Showing posts with label Obama madness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama madness. Show all posts

Saturday, September 8, 2018

Washington Examiner: Obama Prosecuted Staff Leakers, Gave Lie-Detector Tests, ‘Paranoid’....Stalin and Hitler were also paranoid!

Washington Examiner: Obama Prosecuted Staff Leakers, Gave Lie-Detector Tests, ‘Paranoid’



Former President Barack Obama delivers a speech at as rally for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Lt. Gov., Ralph Northam, in Richmond, Va., Thursday, Oct. 19, 2017.
AP Photo/Steve Helber

Paul Bedard writes in the Washington Examiner about a report from the Committee to Protect Journalists laying out the Obama administration’s “paranoid” attacks on the media and leakers, including the use of lie-detector tests on its own staffers:

Should President Trump need a model to use to track down leakers inside his administration like the “anonymous” insider who challenged his authority in a New York Times op-ed, he need go no further back than the Obama administration that prosecuted leakers and shutout the media.
According to reports at the time from even New York Times journalists, no administration was tougher on leakers and punishing to the media than Obama’s, a saga reinforced by reporters who have called Trump’s team more forthcoming.
Criticism of Obama’s attacks on the media and leakers did not just come in tweets and TV appearances by journalists but in an official report from the Committee to Protect Journalists, authored by former Washington Post Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr.
“This is the most closed, control freak administration I’ve ever covered,” said David E. Sanger, veteran chief Washington correspondent of The New York Times, in the report.
USA Today said of the report, it “portrays an administration gripped by strict policies about information flow and paranoid about leaks across all executive branch departments.”
It detailed prosecutions and even the use of lie-detectors on staffers. Some have encouraged Trump to use lie-detector tests on his staff, something he has so far ignored.
Read the rest of this story here.

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

The history of how Obama and the Democrats created the Syrian genocide and refugee situation.

January 31, 2017
President Obama’s Genocide

By Ben Voth

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was released from Iraqi prison custody in 2009, shortly after President Obama came to power largely
upon a political promise to end U.S. military involvement in Iraq. Baghdadi was captured in February 2004 by U.S. forces and had been involved in extensive radical activities including kidnappings of many individuals and ransom activities. Under Saddam he had been involved in radical Islamic sects, earning him extra attention from the Baathist government before U.S. forces arrived. Since the premature departure of American forces led by President Obama, Baghdadi rose quickly to power among Islamic supremacists. By 2010, he was acknowledged as the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. By 2014, his genocidal fantasy with the new moniker of ISIS was already killing 1,000 Iraqis a month in car bombings and various supremacist terrorist acts designed to kill the innocent while attracting more fanatical followers to the idealized task of re-creating the Islamic Caliphate.
ISIS spread across Iraq and Syria and seized U.S. military supplies as it institutionalized savage genocidal policies across the region. Everything from the sale of oil to human organs helped fund this genocidaire’s radical nihilism that was designed to swallow up the entire world if enough allegiance could be gained. Spectacular ‘deaths as text’ filled the internet with videos of people being burned alive, drowned, crucified, thrown off buildings, and an endless quest for more shocking and vivid betrayals of human dignity. ISIS managed to kill 1,200 people outside of its locus of control in Syria and Iraq. Though President Bush predicted in his State of the Union message of 2007 that a premature exit from Iraq would lead to precisely this scenario, the Obama administration continually maintained that one of its most important successes was withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq. More than 30,000 people were killed by ISIS -- mostly Muslims but many Christians and Yazidis as well. Christians and Yazidis were begrudgingly recognized as specific genocide targets in 2016 by the U.S. State Department, but the Obama administration did not prioritize their escape to places such as the United States. The refusal to protect the Yazidis was in some sense ideological payback for the fierce support Kurdish groups gave to the U.S. invasion of Iraq since 2002 to the present. In fact, President Obama mocked such religious preferences for the Christians and Yazidis as “Un-American” in 2015:
“When I hear political leaders suggesting that there would be a religious test for which a person who’s fleeing from a war-torn country is admitted, when some of those folks themselves come from families who benefited from protection when they were fleeing political persecution -- that’s shameful, That’s not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion.”
Of course, that is precisely the kind of standard that was necessary to protect Jews from Nazi Germany and it was the standard of military action in Bosnia for NATO to protect Muslims in the mid-1990s over the objections of the United Nations. Moreover, Obama’s misinterpretation of humanitarian asylum norms gives preference to perpetrators of genocide who control public discourse. Obama’s words help prevent Christians, who make up ten percent of Syria’s population, from escaping the genocidal hell on earth created by ISIS. Samantha Power, who some say wrote the book on America and genocide, did not undo that policy argued by President Obama in her role as UN Ambassador. She did have time to recently ask the Russian government if they had any “shame” in their efforts to stop ISIS.
There were three times as many deaths in Syria since 2012 as there were in Iraq from 2003 to 2009. Yet, there were no massive marches in the U.S. and Europe against this violence as there were during the Iraq war. The anti-war movement has never been against war. It is against the United States military and the Israeli military. There have been nearly 70,000 deaths in Iraq since 2009 and the abrupt U.S. military withdrawal. These death tolls were largely ignored by the media in an effort to bolster the false perception that the Iraq withdrawal was a success. These deaths lay squarely upon the Obama administration and an intellectual
page1image37040 page1image37200 page1image37360 page1image37520

