Al-Nusra]won battles thanks to TOW rockets. Due to these rockets, we reached a balance with the regime. Our tanks came from Libya via Turkey, joined by the [BM-21] multiple rocket launchers.”
The government forces have an advantage because of aircraft and missile launchers, but “we have the American-made TOW missiles, and the situation in some areas is under control.”
On Question if US-made TOW missiles were intended for FSA: “No, the missiles were given to us directly.”
[When Jabhat Al-Nusra] was “besieged, we had officers from Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Israel and America here… Experts in the use of satellites, rockets, reconnaissance and thermal security cameras.”
On US involvement via instructors inside jihadists’ ranks:“The Americans are on our side.”
“We got 500 million Syrian pounds (around $2.3 million) from Saudi Arabia. To capture the Infantry School in Al Muslimiya years ago we received 1.5 million Kuwaiti dinars (around $500,000) and Saudi Arabia's $5 million.”
Money came from the “governments” of those states, not private individuals.
“Israel is now giving us support because Israel is at war with Syria and with Hezbollah.”
West has “paved the way” for jihadists coming to Syria.
“We have many fighters from Germany, France, Britain, America, from all the Western countries.”
On ceasefire: “We do not recognize the ceasefire. We will regroup our groups. We will carry out the next overwhelming attack against the regime in a few days. We have regrouped our forces in all provinces, including Homs, Aleppo, Idlib and Hama.”
“We accept no one from the Assad regime or of the Free Syrian Army, which is described as moderate. Our goal is to overthrow the regime, and establish an Islamic state in accordance with the Islamic Sharia.”
On Mohammed Alloush, a leader in the Jaysh al-Islam group, : “There are mercenaries in Syria, Alloush fights with Al Nusra-Front,”
Jaysh al-Islam group is part of the Syrian opposition’s High Negotiations Committee (HNC) in peace talks.
“The group that was housed in Turkey and which was turned into the Free Syrian Army, used to be part of Al Nusra-Front.”
On affiliation of Jabhat Al-Nusra: [We] “are part of Al Qaeda.”
“Actually, we were inside one group together with the Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL). But the Islamic State has been used in accordance with the interests and political purposes of the big powers like America, and the group has drifted away from our principles. Most of the IS leaders are working with intelligence services, and it’s now clear for us. We, the Jabhat Al-Nusra, have our own way.”

(WASHINGTON, DC) US weapons are being delivered to Jabhat Al-Nusra by governments that Washington supports, a militant commander told the German media, adding that American instructors were in Syria to teach how to use the new equipment.

“Yes, the US supports the opposition [in Syria], but not directly. They support the countries that support us. But we are not yet satisfied with this support,” Jabhat al-Nusra unit commander Abu Al Ezz said in an interview with Koelner Stadt-Anzeiger newspaper from the devastated Syrian city of Aleppo.

According to the commander, the militants should be receiving more “sophisticated weapons” from their backers to succeed against the Syrian government.

“The fight is difficult. The regime is strong and gets support from Russia,” he explained.

Al Ezz said that Jabhat Al-Nusra “won battles thanks to TOW rockets. Due to these rockets, we reached a balance with the regime. Our tanks came from Libya via Turkey, joined by the [BM-21] multiple rocket launchers,” he said.

The government forces have an advantage because of aircraft and missile launchers, but “we have the American-made TOW missiles, and the situation in some areas is under control,” Al Ezz added.

When asked if the TOW missiles were initially intended for Jabhat Al-Nusra or if the group obtained them from the moderate Free Syrian Army, the jihadist clarified: “No, the missiles were given to us directly.”

He also said that when Jabhat Al-Nusra was “besieged, we had officers from Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Israel and America here… Experts in the use of satellites, rockets, reconnaissance and thermal security cameras.”

The journalist asked specifically if the US instructors were really present among the jihadists’ ranks and Al Ezz replied: “The Americans are on our side.”

He also said that Jabhat Al-Nusra has been paid for achieving specific military goals during the Syrian conflict.

“We got 500 million Syrian pounds (around $2.3 million) from Saudi Arabia. To capture the Infantry School in Al Muslimiya years ago we received 1.5 million Kuwaiti dinars (around $500,000) and Saudi Arabia's $5 million,” Al Ezz said.

The money came from the “governments” of those states, not private individuals, he said.

“Israel is now giving us support because Israel is at war with Syria and with Hezbollah,” Al Ezz said.

The West also “paved the way” for jihadists coming to Syria, saying that “we have many fighters from Germany, France, Britain, America, from all the Western countries,” the commander said.


In the interview, he confirmed claims made by Moscow and the Syrian government that the militants were using the Syrian ceasefire, agreed by Russia and US on September 9, to prepare for a new offensive.

“We do not recognize the ceasefire. We will regroup our groups. We will carry out the next overwhelming attack against the regime in a few days. We have regrouped our forces in all provinces, including Homs, Aleppo, Idlib and Hama,” Al Ezz said.

He said that Jabhat Al-Nusa would not let trucks with humanitarian aid enter Aleppo “as long as the regime [forces] are along the Castello Road, in Al Malah and in the northern regions.”

