Saturday, November 9, 2019

NARCOMEX IN MELTDOWN - HOW MUCH MORE WILL MEXICO POUR OVER OUR UNDEFENDED BORDERS?


Arizona Sheriff: Mexican Cartels Are As Brutal As ISIS, U.S. Should Respond Accordingly

Katie Pavlich
|
|
Posted: Nov 09, 2019 10:30 AM

Arizona Sheriff: Mexican Cartels Are As Brutal As ISIS, U.S. Should Respond Accordingly
Source: AP Photo/Eduardo Verdugo, File

Earlier this week, nine Americans made up of women and children were slaughtered while driving in Mexico. They were shot and burned alive, despite attempts to surrender.


 Five Mexican Cops Gunned Down in Southern Mexico

Oaxaca Cops
Twitter La Voz Del Pueblo
3:13

A group of gunmen ambushed and killed five state police officers in the southern state of Oaxaca. Two other officers sustained serious gunshot wounds during the attack.

The attack took place on Friday afternoon in the municipality of San Vicente Coatlan, near a rural area known as La Cementera. According to Mexico’s Excelsior, a group of unknown gunmen attacked the squad of officers as they carried out a series of enforcement patrols in the area. The officers had been patrolling in the police vehicles marked #1730 and #1718.
The officers called for help after the initial attack. This led to a large-scale deployment of police officers and emergency medical personnel that quickly arrived in the area. Paramedics rushed the two wounded officers to local hospitals while state investigators transported the fallen officers to a local morgue. Authorities did not disclose which criminal organization or cartel carried out the attack.
A video released by the citizen journalist page La Voz del Pueblo revealed the moment when state police officers gathered at the morgue expressing their sorrow in front of their fellow fallen officers.



Así vivieron Policías Estatales la perdidas de sus compañeros que fueron emboscados por un comando armado.

Saldo:
5 policías Muertos
1 Policia Herido (estado crítico ).



In the aftermath of the attack, Oaxaca state officials took to social media to condemn the attack and vowed to bring justice to the families of the fallen officers.

El deceso de nuestros compañeros policías lastima a la SSPO y a toda la sociedad oaxaqueña. A sus deudos y familiares, nuestra solidaridad total.
Al límite de capacidades y valores, nuestros esfuerzos se encaminarán a que la justicia siempre se imponga a la barbarie.

DEP



View image on Twitter



Ildefonso Ortiz is an award-winning journalist with Breitbart Texas. He co-founded Breitbart Texas’ Cartel Chronicles project with Brandon Darby and senior Breitbart management. You can follow him on Twitter and on Facebook. He can be contacted at Iortiz@breitbart.com
Brandon Darby is the managing director and editor-in-chief of Breitbart Texas. He co-founded Breitbart Texas’ Cartel Chronicles project with Ildefonso Ortiz and senior Breitbart management. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook. He can be contacted at bdarby@breitbart.com.     




Drug Cartels in Our Backyard – Just Ask ICE

By Howie Carr


The Boston Herald, November 5, 2019

. . .
https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/11/05/howie-carr-drug-cartels-in-our-backyard-just-ask-ice/



ARE YOU SICK OF OBAMA, CLINTON, PELOSI, FEINSTEIN, SCHUMER SABOTAGING HOMELAND SECURITY TO BUILD THEIR PARTY BASE OF ILLEGALS?




Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Tulsi Gabbard to Breitbart News: ‘We Do Not Have a Nation If We Do Not Have Borders’

Democratic presidential hopeful Representative for Hawaii Tulsi Gabbard speaks during the fourth Democratic primary debate of the 2020 presidential campaign season co-hosted by The New York Times and CNN at Otterbein University in Westerville, Ohio on October 15, 2019. (Photo by SAUL LOEB / AFP) (Photo by SAUL LOEB/AFP via …
SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images
2:14

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) told Breitbart News on Thursday morning that “we do not have a nation if we don’t have borders.”