culture that bolsters the idea that American assertiveness in the world is the root of all evil. Terrorism is a rational response to the reality that America hates Muslims. That pathology is believed among some in the U.S. and among the supremacists in Iraq and Syria. The parsing of terrorism data to create domestic ‘lightning is more likely to kill you than terrorism’ is direct jingoistic dehumanization of victims living outside the United States and part of a larger intellectual pathology of suggesting that America is an evil hegemon bent on harming innocent Muslims.
Baghdadi is a genocidaire who envisions killing every person on the planet who disagrees with his Islamic supremacist vision. He never should have been released from the Iraqi prison in 2009 so he could create ISIS. His rhetoric and actions combined with the callous inaction and deception of the Obama administration created conditions of genocide in Iraq and Syria. Obama’s chief expert on genocide Samantha Power, who mocked the U.S. government in her 2002 book, must now gaze upon hundreds of thousands of lives lost in genocidal activities during her leadership. The thesis that American military withdrawal from Iraq would defuse the motives for terrorism has proven terribly false. The current effort to demonize the new immigration orders for Syria that would reprioritize entry and allow genocide victims to escape this age of genocide is diabolical and we ought not be silent.

Ben Voth is an associate professor of Corporate Communication and Public Affairs and Director of Debate at Southern Methodist University. He is the author of The Rhetoric of Genocide: Death as a Text and co-author with Robert Denton of Social Fragmentation and the Decline of American Democracy

Friday, January 6, 2017

Another bit of Obama delusional, pathological fantasizing.

Obama responds to Chicago torture videoby saying race relations are not worsening

Brandon Morse (http://www.theblaze.com/author/bmorse/) Jan 5, 2017 10:00 pm

President Barack Obama pauses as he speaks during an Armed Forces Full Honor Farewell Review for him, Wednesday, Jan. 4, 2017, at Conmy Hall, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, Va. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
During an interview with CBS Chicago’s Jay Levine (http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2017/01/05/obama-calls-facebook-torture-video-despicable-but- optimistic-about-race-relations-in-u-s/), President Obama was asked about race relations during his time as POTUS. Levine made the comment that Obama must feel disappointed in the fact that racial tensions have gone downhill. Obama, however, disagreed with this assessment, and said that the only reason we think this is because of social media.
page1image7424 page1image7584 page1image7912 page1image8072 page1image8232
Obama is referring to the horrible live streamed Facebook video of a black woman named Britanny Herring and her three friends torturing a special needs man (http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/01/04/chicago-foursome-in-custody-after-live-streaming- kidnapping-and-torturing-trump-supporter/) because he allegedly voted for Donald Trump.
“I think the overall trajectory of race relations in this country is actually very positive,” continued Obama. “It doesn’t mean that all racial problems have gone away. It means that we have the capacity to get better.”
Watch below:

page2image5760 page2image5920 page2image6080
“In part because we see visuals of racial tensions, violence and so forth because of smart phones and the Internet,” the president said.
“What we have seen as surfacing, I think, are a lot of problems that have been there a long time.
“Whether it’s tensions between police and communities, hate crimes of the despicable sort that has just now recently surfaced on Facebook. (http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2017/01/05/torture- hate-crime-facebook-live-video/)
page2image10856 page2image11016 page2image11176 page2image11336