“The regime must withdraw from all the territories, and we will let the trucks in. If a truck is going in anyway, we will detain the driver,” he said.

The idea of a transitional government in Syria is also not supported by Jabhat Al-Nusra, the commander said.

“We accept no one from the Assad regime or of the Free Syrian Army, which is described as moderate. Our goal is to overthrow the regime, and establish an Islamic state in accordance with the Islamic Sharia,” he said.

As for the people who represent the Syrian opposition at the Geneva talks, Al Ezz said that “these people are weak, they’ve got a lot of money. They’ve sold themselves.”

“There are mercenaries in Syria, Alloush fights with Al Nusra-Front,” he said talking about Mohammed Alloush, a leader in the Jaysh al-Islam group, part of the Syrian opposition’s High Negotiations Committee (HNC) in the peace talks. “The group that was housed in Turkey and which was turned into the Free Syrian Army, used to be part of Al Nusra-Front.”

The commander openly confirmed that Jabhat Al-Nusra “are part of Al Qaeda,” the terrorist network responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

“Actually, we were inside one group together with the Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL). But the Islamic State has been used in accordance with the interests and political purposes of the big powers like America, and the group has drifted away from our principles. Most of the IS leaders are working with intelligence services, and it’s now clear for us. We, the Jabhat Al-Nusra, have our own way,” Al Ezz said.

The interview with Jabhat al-Nusra’s commander was taken at a stone quarry in Aleppo on September 17 by Koelner Stadt-Anzeiger journalist Jurgen Todenhofer on his seventh trip to war-torn Syria.

This article was contributed by RT
Please contact TRUNEWS correspondent Edward Szall with any news tips related to this story.
Email: | Twitter: @edwardszall | Facebook: Ed Szall

- See more at:
Ancient Islamic Endtimes Prophecy Driving ISIS Forces

September 29, 2016
- See more at:

Iraqi security forces hold an Islamic State flag which they pulled down during victory celebrations in Shirqat

ISIS forces have found themselves making a stand in the Syrian city of Dabiq, the supposed site of an ancient Islamic prophecy where a battle in this remote region would trigger an endtimes apocalypse.

Dabiq is a town in northern Syria, about 25 miles northeast of Aleppo and around 6 miles south of Syria's border with Turkey. It is administratively part of the Akhtarin subdistrict of the A'zaz District of Aleppo Governorate.

Nearby localities include Mare' to the southwest, Sawran to the northwest, and Akhtarin town to the southeast. In the 2004 census, Dabiq had a population of 3,364.

The town was the site of the battle of Marj Dabiq in 1516, in which the Ottoman Empire decisively defeated the Mamluk Sultanate.

READ: Obama admin weighs bombing Assad to save ISIS

In Islamic eschatology, it is believed that Dabiq is one of two possible locations for an epic battle between invading Christians and the defending Muslims which will result in a Muslim victory and mark the beginning of the end of times. The Islamic State believes Dabiq is where an epic and decisive battle will take place with Christian forces of the West, and have named their online magazineafter the village.

According to the London Express,

US SPECIAL forces are encircling a jihadi stronghold in Syria claimed by ISIS to be in old Islamic prophecy as the site of the final battle - triggering the apocalypse.

It is being reported that Turkish troops are just three miles from the small town.

ISIS even named its terrorist propaganda and recruitment magazine after the settlement, which lies around six miles from the Turkish border.

Jihadists believe the Prophet Mohammed remarked that "the last hour will not come" until an army vanquishes the invaders at "Dabiq or Al-A'maq".

One of the founders of ISIS, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, is quoted in the vile group's propaganda magazine as saying:

"The spark has been lit here in Iraq, and its heat will continue to intensify - by Allah's permission - until it burns the crusader armies in Dabiq."


There are three great signs for the Muslims that signal the end of time. Each of these signs will be a man. The first is the arrival of the Final Mahdi (12th Imam). The Mahdi is coming to slaughter all who will not worship Allah and will not covert to Islam. The Quran calls these people who refuse to worship Allah "pigs and dogs." Mahdi's final task is to establish the world dominating Kingdom of Islam.

The Mahdi is their long-awaited savior. Their Messiah. He will establish the final Caliphate. He will destroy all enemies of Islam, in a bloody global holy war. He will have an army, a massive one, going from nation to nation, to punish unbelievers. This army will carry black flags. This flag has on it one word, "Punishment." They go to Israel, and establish his rule on the Temple Mount. All will then prosper, and all worship the Mahdi and they speak of no one else but him. He will make a peace agreement with the Jews and the West for 7 years. The reign of Mahdi lasts 7 years, in which he establishes Islam. He will come riding a white horse and their own writings quote Revelation 6:1-2 as the rider on the white horse carrying a bow. They say that the Jews and the Christians' writings were all wrong and secret scriptures will be revealed to the Mahdi after he gets here that will validate this point of view.

So to sum up, the 12th Imam, or Final Mahdi, will be a great leader, coming on a white horse, a messianic figure, unparalleled leader, out of a crisis of turmoil, establish a new world order, invade many nations, make a peace treaty with the Jews, establish a false religion at Jerusalem, kill non-worshipers, and rule for 7 years.