Gabbard, appearing with Breitbart News’ editor-in-chief Alex Marlow on Breitbart News Daily on Sirius XM Patriot 125, is among the ten Democratic presidential candidates who have qualified for the fifth debate Nov. 20.
She fielded a variety of question from Marlow, including questions about domestic policy, starting with immigration.
“The reality is that we do not have a nation if we don’t have borders,” she said. “It’s a false choice for people to say you’re anti-immigrant if you support secure borders. That’s just not the case.”
Gabbard is one of the only candidates who has opposed decriminalizing illegal immigration, and who has opposed providing free health care and free college tuition to illegal aliens.
She has criticized President Donald Trump’s immigration policy, but also departed from the radical stances of her rivals. She declared in the second Democratic presidential debate: “We will have to stop separating children from their parents, make it so that it’s easier for people to seek asylum in this country, make sure that we are securing our borders and making it so that people are able to use our legal immigration system by reforming those laws.”
On Thursday, she told Breitbart News that it was possible to achieve a balance: “I think that we can and we must have a secure border policy that’s effective and works, and also reform our immigration system so that it works for our country. It can be a safe and secure border along with humane immigration policy and achieve both objectives.”
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.





Drug Flows Increasing at SW Border, DHS Official Says; Fentanyl Seizures Up 20%, Meth Up 200%

By Susan Jones | November 6, 2019 | 9:13am EST
















Over the weekend, Border Patrol agents in Arizona's Tucson Sector seized over 200lbs of marijuana being smuggled through the desert. (Photo courtesy ofCBP)
Over the weekend, Border Patrol agents in Arizona's Tucson Sector seized over 200lbs of marijuana being smuggled through the desert. (Photo courtesy ofCBP)
(CNSNews.com) - On Tuesday, as the nation learned about the murders of nine American women and children at the hands of Mexican drug cartels, the Senate Homeland Security Committee held a hearing on threats to the homeland, including some that emanate from Mexico.
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) noted that the apprehension of illegal immigrants crossing the Southwest Border has declined somewhat from earlier highs, but the drug flow has not slowed.
"We have seen it increase," David Glawe, the chief intelligence officer and under secretary at the Department of Homeland Security told Portman.
Just to give you the numbers from 2017 to 2019, so you know what we are dealing with on the narcotic flows, we have seen a 40-percent increase in cocaine from seizures at the Southwest border.
We have seen a 20-percent increase in fentanyl. We have seen a 30-percent increase in heroin, and to your point, we have seen a 20-percent increase in methamphetamine -- and that is in addition to the emergency on the border we had with the migrant flows...
So we have a crisis at the Southwest border and it is all based on moving people and goods illicitly across the border. And that's what it is about, cartels are about moving goods and people across the Southwest border.
Glawe said the drug seizure percentages "are probably low."
"That is what we are catching," he said. "So we have seen those increases in the last two years, and the cartels are a sophisticated business about moving supplies in the United States. They are as good as any major business," Glawe said, comparing them to a Fortune 500 company in terms of profits.
He also mentioned the cartels' "relationships with China," which is moving its fentanyl production to Mexico. "It is very sophisticated, very robust, and constantly changing and dynamic," Glawe said.
Portman said Americans' demand for the illicit drugs is also "key."
"We have done a lot of work on that, we will continue to on prevention and recovery programs, treatment -- but we have got to do something to deal with the flow," Portman said.
The senator said in the streets of Columbus, Ohio, crystal meth "is less expensive than marijuana and deadly, and so we would appreciate any input you have as to how we can do a better job to reduce that supply, at a minimum."
Glawe said reducing the supply requires a "sophisticated approach that goes just beyond law enforcement. It is partnership with our U.S. intelligence community partners, our Mexican intelligence community partners, the Mexican military as well as our military, and that partnership is robust and we have a very good relationship with our Mexico partners, but it is really upping the game and a strategy to impact these groups that is going to have to go city by city, state by state."
'Awash in meth'
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) told Glawe that his state is "absolutely overwhelmed" with meth coming across the Southwest border. "I mean, there is not a community in my state -- urban, rural, north, south, east, west --that is not just a wash in meth.
"You pointed out that between, I think it was 2017 and 2019 that the southern border apprehension is up over 200 percent for meth," Hawley told Glawe. "Did I hear you say to Senator Portman that the meth apprehensions and other drug apprehensions have continued to increase even as border apprehensions of illegal individuals has decreased. Is that--is that right?"
"That is correct," Glawe said. "And again, this is a two-year snapshot, so it was cocaine, 20 percent (increase in seizures); fentanyl, 20 percent; heroin, 30 percent; and methamphetamine, 200 percent, and that's at the border. That's at the border where we are seizing that. That's in addition to the migration challenges we've had."
Glawe said the cartels "control what goes across and what does not go across. And it is all based on money of moving people and goods."
Hawley asked Glawe what needs to change to more effectively slow the flow of drugs into the United States.
Glawe repeated his earlier response about the U.S. law enforcement partnering with Mexican agencies and the Mexican military in some of Mexico's "lawless" areas.
"But that also has to be hand in glove with our demand," Glawe said. "The U.S. is a high demand for narcotics. So it's a-- it's a joint process, and it's in that realm of having that partnership with our Mexican counterparts in that space to identify the bad and fill it with the good."