Many may disagree with Obama, as groups such as Black Lives Matter have gained traction throughout the country, which has a bad reputation for elevating people such as Malik Shabazz, who is known to advocate for race wars in America (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualprofile.asp?indid=2044). It’s been reported that members also teach their students (http://www.mediaite.com/online/thank-you-black-lives- matter-teacher-is-now-lecturing-students-that-all-whites-are-racist/) that white people are inherently evil, and chapters on college campuses have demanded segregated dorm rooms (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/09/06/calif-university-latest-to-establish-black-only- housing.html) for blacks only. During riots, rioters would intentionally target whites (http://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2016/08/15/milwaukee-protestors-targeted-attacked- whites-riot/) for assault and theft.
On the flip side, race relations have deteriorated to the point where white nationalism (http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/11/21/watch-prominent-alt-righters-salute-trumps-victory- with-chants-of-seig-heil/) has also begun to see an increase in activity.
If Obama is correct, and race relations are improving under his watch, he may have to go further in explaining this to America at large. 

Wednesday, January 4, 2017

Obama's legacy: Debt grows by $1 Trillion in 2016

U.S. Debt Grows by a Trillion Dollars in 2016

The latest numbers from the U.S. Treasury say the United State’s federal debt has risen by a trillion dollars in President Obama’s final year in office, while Republicans controlled both the House and Senate.

The debt at the end of 2016 was $19,976,826,951,047.80, a one-year increase of $1,054,647,941,626.91.
To put the number in perspective, in order to spend one trillion dollars, you would have to spend ten million dollars a day, every day for 273 years.
The new number continue the rising spiral of debt during the Obama administration. As CNS News reports:
During President Barack Obama’s time in office the federal debt has increased by $9,349,949,902,134.72—rising from  $10,626,877,048,913.08 on Jan. 20, 2009, the day of Obama’s inauguration, to $19,976,826,951,047.80 on the last day of 2016.
That equals $78,553.84 for each of the 119,026,000 households in the country as of September.
President-elect Trump spoke out against the debt during the election, and made proposals such as the controversial idea of buying back bonds at a discount rate.

Friday, December 16, 2016

Project much? Mr. & Mrs. O are delusional. Someone Tell them they are not the embodiment of America and not royalty!

Michelle Obama: The nation is experiencing ‘what not having hope feels like’

 
Michelle Obama: The nation is experiencing ‘what not having hope feels like’
Image source: YouTube 

First lady Michelle Obama, during an interview with Oprah Winfrey, said that the nation, post-election, is experiencing “what not having hope feels like.”
In a preview clip of the full interview, Winfrey asked Obama if her husband delivered on his promise of “hope” for the American people.
“Yes, I do,” she replied. “Because we feel the difference now.”
Obama, a sharp critic of Trump on the campaign trail, said the nation is currently feeling “what not having hope feels like.”
“You know, hope is necessary,” she said. “It’s a necessary concept, and Barack didn’t just talk about hope because he thought it was just a nice slogan to get votes. I mean, he and I and so many believe that if you — what else do you have if you don’t have hope?” She continued:
What do you give your kids if you can’t give them hope? You know, our children respond to crises the way they see us respond. You know, it’s like the toddler that bumps his head on the table, and they look up at you to figure out whether it hurts. And if you’re like, oh, my God, they’re crying. But if you’re like, “You know what, babe, it’s OK,” and I feel that Barack has been that for the nation in ways that people will come to appreciate.
She said her husband’s presidency meant “having a grown-up in the White House who can say to you in times of crisis and turmoil, ‘Hey, it’s gonna be OK.’ Let’s remember the good things that we have. Let’s look at the future. Let’s look at all the things that we’re building. All of this is important for our kids to stay focused and to feel like their work isn’t in vain. That their lives aren’t in vain.”
Winfrey’s full interview with the first lady will air Monday on CBS.

Obama claims Russian hacking stopped after he told Putin to ‘cut it out’...so, which is it?