Article by Doc Burkhart, Vice-President, General Manager and co-host of TRUNEWS with Rick Wiles.

Got a news tip? Email us at
Help support the ministry of TRUNEWS with your one-time or monthly gift of financial support. DONATE NOW!
- See more at:

Electricity Fails in ALL of South Australia!

All of South Australia is presently without electrical power and could remain without power until the early hours of tomorrow morning, after a network failure.  Cell phone towers in the state only have a maximum of FOUR hours back-up power and will begin failing soon.
An Emergency Management Council involving the State Government has begun in Adelaide, as Premier Jay Weatherill urged people not to travel on the roads "unless absolutely necessary".
"[People] should continue to listen to Radio on a battery-powered radio, or use social media to keep up to date as they possibly can," he told SuperStation95.
"It could be some hours before this is restored, and that's presently what we're working through."
He said emergency services and hospitals were operating under their own generation.
Mr Weatherill said it appeared weather had damaged power equipment at Port Augusta and the essential service could be out for hours.
He said there was an incident about 3:48pm today "which has caused the failure of the entire South Australian electricity network".
"At this stage we're still gathering information about the cause, but it appears that there was a weather event which has damaged infrastructure in the Port Augusta region."
"Our energy generation assets remain intact, and there does not appear at this stage to be any damage to the interconnector with Victoria.
"What's happened is the national Energy Market Operator assumes control of the situation in these circumstances and system restoration has commenced, but it could take a number of hours before that is completed and power restored."
Federal Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg said the Australian Energy Market Operator, which was responsible for the management of the National Electricity Market, was working closely with the relevant transmission network service provider, ElectraNet, to identify and understand the severity of the fault.


Power could be out until tomorrow

A former South Australia (SA) Power Networks engineer has told SuperStation95 that mobile phone towers only have about four hours of back-up power, which would mean mobile phone coverage could be lost by about 8:00pm.
South Australian Senator Nick Xenophon said that he understands power will not be restored to South Australia until 4:15am tomorrow.
"This is how not to do [transition to renewables]. I can't fatham ... I can't believe my state is in darkness at the moment. If heads have to roll, so be it," he said.
"We're looking at another 11 hours of darkness, and the consequences of that are just horrendous.
"Mobile phone towers may be out within 11 or 12 hours because of how they operate as well. So you might find people's mobile phones stop operating, depending on networks."
SA Police said just after 4:00pm most intersections in Adelaide were without traffic lights.
Adelaide Metro said trains along the Seaford and Tonsley lines and the Glenelg tramline are currently not operating, due to the power outage.
Jenny Scott from the State Library in Adelaide said the building had been evacuated due to the blackout.
"It was just a total power failure across the whole building so of course for safety reasons we had to evacuate.
"It gets quite dark and we worry about customers and staff tripping over things of course and damaging themselves."
Storms and strong winds have lashed South Australia throughout the day with the Bureau of Meteorology issuing severe thunderstorm warning for destructive wind gusts and rain.
The warning said winds of 140kph could occur in Leigh Creek, Hawkers, Waikerie, Arkaroola, Peterborough and Olary.
Storm warnings for Adelaide, Mount Lofty Ranges, Eastern Eyre Peninsula, Yorke Peninsula, Murraylands and North West Pastoral districts have been cancelled.

Last modified on Wednesday, 28 September 2016 05:05

Wednesday, September 28, 2016

FBI Collapsing! FBI wants Trump to Win and Comey, Lynch Prosecuted!

Tuesday, September 27, 2016 16:17
Offered for your discernment. --Max
In an email leaked from an FBI and Pentagon insider, huge new details are emerging regarding the hell storm unleashed with the bogus investigation into the Clinton Foundation, Hillary’s hidden health records about how she got her brain injury and much more!  Here’s the shocking email with insider information from within the FBI!
Anonymous FBI Source
2 FBI and one Pentagon ( me)
FBI is in a state of collapse now.
It could be 2,000 agents quitting if Hillary wins.
There are 6800 agents and another 7,000 staff. Roughly 14,000 people.
If 2,000 walk, it will take years to train. Morale is non existent.
The Pentagon knows Hillary armed Isis at Netanyahu’s request.
HRC has a secret deal with Netanyahu. Double the aid, in exchange for steering donations to Clinton Foundation from wealthy Jewish and Israeli donors. The deal also includes getting Clintons in on new technology companies that HRC plans to have US Gov order from, and Clintons will make “200 million” from such deals. This was directly promised to Hillary by Netanyahu in a closed door meeting and FBI has the recording!
Netanyahu is scared his deal falls apart if Hillary loses. Netanyahu met with Trump today and Trump said “No deal” Trump had his inside FBI guys BUG the room, so he would keep Netanyahu in line if he needs to in the future
13 senior FBI agents slip inside info to Trump, because the agency wants him to win, and then fire and prosecute Comey and Lynch.