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez











Mexican Cartels Are Winning the Propaganda War

CJNG
Breitbart Texas / Cartel Chronicles
5:18

Cartels repeatedly demonstrate their capabilities as effective propagandists against the general public, rivals, and even layers of Mexican or international governing bodies. Their practices try to blur the lines between criminality, terrorism, and even righteous insurgency — raising red flags for national security.

Though typically unrealized, many Mexican cartels manage their organizations like large corporations complete with accounting, legal, and public relations departments. It is common for members to refer to their groups as a “companies.” Simply referring to them as “drug cartels” minimizes their impacts on life and culture south of the border and beyond.
News Media
Dedicated propaganda cells traffic in all forms of new and old media outreach. They place vinyl banners on government buildings, bridges, overpasses, and monuments. In one instance, they even dropped leaflets from an airplane reminiscent of psy-ops efforts prior to a military invasion. They also use social media to disseminate graphic torture footage to catch the attention of international journalists. Every message is designed to either threaten rivals, defend its actions, or even promote good deeds for the benefit of the civilian population living on their turf.
Mexican journalists also walk a tightrope when attempting straight coverage of cartel exploits. Such work in Mexico is some of the most dangerous in the world. In 2019, nearly 250 cases of violence directed at media personnel in the country were documented. Investigative reporters willing to dig into cartel and government connections are particularly at risk.
These organizations do not circulate press releases and hope for glowing coverage. Many Mexican newsrooms are compromised to the point that a particular cell will be in constant contact to act as a de facto assignment editor – deciding which unflattering stories go unpublished versus items that make rivals look bad in the public eye. Failure to cooperate too often means death.
In the Streets
Cartels are bold in their efforts to secure the hearts, minds, and especially stomachs of those living impoverished lives around them. During high holidays, cartel gunmen will lay down arms in public squares to distribute toys or food as if they were the Red Cross. Recently in Michoacán, Cartel Jalisco New Generation (CJNG) posted a video distributing food to the poor. In Tamaulipas, the Gulf Cartel hands out Christmas gifts annually near the Texas border. Gunmen even manage to use local radio stations to promote their charitable acts. During Hurricane Ingrid in 2013, convoys of vehicles were used to distribute tons of food and supplies.
Music and Memes
Popular culture is also leveraged directly and indirectly to idealize the cartel lifestyle. Folk music dubbed “narco-corridos” promote bravery, riches, and sex surrounding the traffickers. Groups will even single out singers praising a rival faction for death. One music video uploaded to YouTube in 2013 promotes the Sinaloa Cartel by mixing staged and actual footage from sicarios.

Gunmen may even dabble in viral dance video challenges in full tactical gear.
Protests and ‘Human Rights’
Mexican organized crime can also wield influence over international bodies like the United Nations. The Cartel del Noreste (CDN) faction of Los Zetas developed efforts to astroturf street protests against police forces near the Texas border in Nuevo Leon. They worked to gin outrage against authorities as top-level operatives were targeted for arrest. Some entities are bold enough to cooperate with “human rights” groups to disseminate conspiracy theories against local governments. In May 2018, the UN issued accusations against federal authorities, suggesting they were abducting CDN members.
Attorneys and Spokesmen
Cartels are comfortable using attorneys for public means. No cartel is complete without a lawyer.
In the aftermath of the high-profile arrest and abrupt release of El Chapo’s son, Ovidio “El Raton” Guzman, multiple attorneys in Mexico and the United States were deployed to spin and play damage control. They held news conferences and sat for interviews to praise President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador’s (AMLO) actions. They also congratulated themselves for their public works on behalf of the Mexican people. One spokesman even explained the Sinaloa Cartel’s plans to build a university, inviting AMLO to attend the first stone laying with El Chapo’s mother. Attorneys also drew a line between the AMLO administration’s decision to release the “Chapito” while condemning those in law enforcement who were responsible for the arrest.
Days later, the Sinaloa Cartel released a branded public apology, which in turn placed much of the blame on federal forces for sparking terror in the state. They go on to thank AMLO for releasing their leader and encouraged authorities to “assume their responsibilities as we are assuming ours.”
New York-based attorney Jeffrey Lichtman, who represents convicted “El Chapo” Guzman, told PIX 11 “I don’t know what caused this, we don’t even know who was shooting the guns.” He also expressed discomfort with taking claims from Mexico City and Washington officials “as Gospel.”
Mexican cartels are perfecting the art of modern persuasion to threaten rivals with demonstrable violence while, in the same breath, suggesting such actions are in the public interest. Their messages can appear from an overpass during the morning drive and in a Twitter feed before turning off a nightlight. Their influence is seen in the local newspaper and on an FM dial. When innocents are objectively terrorized or harmed, a cleanup crew featuring fixers and charitable gestures follow. Until these sophisticated measures are understood and confronted on a critical scale, cartel control will continue to expand unabated.
Jaeson Jones is a retired Captain from the Texas Department of Public Safety’s Intelligence and Counterterrorism Division and a Breitbart Texas contributor. While on duty, he managed daily operations for the Texas Rangers Border Security Operations Center.