Obama claims Russian hacking stopped after he told Putin to ‘cut it out’

 
Obama claims Russian hacking stopped after he told Putin to ‘cut it out’
President Barack Obama speaks during a news conference in the briefing room of the White House in Washington on Friday. (AP/Pablo Martinez Monsivais) 

President Barack Obama claimed Friday that Russian interference in the U.S. election ended after he told Russian President Vladimir Putin in September to “cut it out.”
The Russian intrusion into the emails of Democratic National Committee staffers had happened before Obama met with Putin — and Obama said that he told the other world leader to make the cyberattacks stop.
Particularly, Obama was concerned that the Russians could hack into the actual election process itself and effect the outcome, but that didn’t happen, he added.

“In early September when I saw President Putin in China, I felt that the most effective way to ensure that that didn’t happen was to talk to him directly and tell him to cut it out and [that] there were going to be serious consequences if he didn’t,” Obama said at his end-of-the-year press conference Friday before heading to Hawaii for the holidays.
“And in fact, we did not see further tampering of the election process,” Obama said.

Monday, November 21, 2016

A sign of Obama's hatred of America including the drug ravaged inner cities.

- WND - http://www.wnd.com -

DHS may leave known smuggling route into U.S. unprotected



An active smuggling route at the U.S. southern border with Mexico will be largely abandoned by the government at the end of this month, an agent with U.S. Border Patrol has informed WND.
The so-called “S2 route” runs along a two-lane county road through a remote area. More than 900 illegal immigrants have been apprehended on the route over the past year, said the agent, who works out of the USBP’s El Centro sector but asked not to be identified.
“For basically the last year we’ve been out there covering that route. Now we were told by the end of this month we’re not going to cover it anymore,” said the agent, who said he has personally patrolled the route in the past. “Nobody is going to be on this road come Oct. 1.
“Maybe there’s something being planned that I’m not aware of,” the agent told WND. “But I asked a supervisor what the plans are for this smuggling route and he said ‘I’m not hearing anything.’ They know this is a major route but so far I’m not hearing anything.”

WND contacted Jonathan Pacheco in the public affairs office of the El Centro border patrol sector to see if he could confirm the agent’s report.
“In regards to the information that you received from another agent, it could have been misinterpreted,” Pacheco said in an email. “What we are absolutely safe in saying is that we have always, and will continue to always patrol Highway S-2.”
The border agent who gave the information to WND rejected Pacheco’s statement as “blatantly false.”
“They may send someone over there intermittently but it will not be covered on a regular basis, unless they change the policy between now and Oct. 1,” he said.
Mexicans, Central Americans and Chinese
He said more than 900 “mostly Mexicans” have been arrested trying to sneak through the remote border crossing over the past year “but we have even encountered Chinese and of course there’s always some Central Americans.”
“With that checkpoint down it’s just going to become easy for them to load up and take that route,” the agent said. “They’re loading up on Interstate 8 which is the major east-west route from California to Arizona. A lot are coming across either into the eastern San Diego area or the El Centro or Calexico area.”
Two to four agents per shift have been placed on patrol in the S2 Route, he said.
“It’s a two-lane road, remote, it comes up from Interstate 8 and it winds through the desert mountains of eastern San Diego County, then drops out about 40 miles off interstate 8 into Highway 78, and from there they can take it over west to more of the main part of San Diego,” the agent said.
The U.S. southern border is divided into sections, which DHS calls “sectors,” and the S2 Route is right between the El Centro and San Diego sectors. Within these sectors are various border patrol stations. The Temecula Station is officially responsible for the S2 Route.
Temecula is the same station from which the government tried to transfer busloads of Guatemalans in the summer of 2014 only to meet citizen protesters in nearby Murietta, California. The protesters physically blocked the buses from entering their community.
As recently as July a human smuggler driving an SUV crashed along a remote area of S2 while carrying several illegal aliens into the country, the Los Angeles Times reported. One of the aliens was killed when the SUV rolled over and another seriously injured by the smuggler, who was driving, left the scene of the accident on foot, only to be later found by border agents.
‘Nothing would surprise me’

Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies for the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies, said she had not heard about the route being abandoned but “Nothing would surprise me in this administration.”
“That is concerning. I can’t think of any reason why you would stop trying to apprehend people on a known smuggling route, in an operational plan that’s been successful like that,” Vaughan told WND. “If there is intelligence on it then what would be the alternative to cover this?”
“Oct. 1 is the beginning of the new fiscal year so that’s significant,” Vaughan said. “I wonder if they are pulling resources to handle all the Central Americans who are coming in, because that’s been ramping up again, mostly through Texas.”
She said word will spread fast if the S2 Route is being largely ignored by the Border Patrol.
“There’s no doubt that people around the world now know the best route into the U.S. is to pay a smuggler to take them through the southwest border,” she said. “We are definitely starting to see more and more people coming from countries all over the world, not just Mexico and Central America. That’s because of the catch and release policy. People know that once you’re in the U.S. you’re home free, you will be given a court date, even if you don’t show up for that court date, and if you’re not a convicted felon you’re going to be able to stay for at least an undefined period of time.”
She said the national security implications are huge.
“When we leave routes like that open it presents more of a concern for terrorists or others from a criminal organization,” Vaughan said.
“The smugglers know what the Border Patrol is doing, sometimes better than the agents themselves,” she added. “They have very sophisticated surveillance equipment and spotters to watch what is going on, they pay them to do it, so they’re going to figure this out pretty quickly.”
Unofficially, El Centro has been patrolling the route for over year, the agent said.
“It’s not going to be covered consistently, maybe some occasional agents from Temecula, but that’s a big drop-off from what we have been doing,” he said. “But it’s just foolishness, irresponsible, to let that major route go unprotected.
“I don’t know where exactly it’s coming from, this order, but D.C. has got to know about.
“It’s like the Mississippi River and you have a small leak in the dyke with people working on patching it up and all of a sudden they pull the patch and the city overflows with water.”

Thursday, November 3, 2016

Iran threatens to shelve nuclear deal at “museum” if U.S. is non-compliant: Government official or, we need more money to kill your soldiers.

Iran threatens to shelve nuclear deal at “museum” if U.S. is non-compliant: Government official

    Salami Hossein

    A lieutenant commander within Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps is celebrating the 37th anniversary of the U.S. Embassy takeover in Tehran by threatening that if the United States does not keep its end of the nuclear deal, Iran will render the deal void, or “send the deal to (the) Museum,” according to Iranian media sources.
    "The Iranian nation is bound to its nuclear commitments, but this commitment is not a one-way street," Brigadier General Hossein Salami said at a commemoration of the Embassy takeover and subsequent hostage crisis in Tehran.
    Salami spoke at a large-scale demonstration in Iran’s capital Thursday, further stating that if the U.S. fails to keep its word regarding the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), better known as the Iran nuclear deal, they will be forced to return to “square one” regarding negotiations.
    The takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Iran occurred shortly after the beginning of the Islamic Revolution in which Iran’s monarch, Shah Reza Pahlavi, was dethroned by radical mullahs. The Embassy was raided, and 52 Americans were held hostage for 444 days from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981.
    The Iran nuclear deal, or JCPOA, was an agreement reached between Tehran and the West, as represented by the nations comprising the P5+1, namely Russia, China, the U.S., Britain, France and Germany in July 2015, to “ensure that Iran’s nuclear program will be exclusively peaceful,” according to the State Department.
    The agreement was adopted in October of that year and went into effect in January 2016.
    Salami also warned that the Iranian government would also resume its nuclear activity and activate its discharged centrifuges.
    “Iranians will fight to the last moment for their rights anywhere in the world; a complete return to conditions before JCPOA is a total possibility should the US fail to attach to its commitments in implementing much-vaunted deal,” Salami said.
    Since the deal was signed, Iran has often pointed fingers at the U.S. over upholding its side of the deal, while at the same time Iran’s government has come under serious criticism regarding its financial and material support of global terror, human rights abuses, imprisonment of American, Canadian and European individuals and its ongoing involvement in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.
    Meanwhile, Germany's domestic intelligence agency reported that the Iranian regime has plans to follow a “clandestine” road to obtaining nuclear technology and paraphernalia from German companies in what the report called “a quantitatively high level,” even by international standards.
    The Associated Press discovered a secret agreement revealing that the nuclear deal would undoubtedly lift limits on Iran’s weapons program long before the deal expires in 10 years. During this time they could install thousands of centrifuges, five times more than what the regime currently has, in addition to enriching uranium faster than its current capability.
    It was later discovered that coinciding with the start of the deal in January, the U.S. airlifted $400 million in foreign currencies to Iran, and on the same day, four Americans being held in Iranian prisons were released. The State Department still denies that the money was paid as ransom for the hostages.
    Since, an Iranian American father and son, Siamak and Bagher Namazi, have recently been sentenced to 10 years in prison in Iran for allegedly “cooperating with the U.S. government against Iran.”
    Reza (Robin) Shahini, an American Iranian dual citizen has also been taken into custody during this time. Shahini traveled from San Diego to Iran to reportedly visit his ill mother when he was arrested. Last week The Foreign Desk reported that Shahini was sentenced to 18 years for his activities on Facebook and for cooperating with a foreign government, referring to the U.S.