Also Reference:

True Pundit Article

EXCLUSIVE: FBI Used Agents As Pawns To Insulate Hillary, Aides & Clinton Foundation From Prosecutions

Startling & Thought-Provoking New Analysis of LaVoy Finicum Shooting — with Additional Commentary by Attorney Fred Grant

About the Nuclear Football

Wednesday, September 28, 2016 13:09  

I hope this isn't true. 
This is the Nuclear Football

It is an attache case with America’s nuclear launch codes, and accompanies the President of the United States everywhere he or she goes. It stands ready to execute the unthinkable at a moment of extreme need. 

We go about our daily activities thinking little about this menacing object. It is entrusted to the country’s highest officers, and is carefully monitored.
The one potential weakness in the system is the level of authority and responsibility entrusted to any sitting President.
Needless to say that,
of all the most important attributes,
the president must possess…
the most critically important is…

Oregon Standoff Trial Day 10: The Prosecution Rests

Patch – by Colin Miner
For nearly thirty minutes, two FBI agents showed off guns that had been seized from the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge after the 41-day armed occupation was over. When the FBI agents were done with the 44 weapons and thousands of rounds of ammunition, the prosecution rested.
The case against Ammon Bundy, his brother Ryan and five others on charges stemming from the takeover of the refuge goes to the defense on Wednesday  
On Tuesday – the tenth day of testimony – prosecutors presented 22 long guns, 12 handguns, and thousands of rounds of ammunition that were wheeled in to the courtroom in 14 large black bins.
In all, the FBI agents they had seized 18,331 pieces of ammunition from the refuge.
Defense lawyers had objected to the ammunition being introduced as evidence but Judge Anna Brown, who is overseeing the trial allowed it. She did, though, seem a little impatient, asking prosecution to speed things up.
“Can’t we just do a summary, please,” she said at one point as the prosecution was discussing the ammunition. “Let’s get on with it.”
On cross-examination, the defense lawyers pointed out that none of the weapons or ammunition was illegal.

Guccifer Letter: Hillary “High Priest” of the Occult

Tuesday, September 27, 2016 16:15

Editor’s Note: Hm. Guccifer didn’t say “priestess“… the plot thickens.
hillary yikes
In a handwritten letter sent to Fox News, Guccifer calls Hillary Clinton “one of the high priests, a goddes (sic) of this occult, satanic, shadow group.”
“Though I know I invested a great deal of time & effort trying to expose the crimes of the Rockefellers, the Bush Klan, the Clintons, and many others, maybe my skills (or lack of skills?) were NOT matching my faith.”
Guccifer, aka Marcel Lazar Lehel, is a Romanian hacker responsible for hacking the computers of a number of government insiders, including George Bush, Colin Powell, Lisa Murkowski, and Sidney Blumenthal, a former aide to Bill Clinton.
He also accessed the emails accounts owned by two members of the Council on Foreign Relations, members of the Rockefeller family, and accounts owned by Adam Posen, a member of the CFR and the Trilateral Commission, and his wife and another owned by a former Federal Reserve Board official.
Earlier this month Lazar was sentenced to 52 month in federal prison. He is currently serving time in Romania.
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).

Contributed by Kurt Nimmo of Another Day in the Empire.
Kurt Nimmo is the editor of Another Day in the Empire, where this article first appeared. He is the former lead editor and writer of

After the Republic

A deeper view of 'current events' in the u.s.