 House Votes to 'Enhance the Border Security' of Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt and Tunisia--Not the USA

 By Terence P. Jeffrey | November 6, 2019 | 4:33am EST



The Democrat-controlled House of Representatives has voted to fund efforts to "enhance the border security" of Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt and Tunisia while moving to deny all funding to build walls, fencing or any other structures to enhance the border security of the United States.













Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her lieutenants have their priorities.
To them, borders on the other side of the world are more important than our own.
On June 19, the House approved a massive spending bill. In an act of legislative polygamy, it "married" the appropriations bill for the Department of Defense to the appropriations bills for the Department of State, the Department of Energy, and the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and Education.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated this monstrosity would cost taxpayers $984.7 billion in fiscal 2020.
Yet there is one thing this bill would forbid the Trump administration from spending one penny to accomplish.
On page 304 (of 650), it says: "None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act or any prior Department of Defense appropriations Acts may be used to construct a wall, fence, border barriers, or border security infrastructure along the southern land border of the United States."
A month later, the House Appropriations Committee sent the full House a bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security.
This bill — so far — is unmarried and would cost taxpayers $63.8 billion.
President Trump had requested that it include $5 billion to use in constructing barriers at the border.
How much did the committee give him?
"No funding is provided in the bill for new physical barriers along the southwest border," said the committee report.
It also said, "The recommendation provides no funding for additional Border Patrol Agents."
Thus, the Democrat-controlled House is advancing discretionary appropriations bills that would spend more than $1 trillion in one year but provide zero dollars to build physical barriers to stop illegal aliens, human traffickers and drug smugglers from crossing our southern border.
Yet that does not mean the Democrat-controlled House is not planning to spend some money to enhance border security.
It just depends where the border is.
In that 650-page spending bill that prohibits Defense Department money from being used to defend the southern border of the United States, there is a section that creates a $1.295 billion fund for use by the secretary of defense.
"For the 'Counter-Islamic State of Iraq and Syria Train and Equip Fund', $1,295,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2021," says the bill. "Provided, That such funds shall be available to the secretary of defense in coordination with the Secretary of State, to provide assistance, including training; equipment; logistics support, supplies, and services; stipends; infrastructure repair and renovation; and sustainment, to foreign security forces, irregular forces, groups, or individuals participating, or preparing to participate in activities to counter the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, and their affiliated or associated groups."
"Provided further," says the bill, "That these funds may be used in such amounts as the Secretary of Defense may determine to enhance the border security of nations adjacent to conflict areas including Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, and Tunisia resulting from actions of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria."
So, the secretary of defense could take a chunk of this $1.295 billion and give it to the government of Egypt to secure its border with post-Gadhafi Libya, where ISIS is active.
And he could give a chunk to Tunisia to secure its border with Libya.
Or he could give some American tax dollars to unnamed "irregular forces, groups, or individuals" who, someplace in this world, are "preparing to participate in activities" to counter ISIS, or at least groups that are "affiliated or associated" with ISIS.
But according to the House appropriations bills, President Trump cannot spend a penny to build structures at our own border to secure our own territory and our own people.
By contrast, the Republican-controlled Senate Appropriations Committee has approved a Homeland Security spending bill that does include $5 billion to build "pedestrian fencing" — to stop people on foot and in vehicles from crossing our southern border. Also, that committee's defense spending bill does not prohibit the president from using defense money to build barriers to defend our own border.
It even includes a larger fund ($1.8 billion) than the House bill that, among other things, can be used "for enhanced border security" not only in Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt and Tunisia but also in Oman.
We are now more than a month into fiscal 2020. The government is running on a continuing resolution that expires Nov. 21.
President Trump should deliver a simple message to Speaker Pelosi: He is not going to sign a spending bill that funds border security in Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt and Tunisia but not California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas.
He should put America first — even if Pelosi will shut down the government trying to stop him.
(Terence P. Jeffrey is the editor in chief of CNSNews.com.)