    Monday, October 24, 2016

    Wikileaks: Soros Memo Accused Obama of Fueling Radical Islam to Push TPP.

    A March 2016 email published Monday by the organization Wikileaks reveals that George Soros, in anticipation of a meeting with Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, requested Podesta read a memo accusing President Barack Obama of emboldening radical Islam in Malaysia in order to get the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP) passed.

    Podesta received an email in March 2016 from Soros spokesperson Michael Vachon. “I have attached a memo on TPP and Malaysia, as it may come up when you see George and Alex [Soros, George’s son],” he writes. “In general I think George is more interested in talking about policy than the campaign per se, though I can’t imagine you won’t spend some time on politics.”


    Podesta later forwards the attached memo in question to another Clinton campaign official. Subsequent emails seem to indicate Podesta met George and Alex Soros for dinner on March 15 of this year.


    The attached memo, titled “The TPP and Malaysia’s Corruption Crisis,” argues that President Obama has wrongfully chosen to support the government of Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, accused of a variety of outrageous abuses of power and responsible for the dynamic growth of radical Islam in the southeast Asian nation.


     


    The memo appears to have been authored by John Pang, a board member at Soros’ Open Society Foundation. Pang writes that Najib is “a poster boy for the 21st century kleptocracy” who has used “a racial supremacist ideology that is collapsing under the weight of corruption” to perpetuate himself in power. Najib, he argues, has created “a Malay-Islamic state in which Sunni Islam’s supremacy is indivisible from the political and legal supremacy of the Malay race.” The result is a country in which “1 in 10 Muslims there had favorable views of ISIS and that a 53% majority were in favor of implementing Hudud, the Islamic penal code.”


    Pang writes that, specifically, Malaysia under Najib has enacted laws prohibiting non-Muslims from using the word “Allah,” banned Bibles in the Malay language, and seen thousands of its citizens leave Malaysia to join the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. At home, Najib has “raised street demonstrations threatening violence against the nation’s Chinese and Christian minorities and fanned anti-Semitism,” Pang writes.


    The more prominent allegations of corruption against Najib, the memo argues, the more he has embraced radical Islam.


     


    Malaysia is a key player in the passage of TPP, however, which is nominally a measure to attempt to court China’s major trading partners to do more business with the United States.


    “The Obama administration has made heavy and often personal bets on the leadership of Prime Minister Najib Razak as a partner in the region in the ‘pivot to Asia’ and the struggle against Islamic radicalism,” the memo argues. “These priorities have been undercut by being subsumed under the administration’s aggressive pursuit of the TPP.”


    Since Najib assumed power, Malaysia has been home to some of the most outrageous violations of human rights in the name of Islam in the world. Among them are the arrest of a rapper for using the word “Allah” in a rap song, the arrest of a teenage girl for hugging a pop singer in public, protests against another teenage girl for hugging a dog (dogs are considered “unclean” in Islam), the banning of the phrase “hot dog” as it confused Muslims into thinking they were eating dog meat, widespread protests against Cadbury chocolate eggs, and the arrests of couples celebrating St. Valentine’s Day.


    Malaysia has been refused FIFA soccer hosting duties over refusing to let Israeli nationals into the country, and its government has admitted to monitoring liberal Muslim “deviants” as a national security threat.


    The first successful Islamic State attack in Malaysia occurred in July 2016, and targeted a Cuban nightclub.