By: Angelo M. Codevilla
September 27, 2016
ver the past half century, the Reagan years notwithstanding, our ruling class’s changing preferences and habits have transformed public and private life in America. As John Marini shows in his essay, “Donald Trump and the American Crisis,” this has resulted in citizens morphing into either this class’s “stakeholders” or its subjects. And, as Publius Decius Mus argues, “America and the West” now are so firmly “on a trajectory toward something very bad” that it is no longer reasonable to hope that “all human outcomes are still possible,” by which he means restoration of the public and private practices that made the American republic. In fact, the 2016 election is sealing the United States’s transition from that republic to some kind of empire.
Electing either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump cannot change that trajectory. Because each candidate represents constituencies hostile to republicanism, each in its own way, these individuals are not what this election is about. This election is about whether the Democratic Party, the ruling class’s enforcer, will impose its tastes more strongly and arbitrarily than ever, or whether constituencies opposed to that rule will get some ill-defined chance to strike back. Regardless of the election’s outcome, the republic established by America’s Founders is probably gone. But since the Democratic Party’s constituencies differ radically from their opponents’, and since the character of imperial governance depends inherently on the emperor, the election’s result will make a big difference in our lives.
Many Enemies, Few Friends
The overriding question of 2016 has been how eager the American people are to reject the bipartisan class that has ruled this country contrary to its majority’s convictions. Turned out, eager enough to throw out the baby with the dirty bathwater. The ruling class’s united front in response to the 2008 financial crisis had ignited the Tea Party’s call for adherence to the Constitution, and led to elections that gave control of both houses of Congress to the Republican Party. But as Republicans became full partners in the ruling class’s headlong rush in what most considered disastrous directions, Americans lost faith in the Constitution’s power to restrain the wrecking of their way of life.
From the primary season’s outset, the Democratic Party’s candidates promised even more radical “transformations.” When, rarely, they have been asked what gives them the right to do such things they have acted as if the only answer were Nancy Pelosi’s reply to whether the Constitution allows the government to force us into Obamacare: “Are you kidding? Are you kidding?”
On the Republican side, 17 hopefuls promised much, without dealing with the primordial fact that, in today’s America, those in power basically do what they please. Executive orders, phone calls, and the right judge mean a lot more than laws. They even trump state referenda. Over the past half-century, presidents have ruled not by enforcing laws but increasingly through agencies that write their own rules, interpret them, and punish unaccountably—the administrative state. As for the Supreme Court, the American people have seen it invent rights where there were none—e.g., abortion—while trammeling ones that had been the republic’s spine, such as the free exercise of religion and freedom of speech. The Court taught Americans that the word “public” can mean “private” (Kelo v. City of New London), that “penalty” can mean “tax” (King v. Burwell), and that holding an opinion contrary to its own can only be due to an “irrational animus” (Obergefell v. Hodges).
What goes by the name “constitutional law” has been eclipsing the U.S. Constitution for a long time. But when the 1964 Civil Rights Act substituted a wholly open-ended mandate to oppose “discrimination” for any and all fundamental rights, it became the little law that ate the Constitution. Now, because the Act pretended that the commerce clause trumps the freedom of persons to associate or not with whomever they wish, and is being taken to mean that it trumps the free exercise of religion as well, bakers and photographers are forced to take part in homosexual weddings. A commission in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts reported that even a church may be forced to operate its bathrooms according to gender self-identification because it “could be seen as a place of public accommodation if it holds a secular event, such as a spaghetti supper, that is open to the general public.” California came very close to mandating that Catholic schools admit homosexual and transgender students or close down. The Justice Department is studying how to prosecute on-line transactions such as vacation home rental site Airbnb, Inc., that fall afoul of its evolving anti-discrimination standards.
This arbitrary power, whose rabid guard-dog growls and barks: “Racist! Sexist! Homophobic!” has transformed our lives by removing restraints on government. The American Bar Association’s new professional guidelines expose lawyers to penalties for insufficient political correctness. Performing abortions or at least training to perform them may be imposed as a requirement for licensing doctors, nurses, and hospitals that offer services to the general public.
Addressing what it would take to reestablish the primacy of fundamental rights would have required Republican candidates to reset the Civil Rights movement on sound constitutional roots. Surprised they didn’t do it?
No one running for the GOP nomination discussed the greatest violation of popular government’s norms—never mind the Constitution—to have occurred in two hundred years, namely, the practice, agreed upon by mainstream Republicans and Democrats, of rolling all of the government’s expenditures into a single bill. This eliminates elected officials’ responsibility for any of the government’s actions, and reduces them either to approving all that the government does without reservation, or the allegedly revolutionary, disloyal act of “shutting down the government.”
Rather than talk about how to restrain or shrink government, Republican candidates talked about how to do more with government. The Wall Street Journal called that “having a positive agenda.” Hence, Republicans by and large joined the Democrats in relegating the U.S. Constitution to history’s dustbin.
Because Republicans largely agree with Democrats that they need not take seriously the founders’ Constitution, today’s American regime is now what Max Weber had called the Tsarist regime on the eve of the Revolution: “fake constitutionalism.” Because such fakery is self-discrediting and removes anyone’s obligation to restrain his passions, it is a harbinger of revolution and of imperial power.
The ruling class having chosen raw power over law and persuasion, the American people reasonably concluded that raw power is the only way to counter it, and looked for candidates who would do that. Hence, even constitutional scholar Ted Cruz stopped talking about the constitutional implications of President Obama’s actions after polls told him that the public was more interested in what he would do to reverse them, niceties notwithstanding. Had Cruz become the main alternative to the Democratic Party’s dominion, the American people might have been presented with the option of reverting to the rule of law. But that did not happen. Both of the choices before us presuppose force, not law.