US sends 3,000 more troops to defend Saudi monarchy... YES, THE VERY ONES WHO INVADED US 9-11

 

The Pentagon confirmed Friday that 3,000 more US troops are being deployed to Saudi Arabia to defend the blood-soaked monarchy led by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and prepare for war against Iran.
The deployment includes two fighter squadrons, one Air Expeditionary Wing (AEW), two more Patriot missile batteries, and one Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system (THAAD).
According to a Pentagon statement Friday, the US Secretary of Defense phoned Crown Prince bin Salman (who also holds the post of Saudi minister of defense) to inform him of the coming reinforcements, which he said were meant “to assure and enhance the defense of Saudi Arabia.”
The Pentagon also acknowledged that the latest escalation brings the number of additional troops sent into the Persian Gulf region since May to 14,000. They have been accompanied by an armada of US warships and a B-52-led bomber task force. The Pentagon has also announced that an aircraft carrier-led battle group will remain in the Persian Gulf.
US soldiers deployed in the Middle East (U.S. Army by 1st Lt. Jesse Glenn)
While initiated as a supposed response to unspecified threats from Iran, the US buildup in the Persian Gulf region has constituted from its outset a military provocation and preparation for a war of aggression. This military buildup has accompanied Washington’s so-called “maximum pressure” campaign of sweeping economic sanctions that are tantamount to a state of war. The aim, as the Trump administration has stated publicly, is to drive Iranian oil exports down to zero. By depriving Iran of its principal source of export income, Washington hopes to starve the Iranian people into submission and pave the way to regime change, bringing to power a US puppet regime in Tehran.
The latest military buildup was announced in the immediate aftermath of an attack on an Iranian tanker in the Red Sea, about 60 miles from the Saudi port of Jeddah.
The National Iranian Tanker Co. reported that its oil tanker, the Sabiti, was struck twice by explosives early Friday morning, leaving two holes in the vessel and causing a brief oil spill into the Red Sea.
While Iranian state news media blamed the damage on missile attacks, a spokesman for the company told the Wall Street Journal that the company was not sure of the cause.
Some security analysts have suggested that the fairly minor damage to the vessel could have been caused by limpet mines. Such mines were apparently used last June when two tankers—one Japanese and one Norwegian-owned—were hit by explosions in the Sea of Oman. At the time, Washington blamed the attacks on Iran, without providing any evidence. Tehran denied the charge, saying that it sent teams to rescue crew member of the damaged tankers.
The Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA) quoted an unnamed Iranian government official as stating that the Iranian tanker had been the victim of a “terrorist attack.”
“Examination of the details and perpetrators of this dangerous action continues and will be announced after reaching the result,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi said.
The National Iranian Tanker Co. issued a statement saying that there was no evidence that Saudi Arabia was behind the attack.
The incident raised the specter of an escalating tanker war that could disrupt shipping through the strategic Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of the world’s oil supply flows. News of the attack sent crude oil prices spiking by 2 percent.
In addition to the June attacks on the tankers in the Gulf of Oman, in July British commandos, acting on a request from Washington, stormed an Iranian super tanker, the Grace 1, in waters off the British overseas territory of Gibraltar. In apparent retaliation, Iranian Revolutionary Guards seized the British-flagged Stena Impero for what Tehran charged were violations of international maritime regulations as it passed through the Strait of Hormuz. Both tankers were subsequently released.
Earlier this week, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued a statement charging that the Iranian super tanker, renamed the Adrian Darya 1, had offloaded its oil in Syria in violation of European Union sanctions and a pledge made by Tehran to the UK at the time of the vessel’s release. He demanded provocatively that “EU members should condemn this action, uphold the rule of law, and hold Iran accountable.”