    Thursday, September 8, 2016

    Iran May Have Received as Much as $33.6 Billion in Cash, Gold Payments From U.S. This is what an imperial Presidency looks like.

    Iran May Have Received as Much as $33.6 Billion in Cash, Gold Payments From U.S.

    New questions emerge on several billions paid out to Iran by Obama admin

    John Kerry, left, and Javad Zarif / AP

    John Kerry, left, and Javad Zarif / AP
    BY:   
    Iran may have received an additional $33.6 billion in secret cash and gold payments facilitated by the Obama administration between 2014 and 2016, according to testimony provided before Congress by an expert on last summer’s nuclear agreement with Iran.
    Between January 2014 and July 2015, when the Obama administration was hammering out the final details of the nuclear accord, Iran was paid $700 million every month from funds that had previously been frozen by U.S. sanctions.
    A total of $11.9 billion was ultimately paid to Iran, but the details surrounding these payments remain shrouded in mystery, according to Mark Dubowitz, executive director at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
    In total, “Iran may have received as much as $33.6 billion in cash or in gold and other precious metals,” 
    Dubowitz disclosed.New questions about these payments are emerging following confirmation from top Obama administration officials on Thursday that it was forced to pay Iran $1.7 billion in cash prior to the release of several U.S. hostages earlier this year. The administration insisted that cash had to be used for this payment.
    Top administration officials were adamant that the cash payments were the best way to ensure that Iran got immediate access to this money due to its ongoing difficulty accessing international funds still sanctioned by the West.
    Lawmakers and others are now pressing the administration to disclose how a slew of other payments to Iran were made in the years leading up to the final nuclear accord.
    “In July, the Associated Press cited U.S. officials who estimated that Iran ‘brought home less than $20 billion.’ Were these funds repatriated to Tehran in cash or in gold and precious metals? Through the formal financial system? Or through some combination?” Dubowitz asked in his testimony before the House Financial Services Committee.
    “The administration should also clarify if the $20 billion dollars is inclusive of the $11.9 billion in [Joint Plan of Action] funds, or if the $20 billion was in addition to the $11.9 billion,” he said. “Either way, it is important to understand how funds were sent. The worst-case scenario here is that Iran may have received as much as $33.6 billion in cash or in gold and other precious metals.”
    At least some of this money was likely sent in cash and other assets, according to Dubowitz.
    The Obama administration was forced to disclose on Thursday that current sanctions and banking restrictions prohibited it from transferring funds to Iran via electronic methods.
    The cash payment of $1.7 billion earlier this year was the easiest way to ensure Iran got immediate access to the money, according to these officials.
    “Iran had to have it in cash,” Paul Ahern, assistant general counsel for enforcement and intelligence at the Treasury Department, told lawmakers. “Iran was very aware of the difficulties it would face in accessing and using the funds if they were in any other form than cash, even after the lifting of sanctions.”
    A cash delivery “was the most reliable way that they received the funds in a timely manner and it was the manner preferred by the relative foreign banks,” Ahren said.
    Given the situation, it is likely that the multiple past payments to Iran were conducted in a similar fashion, according to Dubowitz.
    “If the White House could only send cash to Iran from the start of the JPOA period through the Tribunal payment that could amount to a grant total of 33.6 billion,” he said. “Did any of this money go through the formal financial system? If so, the administration is not being truthful about the 1.7 billion. If many billions arrived in Iran on pallets [of cash] this would be a pretty astounding revelation.”
    Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon official and expert on rogue regimes, said that cash payments of this nature are “highly irregular.”
    “There’s no reason it needed to be paid now. After all, successive administrations, both Democratic and Republican, have delayed payments so as to avoid funding Iranian terrorism,” Rubin said. “Likewise, if the United States freezes accounts linked to al Qaeda or Hamas, releasing it and saying, ‘It’s their money anyway,’ would not be a tenable explanation. Cash payments are highly irregular.”
    The Iranians have been clear that they “perceived the payment to be a ransom” despite the administration’s protestations, Rubin explained.
    “Not only has the delivery of the millions of dollars been perceived as a ransom, provided as an incentive to seize more hostages …. but because the money was delivered in cash the payment bolstered the strength of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and augmented its ability to finance and conduct terrorism,” he said.