A Change of Regimes
All ruling classes are what Shakespeare called the “makers of manners.” Plato, in The Republic, and Aristotle, in his Politics, teach that polities reflect the persons who rise to prominence within them, whose habits the people imitate, and who set the tone of life in them. Thus a polity can change as thoroughly as a chorus changes from comedy to tragedy depending on the lyrics and music. Obviously, the standards and tone of life that came from Abraham Lincoln’s Oval Office is quite opposite from what came from the same place when Bill Clinton used it. Germany under Kaiser Wilhelm was arguably the world’s most polite society. Under Hitler, it became the most murderous.
In today’s America, a network of executive, judicial, bureaucratic, and social kinship channels bypasses the sovereignty of citizens. Our imperial regime, already in force, works on a simple principle: the president and the cronies who populate these channels may do whatever they like so long as the bureaucracy obeys and one third plus one of the Senate protects him from impeachment. If you are on the right side of that network, you can make up the rules as you go along, ignore or violate any number of laws, obfuscate or commit perjury about what you are doing (in the unlikely case they put you under oath), and be certain of your peers’ support. These cronies’ shared social and intellectual identity stems from the uniform education they have received in the universities. Because disdain for ordinary Americans is this ruling class's chief feature, its members can be equally certain that all will join in celebrating each, and in demonizing their respective opponents.
And, because the ruling class blurs the distinction between public and private business, connection to that class has become the principal way of getting rich in America. Not so long ago, the way to make it here was to start a business that satisfied customers’ needs better than before. Nowadays, more businesses die each year than are started. In this century, all net additions in employment have come from the country’s 1,500 largest corporations. Rent-seeking through influence on regulations is the path to wealth. In the professions, competitive exams were the key to entry and advancement not so long ago. Now, you have to make yourself acceptable to your superiors. More important, judicial decisions and administrative practice have divided Americans into “protected classes”—possessed of special privileges and immunities—and everybody else. Equality before the law and equality of opportunity are memories. Co-option is the path to power. Ever wonder why the quality of our leaders has been declining with each successive generation?
Moreover, since the Kennedy reform of 1965, and with greater speed since 2009, the ruling class’s immigration policy has changed the regime by introducing some 60 million people—roughly a fifth of our population—from countries and traditions different from, if not hostile, to ours. Whereas earlier immigrants earned their way to prosperity, a disproportionate percentage of post-1965 arrivals have been encouraged to become dependents of the state. Equally important, the ruling class chose to reverse America’s historic practice of assimilating immigrants, emphasizing instead what divides them from other Americans. Whereas Lincoln spoke of binding immigrants by “the electric cord” of the founders’ principles, our ruling class treats these principles as hypocrisy. All this without votes or law; just power.
Foul is Fair and Fair is Foul
In short, precisely as the classics defined regime change, people and practices that had been at society’s margins have been brought to its center, while people and ideas that had been central have been marginalized.
Fifty years ago, prayer in the schools was near universal, but no one was punished for not praying. Nowadays, countless people are arrested or fired for praying on school property. West Point’s commanding general reprimanded the football coach for his team’s thanksgiving prayer. Fifty years ago, bringing sexually explicit stuff into schools was treated as a crime, as was “procuring abortion.” Nowadays, schools contract with Planned Parenthood to teach sex, and will not tell parents when they take girls to PP facilities for abortions. Back then, many schools worked with the National Rifle Association to teach gun handling and marksmanship. Now students are arrested and expelled merely for pointing their finger and saying “bang.” In those benighted times, boys who ventured into the girls’ bathroom were expelled as perverts. Now, girls are suspended for objecting to boys coming into the girls’ room under pretense of transgenderism. The mainstreaming of pornography, the invention of abortion as the most inalienable of human rights and, most recently, the designation of opposition to homosexual marriage as a culpable psychosis—none of which is dictated by law enacted by elected officials—is enforced as if it had been. No surprise that America has experienced a drastic drop in the formation of families, with the rise of rates of out-of-wedlock births among whites equal to the rates among blacks that was recognized as disastrous a half-century ago, the near-disappearance of two-parent families among blacks, and the social dislocations attendant to all that.
Ever since the middle of the 20th century our ruling class, pursuing hazy concepts of world order without declarations of war, has sacrificed American lives first in Korea, then in Vietnam, and now throughout the Muslim world. By denigrating Americans who call for peace, or for wars unto victory over America’s enemies; by excusing or glorifying those who take our enemies’ side or who disrespect the American flag; our rulers have drawn down the American regime’s credit and eroded the people’s patriotism.
As the ruling class destroyed its own authority, it wrecked the republic’s as well. This is no longer the “land where our fathers died,” nor even the country that won World War II. It would be surprising if any society, its identity altered and its most fundamental institutions diminished, had continued to function as before. Ours sure does not, and it is difficult to imagine how it can do so ever again. We can be sure only that the revolution underway among us, like all others, will run its unpredictable course.
All we know is the choice that faces us at this stage: either America continues in the same direction, but faster and without restraint, or there’s the hazy possibility of something else.
Imperial Alternatives
The consequences of empowering today’s Democratic Party are crystal clear. The Democratic Party—regardless of its standard bearer—would use its victory to drive the transformations that it has already wrought on America to quantitative and qualitative levels that not even its members can imagine. We can be sure of that because what it has done and is doing is rooted in a logic that has animated the ruling class for a century, and because that logic has shaped the minds and hearts of millions of this class’s members, supporters, and wannabes.