The Trump administration, which in May of last year unilaterally and illegally abrogated the 2015 nuclear agreement between Tehran and the major powers has been pressuring the European signatories to the deal—Germany, France and the UK—to follow suit.
While the respective governments of the three countries have insisted that they still support the nuclear agreement, they have repeatedly bowed to Washington’s war drive, while failing to take any significant actions to counter the effects of the US “maximum pressure” campaign and deliver to Tehran the sanctions relief and economic normalization that it was promised in exchange for curtailing its nuclear program.
Most recently, the three European governments backed Washington in blaming Iran for a September 14 attack on Saudi oil facilities that temporarily shut down half of the kingdom’s oil production and sent crude prices spiraling by 20 percent—again without providing a shred of proof.
Washington is seeking to topple the Iranian regime or bully it into accepting complete subordination to US imperialist predatory interests in the energy-rich and geostrategically vital Middle East.
The US sanctions regime and military buildup have placed the entire region on a hair trigger for the outbreak of a catastrophic war that could engulf not only the Middle East, but the entire planet.
All of the regimes involved in the escalating conflict are gripped by crises that make the drive to war all the more explosive.
The impact of the sanctions on Iran’s economy has been devastating. It is estimated that oil exports last month fell to just 400,000 barrels per day (b/d), compared to 1.95 million b/d in September 2018. Left with little means of combating spiraling inflation and growing unemployment, Iran’s bourgeois-clerical regime is caught between intense pressure from imperialism on the one hand, and the growth of social opposition among Iranian workers and poor on the other.
The Saudi monarchy is confronting the debacle of its four-year-old and near genocidal war against the people of Yemen, made possible by the weapons and logistical aid provided by Washington, even as Prince bin Salman remains a global pariah for his ordering of the grisly assassination of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi last year in Istanbul.
Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, incapable of forming a new government after two elections and confronting criminal indictments, has grown increasingly concerned over the apparent lack of appetite by the Persian Gulf Sunni monarchies for military confrontation with Iran and Washington’s failure to carry out military strikes after the downing of its drone in June and the attacks on the Saudi oil facilities last month. Clearly, Tel Aviv, which has cast Iran as its strategic enemy, would have a motive for attacking Iranian tankers in the hopes of provoking a response that could lead to US military action.
And then there is Trump. He has proclaimed his determination to halt the “endless wars” in the Middle East and provoked a political firestorm by pulling back a relative handful of US troops in Syria, allowing Turkey to launch a long-planned attack on the Pentagon’s erstwhile proxy force, the Kurdish-dominated YPG militia.
Faced with an escalating political crisis and growing social tensions within the US, along with an impeachment investigation by the Democrats in Congress that is focused entirely on the national security concerns of the CIA and the Pentagon, he has ample motive for launching a new war.
While the Democrats’ exclusive focus on Trump’s failure to pursue a sufficiently bellicose policy against Russia and prosecute the war for regime change in Syria has allowed the US president to absurdly posture as an opponent of war, the reality is that he has overseen a staggering increase in military spending designed to prepare for “great power” confrontations, particularly with China.
Meanwhile, whatever his political pretense, Trump has done nothing to end any of the wars in the Middle East. While he has ordered US troops to pull back, allowing the Turkish invasion, none of them have been withdrawn from Syria.

With the latest buildup of US forces in Saudi Arabia, Washington is preparing, behind the backs of the working class, to launch a catastrophic military conflict with Iran. The most urgent task posed by these developments is the building of a global antiwar movement led by the working class. This movement must be armed with a socialist and internationalist program to unify working people in the United States, Europe and the Middle East in a common struggle against imperialist war and its source, the capitalist system.


 TRUMP AND THE MURDERING 9-11 MUSLIM SAUDIS…
Why is the Swamp Keeper and his family of parasites up their ar$es??


WHAT WILL TRUMP AND HIS PARASITIC FAMILY DO FOR MONEY???

JUST ASK THE SAUDIS!


JOHN DEAN: Not so far. This has been right by the letter of the special counsel’s charter. He’s released the document. What I’m looking for is relief and understanding that there’s no witting or unwitting likelihood that the President is an agent of Russia. That’s when I’ll feel comfortable, and no evidence even hints at that. We don’t have that yet. We’re still in the process of unfolding the report to look at it. And its, as I say, if [Attornery General William Barr] honors his word, we’ll know more soon.