That logic’s essence, expressed variously by Herbert Croly and Woodrow Wilson, FDR’s brains trust, intellectuals of both the old and the new Left, choked back and blurted out by progressive politicians, is this: America’s constitutional republic had given the American people too much latitude to be who they are, that is: religiously and socially reactionary, ignorant, even pathological, barriers to Progress. Thankfully, an enlightened minority exists with the expertise and the duty to disperse the religious obscurantism, the hypocritical talk of piety, freedom, and equality, which excuses Americans’ racism, sexism, greed, and rape of the environment. As we progressives take up our proper responsibilities, Americans will no longer live politically according to their prejudices; they will be ruled administratively according to scientific knowledge.
Progressivism’s programs have changed over time. But its disdain for how other Americans live and think has remained fundamental. More than any commitment to principles, programs, or way of life, this is its paramount feature. The media reacted to Hillary Clinton’s remark that “half of Trump’s supporters could be put into a ‘basket of deplorables’” as if these sentiments were novel and peculiar to her. In fact, these are unremarkable restatements of our ruling class’s perennial creed.
The pseudo-intellectual argument for why these “deplorables” have no right to their opinions is that giving equal consideration to people and positions that stand in the way of Progress is “false equivalence,” as President Obama has put it. But the same idea has been expressed most recently and fully by New York Times CEO Mark Thompson, as well as Times columnists Jim Rutenberg, Timothy Egan, and William Davies. In short, devotion to truth means not reporting on Donald Trump and people like him as if they or anything they say might be of value.
If trying to persuade irredeemable socio-political inferiors is no more appropriate than arguing with animals, why not just write them off by sticking dismissive names on them? Doing so is less challenging, and makes you feel superior. Why wrestle with the statistical questions implicit in Darwin when you can just dismiss Christians as Bible-thumpers? Why bother arguing for Progressivism’s superiority when you can construct “scientific” studies like Theodor Adorno’s, proving that your opponents suffer from degrees of “fascism” and other pathologies? This is a well-trod path. Why, to take an older example, should General Omar Bradley have bothered trying to refute Douglas MacArthur’s statement that in war there is no substitute for victory when calling MacArthur and his supporters “primitives” did the trick? Why wrestle with our climate’s complexities when you can make up your own “models,” being sure that your class will treat them as truth?
What priorities will the ruling class’s notion of scientific truth dictate to the next Democratic administration? Because rejecting that true and false, right and wrong are objectively ascertainable is part of this class’s DNA, no corpus of fact or canon of reason restrains it or defines its end-point. Its definition of “science” is neither more nor less than what “scientists say” at any given time. In practice, that means “Science R-Us,” now and always, exclusively. Thus has come to pass what President Dwight Eisenhower warned against in his 1960 Farewell address: “A steadily increasing share [of science] is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.… [T]he free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution…a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity.” Hence, said Ike, “The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present—and is gravely to be regarded.” The result has been that academics rise through government grants while the government exercises power by claiming to act on science’s behalf. If you don’t bow to the authority of the power that says what is and is not so, you are an obscurantist or worse.
Under our ruling class, “truth” has morphed from the reflection of objective reality to whatever has “normative pull”—i.e., to what furthers the ruling class’s agenda, whatever that might be at any given time. That is the meaning of the term “political correctness,” as opposed to factual correctness.
It’s the Contempt, Stupid!
Who, a generation ago, could have guessed that careers and social standing could be ruined by stating the fact that the paramount influence on the earth’s climate is the sun, that its output of energy varies and with it the climate? Who, a decade ago, could have predicted that stating that marriage is the union of a man and a woman would be treated as a culpable sociopathy, or just yesterday that refusing to let certifiably biological men into women’s bathrooms would disqualify you from mainstream society? Or that saying that the lives of white people “matter” as much as those of blacks is evidence of racism? These strictures came about quite simply because some sectors of the ruling class felt like inflicting them on the rest of America. Insulting presumed inferiors proved to be even more important to the ruling class than the inflictions’ substance.
How far will our rulers go? Because their network is mutually supporting, they will go as far as they want. Already, there is pressure from ruling class constituencies, as well as academic arguments, for morphing the concept of “hate crime” into the criminalization of “hate speech”—which means whatever these loving folks hate. Of course this is contrary to the First Amendment, and a wholesale negation of freedom. But it is no more so than the negation of freedom of association that is already eclipsing religious freedom in the name anti-discrimination. It is difficult to imagine a Democratic president, Congress, and Supreme Court standing in the way.
Above all, these inflictions, as well as the ruling class’s acceptance of its own members’ misbehavior, came about because millions of its supporters were happy, or happy enough, to support them in the interest of maintaining their own status in a ruling coalition while discomfiting their socio-political opponents. Consider, for example, how republic-killing an event was the ruling class’s support of President Bill Clinton in the wake of his nationally televised perjury. Subsequently, as constituencies of supporters have effectively condoned officials’ abusive, self-serving, and even outright illegal behavior, they have encouraged more and more of it while inuring themselves to it. That is how republics turn into empires from the roots up.
But it is also true, as Mao Tse-Tung used to say, “a fish begins to rot at the head.” If you want to understand why any and all future Democratic Party administrations can only be empires dedicated to injuring and insulting their subjects, look first at their intellectual leaders’ rejection of the American republic’s most fundamental principles.
The Declaration of Independence says that all men “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” among which are “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” These rights—codified in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights—are not civil rights that governments may define. The free exercise of religion, freedom of speech and assembly, keeping and bearing arms, freedom from warrantless searches, protection against double jeopardy and self-incrimination, trial by jury of one’s peers, etc., are natural rights that pertain to human beings as such. Securing them for Americans is what the United States is all about. But today’s U.S. Civil Rights Commission advocates truncating the foremost of these rights because, as it stated in a recent report, “Religious exemptions to the protections of civil rights based upon classifications such as race, color, national origin, sex, disability status, sexual orientation, and gender identity, when they are permissible, significantly infringe upon those civil rights.” The report explains why the rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights should not be permissible: “The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy, or any form of intolerance.”
Hillary Clinton’s attack on Trump supporters merely matched the ruling class’s current common sense. Why should government workers and all who wield the administrative state’s unaccountable powers not follow their leaders’ judgment, backed by the prestige press, about who are to be treated as citizens and who is to be handled as deplorable refuse? Hillary Clinton underlined once again how the ruling class regards us, and about what it has in store for us.
Electing Donald Trump would result in an administration far less predictable than any Democratic one. In fact, what Trump would or would not do, could or could not do, pales into insignificance next to the certainty of what any Democrat would do. That is what might elect Trump.
The character of an eventual Trump Administration is unpredictable because speculating about Trump’s mind is futile. It is equally futile to guess how he might react to the mixture of flattery and threats sure to be leveled against him. The entire ruling class—Democrats and Republicans, the bulk of the bureaucracy, the judiciary, and the press—would do everything possible to thwart him; and the constituencies that chose him as their candidate, and that might elect him, are surely not united and are by no means clear about the demands they would press. Moreover, it is anyone’s guess whom he would appoint and how he would balance his constituencies’ pressures against those of the ruling class.
Never before has such a large percentage of Americans expressed alienation from their leaders, resentment, even fear. Some two-thirds of Americans believe that elected and appointed officials—plus the courts, the justice system, business leaders, educators—are leading the country in the wrong direction: that they are corrupt, do more harm than good, make us poorer, get us into wars and lose them. Because this majority sees no one in the political mainstream who shares their concerns, because it lacks confidence that the system can be fixed, it is eager to empower whoever might flush the system and its denizens with something like an ungentle enema.
Yet the persons who express such revolutionary sentiments are not a majority ready to support a coherent imperial program to reverse the course of America’s past half-century. Temperamentally conservative, these constituencies had been most attached to the Constitution and been counted as the bedrock of stability. They are not yet wholly convinced that there is little left to conserve. What they want, beyond an end to the ruling class’s outrages, has never been clear. This is not surprising, given that the candidates who appeal to their concerns do so with mere sound bites. Hence they chose as the presidential candidate of the nominal opposition party the man who combined the most provocative anti-establishment sounds with reassurance that it won’t take much to bring back good old America: Donald Trump. But bringing back good old America would take an awful lot. What could he do to satisfy them?
Trump’s propensity for treating pronouncements on policy as flags to be run up and down the flagpole as he measures the volume of the applause does not deprive them of all significance—especially the ones that confirm his anti-establishment bona fides. These few policy items happen to be the ones by which he gained his anti-establishment reputation in the first place: 1) opposition to illegal immigration, especially the importation of Muslims whom Americans reasonably perceive as hostile to us; 2) law and order: stop excusing rioters and coddling criminals; 3) build a wall, throw out the illegals, let in only people who are vetted and certified as supporters of our way of life (that’s the way it was when I got my immigrant visa in 1955), and keep out anybody we can’t be sure isn’t a terrorist. Trump’s tentative, partial retreat from a bit of the latter nearly caused his political standing to implode, prompting the observation that doing something similar regarding abortion would end his political career. That is noteworthy because, although Trump’s support of the pro-life cause is lukewarm at best, it is the defining commitment for much of his constituency. The point here is that, regardless of his own sentiments, Trump cannot wholly discount his constituencies’ demands for a forceful turn away from the country’s current direction.
Trump’s slogan—“make America great again”—is the broadest, most unspecific, common denominator of non-ruling-class Americans’ diverse dissatisfaction with what has happened to the country. He talks about reasserting America’s identity, at least by controlling the borders; governing in America’s own interest rather than in pursuit of objectives of which the American people have not approved; stopping the export of jobs and removing barriers to business; and banishing political correctness’s insults and injuries. But all that together does not amount to making America great again. Nor does Trump begin to explain what it was that had made this country great to millions who have known only an America much diminished.
In fact, the United States of America was great because of a whole bunch of things that now are gone. Yes, the ruling class led the way in personal corruption, cheating on tests, lowering of professional standards, abandoning churches and synagogues for the Playboy Philosophy and lifestyle, disregarding law, basing economic life on gaming the administrative state, basing politics on conflicting identities, and much more. But much of the rest of the country followed. What would it take to make America great again—or indeed to make any of the changes that Trump’s voters demand? Replacing the current ruling class would be only the beginning.
Because it is difficult to imagine a Trump presidency even thinking about something so monumental as replacing an entire ruling elite, much less leading his constituency to accomplishing it, electing Trump is unlikely to result in a forceful turn away from the country’s current direction. Continuing pretty much on the current trajectory under the same class will further fuel revolutionary sentiments in the land all by itself. Inevitable disappointment with Trump is sure to add to them.
We have stepped over the threshold of a revolution. It is difficult to imagine how we might step back, and futile to speculate where it will end. Our ruling class’s malfeasance, combined with insult, brought it about. Donald Trump did not cause it and is by no means its ultimate manifestation. Regardless of who wins in 2016, this revolution’s sentiments will grow in volume and intensity, and are sure to empower politicians likely to make Americans nostalgic for Donald Trump’s moderation.


Opinions expressed in signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of the editors, the Claremont Institute, or its board of directors. Nothing in this journal, whether in print or pixels, is an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill or influence the election of any candidate.
© Claremont Institute 2016