“Our entire crony capitalist system, Democrat and 

Republican alike, has become a kleptocracy 

approaching par with third-world hell-holes.  This 

is the way a great country is raided by its elite.” ---

- Karen McQuillan AMERICAN THINKER


PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES DONALD TRUMP: Pathological liar, swindler, con man, huckster, golfing cheat, charity foundation fraudster, tax evader, adulterer, porn whore chaser and servant of the Saudis dictators

THE TRUMP FAMILY FOUNDATION SLUSH FUND…. Will they see jail?
VISUALIZE REVOLUTION!.... We know where they live!
“Underwood is a Democrat and is seeking millions of dollars in penalties. She wants Trump and his eldest children barred from running other charities.”


Opinion: Trump And Pompeo Have Enabled A Saudi Cover-Up Of The Khashoggi Killing

October 2, 201911:45 AM ET
AARON DAVID MILLER
RICHARD SOKOLSKY
In the weeks following the death of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, President Trump spent more time praising Saudi Arabia as a very important ally than he did reacting to the killing.
Hasan Jamali/AP
Aaron David Miller (@aarondmiller2) is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a former State Department Middle East analyst, adviser and negotiator in Republican and Democratic administrations. He is the author most recently of the End of Greatness: Why America Can't Have (and Doesn't Want) Another Great President.
Richard Sokolsky, a nonresident senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, worked in the State Department for six different administrations and was a member of the secretary of state's Office of Policy Planning from 2005 to 2015.


It has been a year since Saudi journalist and Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi entered Saudi Arabia's Consulate in Istanbul where he was slain and dismembered. There is still no objective or comprehensive Saudi or American accounting of what occurred, let alone any real accountability.
The Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman's admission in a recent CBS interview that he takes "full responsibility," while denying foreknowledge of the killing or that he ordered it, sweeps under the rug the lengths to which the Saudis have gone to obscure the truth about their involvement in the killing and cover-up.
The Saudi campaign of obfuscation, denial and cover-up would never have gotten off the ground had it not been for the Trump administration's support over the past year. The president and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo not only refused to distance themselves from the crown prince, known by his initials MBS, but also actively worked to relegitimize him. The Saudis killed Khashoggi but Trump acquiesced in the cover-up and worked hard to protect the U.S.-Saudi relationship and soften the crown prince's pariah status. In short, without Trump, the attempted makeover — such as it is — would not have been possible.
The Saudis killed Khashoggi but Trump acquiesced in the cover-up and worked hard to protect the U.S.-Saudi relationship and soften the crown prince's pariah status.
Weak administration response
The administration's weak and feckless response to Khashoggi's killing was foreshadowed a year before it occurred. In May 2017, in an unusual break with precedent, Trump visited Saudi Arabia on his inaugural presidential trip; gave his son-in-law the authority to manage the MBS file, which he did with the utmost secrecy; and made it unmistakably clear that Saudi money, oil, arm purchases and support for the administration's anti-Iranian and pro-Israeli policies would elevate the U.S.-Saudi "special relationship" to a new level.
Predictably, therefore, the administration's reaction to Khashoggi's killing was shaped by a desire to manage the damage and preserve the relationship. In the weeks following Khashoggi's death, Trump spent more time praising Saudi Arabia as a very important ally, especially as a purchaser of U.S. weapons and goods, than he did reacting to the killing. Trump vowed to get to the bottom of the Khashoggi killing but focused more on defending the crown prince, saying this was another example of being "guilty before being proven innocent."
Those pledges to investigate and impose accountability would continue to remain hollow. Over the past year, Trump and Pompeo have neither criticized nor repudiated Saudi actions that have harmed American interests in the Middle East. Two months after Khashoggi's death, the administration, in what Pompeo described as an "initial step," imposed sanctions on 17 Saudi individuals implicated in the killing. But no others have been forthcoming, and the visa restrictions that were imposed are meaningless because none of the sanctioned Saudis would be foolish enough to seek entry into the United States.
What's more, the administration virtually ignored a congressional resolution imposing sanctions on the Saudis for human rights abuses and vetoed another bipartisan resolution that would have ended U.S. military assistance to Saudi Arabia's inhumane military campaign in Yemen.
The Saudis opened a trial in January of 11 men implicated in the killing, but the proceedings have been slow and secretive, leading the United Nations' top human rights expert to declare that "the trial underway in Saudi Arabia will not deliver credible accountability." Despite accusations that the crown prince's key adviser Saud al-Qahtani was involved in the killing, he's still advising MBS, has not stood trial and will likely escape punishment. A year later, there are still no reports of convictions or serious punishment.
Legitimizing Mohammed bin Salman
The Trump administration has not only given the crown prince a pass on the Khashoggi killing, but it has also worked assiduously to remove his pariah status and rehabilitate his global image. Barely two months after the 2018 slaying, Trump was exchanging pleasantries with the crown prince at the Group of 20 summit in Buenos Aires and holding out prospects of spending more time with him. Then this past June, at the G-20 in Osaka, Japan, Trump sang his praises while dodging questions about the killing. "It's an honor to be with the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, a friend of mine, a man who has really done things in the last five years in terms of opening up Saudi Arabia," Trump said.
And you can bet that when Saudi Arabia hosts the G-20, scheduled to be held in its capital of Riyadh in November 2020, the Trump administration will be smiling as its rehab project takes another step in its desired direction.
What the U.S. should have done
Trump has failed to impose any serious costs or constraints on Saudi Arabia for the killing of a U.S. newspaper columnist who resided in Virginia or for the kingdom's aggressive policies, from Yemen to Qatar. In the wake of the Khashoggi killing, the administration should have made it unmistakably clear, both publicly and privately, that it expected a comprehensive and credible accounting and investigation. It should have suspended high-level contacts and arms sales with the kingdom for a period of time. And to make the point, the administration should have supported at least one congressional resolution taking the Saudis to task, in addition to triggering the Magnitsky Act, which would have required a U.S. investigation; a report to Congress; and sanctions if warranted.
Back to business as usual
The dark stain of the crown prince's apparent involvement in Khashoggi's death will not fade easily. But for Trump and Pompeo, it pales before the great expectations they still maintain for the kingdom to confront and contain their common enemy, Iran, as well as support the White House's plan for Middle East peace, defeat jihadists in the region and keep the oil spigot open.
Most of these goals are illusory. Saudi Arabia is a weak, fearful and unreliable ally. The kingdom has introduced significant social and cultural reforms but has imposed new levels of repression and authoritarianism. Its reckless policies toward Yemen and Qatar have expanded, not contracted, opportunities for Iran, while the Saudi military has demonstrated that, even after spending billions to buy America's most sophisticated weapons, it still can't defend itself without American help.
Meanwhile, recent attacks on critical Saudi oil facilities that the U.S. blames on Iran have helped rally more American and international support for the kingdom.
When it comes to the U.S.-Saudi relationship and the kingdom's callous reaction to Khashoggi's killing, the president and his secretary of state have been derelict in their duty: They have not only failed to advance American strategic interests but also undermined America's values in the process.


The U.S. Military is Sending Thousands of Troops and Even B-1 Bombers into Saudi Arabia (To Counter Iran)

The National InterestNovember 3, 2019
On October 6, around fifty U.S. commandos in northeastern Syria tasked with hunting down ISIS forces were withdrawn from territory near the Turkish border controlled by the Kurdish-Arab SDF faction.
The U.S. withdrawal was a prerequisite for a Turkish attack against the SDF which subsequently took place. The remaining hundreds of U.S. forces elsewhere in northeastern Syria were endangered in the crossfire and had to be withdrawn a few days later.
The U.S. withdrawal was post-hoc justified on the basis that they were no longer needed in the Middle East and it was time to “bring the troops home.” 
But in the weeks since, the United States has deployed over 3,000 more troops to the Middle East—including hundreds of National Guardsmen in Syria, and thousands of soldiers and airmen deployed to Saudi Arabia.
While a companion article looks at the deployment of a mechanized battalion to defend an oil field in southeastern Syria, this second part looks at the rapid buildup of U.S. forces in the wealthy Kingdom in response to intensifying clashes with Iran following the United State’s withdrawal from a nuclear deal with Tehran.
Return to the Kingdom
The deployments to Saudi Arabia marks a dramatic turn around from sixteen years earlier in 2003, when Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld pulled out thousands of U.S. troops. Their presence had long been cited as a factor radicalizing Muslims across the planet who objected to the presence of foreign troops so close to the holy city of Mecca.
Apparently, these concerns have since faded, despite political headwinds from a U.S. Congress angered by Saudi Arabia’s grisly murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in its consulate in Istanbul.
The buildup has been prompted by Iranian harassment of shipping in the Persian Gulf, the shootdown of U.S. surveillance drone over the Persian Gulf in June, and a drone and missile attack on Saudi oil refineries in September that was almost certainly of Iranian origin but which Yemeni rebels took credit for.
First, following the loss of drones in June, that the Defense Department announced it was doubling troop deployment to the Kingdom from 500 to 1,000 personnel.

No comments: