[PJ] Former Assistant FBI Director James Kallstrom unloaded on James Comey, Robert Mueller, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama Thursday, charging that major crimes "20 times bigger than Watergate" are being swept under the rug while Attorney General Jeff Sessions "is in a coma."
Appearing on Fox News' Varney & Co., Kallstrom told the host that it "was obvious to anybody that knows anything" that former President Barack Obama was not going to let James Comey indict Clinton.
"It turns out -- unfortunately -- he was a political hack," Kallstrom said flatly. "I think he maybe started out in an honorable way. His opinion of himself is sky high -- just an unbelievable guy with just an arrogance about him.... It got him in trouble because I think he thought he was Superman and he found out that he wasn’t."
Kallstrom blamed the Clintons for Comey's descent into hackery.
"The dogs are always going to bite your heels when you’re dealing with the Clintons," he explained. "Look how long the public, the American people have been dealing with the crime syndicate known as the Clinton Foundation... just look at what's in the public domain. The Clintons have been taking advantage of their stations in life for so long."
"Back in '95, '96 -- somewhere around there -- Bill Clinton let our guidance technology for our ICBM missiles go to China. Things like this that are very devastating," he pointed out.
And then a few years down the road, "we sell 20 percent of our uranium," Kalstrom added, referencing the corrupt Uranium One deal that routed millions of Russian dollars to the Clinton Foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on the federal government’s Committee on Foreign Investment.
Kallstrom also questioned why Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was appointed to his position.
[Wash Times] A federal judge tossed a lawsuit Thursday that would have pushed the State Department and FBI to do more to try to track down Hillary Clinton’s emails, ruling the government has done all it reasonably could to locate the former secretary of state’s messages.
Two watchdog groups, Judicial Watch and Cause of Action, had sued in 2015 demanding the government recover all of Mrs. Clinton’s emails, saying she violated open-records laws by not preserving her messages.
U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg, though, said the FBI did what it could, and did manage to recover thousands of messages Mrs. Clinton didn’t return herself.
"Those efforts went well beyond the mine-run search for missing federal records ... and were largely successful, save for some emails sent during a two-month stretch. Even then, the FBI pursued every imaginable avenue to recover the missing emails," wrote Judge Boasberg, an Obama appointee to the court.
Originally, the case had been dismissed as moot, but last year the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia reversed that finding, ordering the government to "shake loose a few more emails."
#1
James Emanuel "Jeb" Boasberg (born February 20, 1963)[2] is a United States District Judge on the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, also serving as a Judge on the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court; and former associate judge on the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.
#2
“The Court of Appeals may have asked the Government to ‘shak[e] the tree harder’ for more emails, but it never suggested that the FBI must shake every tree in every forest, without knowing whether they are fruit trees,” he wrote.
You'd almost think this judge was a part of a cover-up but naw, that can't be. I wonder what FBI director Wray says?
If any of the citizens out here violated any Federal laws, they would go to the ends of the earth to dig up info to build a case.
[Free Beacon] NBC host Megyn Kelly said the saga of a woman who flipped off President Donald Trump's motorcade spoke "uniquely to what America's all about" during an interview with her on Thursday.
A photograph of Juli Briskman flipping off Trump's motorcade last month in Virginia as she rode her bicycle went viral, particularly among people frustrated with Trump's administration. However, after she posted it to her social media accounts, she was forced to resign from her job at Akima LLC.
Briskman recounted why she decided to flip off Trump to Kelly, saying it felt "great."
Kelly noted the incident had gotten worldwide coverage.
"To me, it speaks uniquely to what America's all about. You can do that," Kelly said. "That's the beauty of a free society. Whether you love President Trump or hate him, you are allowed to tell the president how you feel about him, whether it's President Obama or President Trump. That's one of our core ideals."
#2
She is right, and so is it in our core for the company she works for to fire her...
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
11/10/2017 9:03 Comments ||
Top||
#3
It is true that her flipping off Trump is protected by the First Amendment. The government can do nothing to her. As she found out, it doesn't mean that there are no consequences.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
11/10/2017 10:29 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I believe you should be able to flip off the president, or anybody else you choose.
You should also be able to post it on FB or whatever, but that's more in the way of virtue signaling than anything else.
It's when your FB post is right there next to your employer's name proudly displayed that the problem starts...
Posted by: ed in texas ||
11/10/2017 10:38 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Whether you love President Trump or hate him, you are allowed to tell the president how you feel about him, whether it's President Obama or President Trump.
#7
Dear Megyn. It is what America is about. I'm happy she "felt great." However, actions do have consequences. And as long as you think it was worth being unemployed. Yipee for you.
#10
It's what America's all about. Just like jumping to a different channel and dissing your fans and then watching your ratings plummet. Actions have repurcussions.
#2
A question repeats ad nauseam: How do they get away with this stuff? How did gropers and pederasts run amok in our nation's media for decades without being challenged? How did a web of state operatives, lobbyists, agents, and propagandists fool so many people with disinformation for so long without being caught?
The Deep State works on the basis of blackmail an protection? Who would have thought.
#3
The ugliness is that I believe our buddies in the deep state and the media/Hollywood perverts and the academic crazies are all one in the same. This article alludes to that and I think that is the real story. The Dems have to be in this as they get a lot of money and support and air time from these loathsome creatures.
As an aside, I posted a thread here a couple of weeks ago and last week I received a reprimand for "divisiveness" interesting in that the thread was posted at home and on my personal computer using my home encrypted Wi-Fi network...
It is a testament to the wholesale moronization of our culture that there are gazillions of apparently sane people willing to take out six figures of debt they'll be paying off for decades for the privilege of being "taught" by the likes of Professor Bray. The reason "we don't look back at the Weimar Republic today and celebrate them for allowing Nazis to have their free-speech rights" is because they didn't. A decade ago, as my battles with Canada's "human rights" commissions were beginning, I lost count of the number of bien-pensants insisting that, while in theory we could permit hatemongers like Steyn to exercise their free-speech rights, next thing you know it would be jackboots on the 401. As I said way back when:
"Hateful words" can lead to "unspeakable crimes." The problem with this line is that it's ahistorical twaddle, as I've pointed out. Yet still it comes up. It did last month, during my testimony to the House of Commons justice committee, when an opposition MP mused on whether it wouldn't have been better to prohibit the publication of Mein Kampf.
"That analysis sounds as if it ought to be right," I replied. "But the problem with it is that the Weimar Republic—Germany for the 12 years before the Nazi party came to power—had its own version of Section 13 and equivalent laws. It was very much a kind of proto-Canada in its hate speech laws. The Nazi party had 200 prosecutions brought against it for anti-Semitic speech. At one point the state of Bavaria issued an order banning Hitler from giving public speeches."
And a fat lot of good it all did.
That's why "we don't look back at the Weimar Republic". If you're rube enough to sign up for Professor Bray's classes, here's more, from my book on free speech, Lights Out (personally autographed copies of which are exclusively available at the Steyn store). On page 250 I write:
This argument is offered routinely: If only there'd been "reasonable limits on the expression of hatred" seventy years ago, the Holocaust might have been prevented.
There's just one teensy-weensy problem with it: pre-Nazi Germany had such "reasonable limits." Indeed, the Weimar Republic was a veritable proto-Trudeaupia. As Alan Borovoy, Canada's leading civil libertarian, put it:
"Remarkably, pre-Hitler Germany had laws very much like the Canadian anti-hate law. Moreover, those laws were enforced with some vigour. During the 15 years before Hitler came to power, there were more than 200 prosecutions based on anti-Semitic speech. And, in the opinion of the leading Jewish organization of that era, no more than 10 per cent of the cases were mishandled by the authorities. As subsequent history so painfully testifies, this type of legislation proved ineffectual on the one occasion when there was a real argument for it."
Pick almost any leading Nazi propagandist of the Weimar era: Josef Goebbels? Theodor Fritsch? Both were prosecuted for anti-Semitism. You didn't have to threaten to kill the Jews: The publication of the statement "The Jews are our misfortune" was forbidden by court order. Der Sturmer was prosecuted dozens of times and just plain seized and destroyed on another dozen occasions. Its publisher Julius Streicher was twice gaoled. Read the whole thing at the link
#2
I lost a lot of respect for Canada when they chased Steyn out. But a nice reminder that anything with "Human Rights" or "People's Democratic Republic" in the name isn't what it sounds like.
NEW YORK (AP) ‐ While Fox News Channel has spent hours talking about Hillary Clinton and an Obama-era uranium deal in recent weeks, its news anchor Shepard Smith avoided the story entirely.
Fresh evidence that Smith is an island unto himself at the news network came in research released Thursday by the liberal watchdog group Media Matters for America. During the three weeks starting Oct. 17, Fox News spent just under 12 hours talking about the Uranium One deal, with 29 percent of that time on opinion host Sean Hannity’s prime-time show.
In recent weeks, the issue has been at the center of the nation’s partisan divide. Hannity calls it "the real Russian conspiracy," while Democrats suggest the story is used to distract from news about Robert Mueller’s investigation into President Donald Trump and ties to Russia. Conservatives contend that "mainstream" news outlets are obsessed with Mueller’s investigation.
Republicans have called for a probe into the 2010 purchase of American uranium mines by a Russian-backed company, noting some of the company’s investors had donated money to Clinton. The state department, then led by Clinton, was one of nine U.S. agencies with oversight of the deal, although she has said she wasn’t involved. Trump has said the company’s sale is a scandal on par with Watergate.
#5
His pretending to be a straight news guy when his aside comments and topic choices say otherwise has to be supported by leadership at Fox. Bedeviled by al the sexual allegations, perhaps they don't want to risk the firing of a homosexual news guy who hasn't played the gay card yet.
[DAWN] Upon the indignity of disqualification has been heaped further humiliation.
The detailed judgement dismissing the review petitions filed by Nawaz Sharif ... served two non-consecutive terms as prime minister, heads the Pakistain Moslem League (Nawaz). Noted for his spectacular corruption, the 1998 Pak nuclear test, border war with India, and for being tossed by General Musharraf, then by the courts... and his family makes for devastating reading. Not only has the court reiterated its total belief that it acted rightly to disqualify Mr Sharif for omitting to declare a nominal salary, it has also called into question the former prime minister’s character, intentions and competence.
The tone and tenor of the detailed judgement will likely leave legal purists uncomfortable, with the harsh language and condemnation often veering away from strictly legal interpretations.
It had been hoped that the Panama Papers case would lay down good law that could, because of sound legal reasoning, go on to become easily citable as sound precedent, but that is arguably not yet the case.
For Mr Sharif, however, the problems continue to mount. While his demeanour and rhetoric had suggested that he did not expect to receive a sudden reprieve in court, his path to a return to front-line politics continues to narrow.
Perhaps Mr Sharif ought to reflect on his own mistakes that have allowed a political crisis to consume the country for more than a year and a half. Once the Sharif family was enmeshed in the Panama Papers revelations, it was imperative that the then prime minister give a complete and candid account of his family’s wealth and assets.
Instead, Mr Sharif chose the path of obfuscation, evasion and delay. Neither was Mr Sharif willing to submit to political scrutiny in parliament nor was he able to provide satisfactory answers once the matter had shifted to the Supreme Court.
Mr Sharif did not appear to realise that the democratic project was at an inflection point and that his personal conduct would determine whether democracy was strengthened or weakened in the country. Even now, Mr Sharif appears unwilling to acknowledge the legal dimensions of his political troubles, having forced a return as president of the PML-N while his accountability court trial continues.
At some point, Mr Sharif will have to acknowledge that the democratic project is more important than the political fate of any given individual. If he does not, an already worrying political crisis in the country will deepen.
What Mr Sharif must surely avoid is the further introduction of person-specific legislation to help circumvent his legal troubles. Nor must the PML-N make any attempt to somehow clip the powers of the superior judiciary.
With a historic third consecutive on-schedule election less than a year away, the PML-N has an opportunity to convince the electorate that it deserves another stint in power. A fresh mandate, if the PML-N receives one, could help clear the uncertainty that has engulfed the political landscape, while failure to win re-election would render moot a debate on Mr Sharif’s political future. The paramount interest is continuity of the democratic process.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/10/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[DAWN] ANOTHER deadly attack in Quetta; yet more coppers targeted and killed. The sickening pattern of violence in Balochistan ...the Pak province bordering Kandahar and Uruzgun provinces in Afghanistan and Sistan Baluchistan in Iran. Its native Baloch propulation is being displaced by Pashtuns and Punjabis and they aren't happy about it... is too public and clear for state officials to simply try and foist blame on unnamed external actors. That a police brass hat, this time a DIG and two other coppers, could be killed near his official residence in what ought to be a high-security zone in Quetta is an utter failure of the intelligence and security apparatus. There is simply no excuse for why a jacket wallah can infiltrate the area, reach his target and detonate explosives without being identified and stopped. Quetta and the wider province have suffered violence that has ebbed and flowed too many times for the usual explanations to be tolerated. A murky security strategy in the province appears to have made accountability all but impossible. Who is responsible for the consistent lapses and why is it that the only thing that appears horribly certain in Balochistan is that more attacks will occur?
The targeting of coppers is a particularly deadly terrorist tactic. In Balochistan, where the state has been hollowed out by attacking officials over the years to discourage others from serving in the province, there is a desperate shortage of skills at all tiers of the private and public sectors. The worse that shortage is made and the more others are deterred from serving in the region, the less Balochistan will be able to reverse its abysmal socioeconomic indicators. And that will surely help consign Balochistan to many more years of deprivation and violence ‐ a cycle that the security establishment appears to have no real answer to. Without recognising that a militarised security strategy in Balochistan has failed to produce adequate results in a province that is beset by a range of security challenges, Balochistan cannot begin to find answers to a complex, layered security threat.
Perhaps now is the time for the civilian government or one of its partners to issue an urgent call for a fresh national dialogue on Balochistan. Previous attempts have achieved little, but it remains the case that only a combined civilian and military strategy affords Balochistan a chance to escape from its otherwise seemingly endless misery. The different challenges ‐ sectarianism, external interference, domestic militancy, radicalisation of parts of the population and a low-level separatist insurgency ‐ require different responses, but they all need a coherent state strategy. At the moment, it is not clear what strategy the state has to respond to this latest wave of violence. A fresh initiative by the civilian leadership could open the door to an intra-state dialogue and an understanding of how to tackle the different strands of militancy, terrorism and violence in Balochistan. The lack of ideas and initiatives in Balochistan appears to be undermining security in the province; it is time for another path to be taken.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/10/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
I often take part in what's known as "track II diplomacy" ‐ brainstorming discussions with former officials and academics that explore options for breaking major international impasses or ending conflicts. In one that just concluded, two of my longtime acquaintances from the Middle East greeted me with, "Well, once again America's word is no good. How could you abandon the Kurds?"
My Middle Eastern colleagues were calling attention to what has recently taken place in northern Iraq. There, the Iraqi military, with the clear involvement of Iranians and the Shia militias, pushed Kurdish forces out of Kirkuk,
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
11/10/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iraq
#2
There are far more Kurds in Iran and also in Turkey than there are in Iraq or Syria.
If present demographic trends continue, more than half of the population of Turkey will be Kurdish speaking in 20 to 40 years.
Since the government of Iran enjoys practicing and supporting terrorism, we would be justified in supporting independence for the Kurdish majority or plurality regions of Iran. We could support an independent Kurdistan that includes the Kurdish areas of both Iran and Iraq.
There are disgruntled Kurds in Iran, and we could support these with advanced weaponry. Since Iran seems intent on arming itself with nuclear weapons, we could even supply the Kurds with nuclear weapons.
It might even be that the threat of such things might change the Mullahs' behavior.
Posted by: Daniel ||
11/10/2017 2:57 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Since Iran seems intent on arming itself with nuclear weapons, we could even supply the Kurds with nuclear weapons.
The Kurds are Muslim. Giving them nuclear weapons will end up hurting us. If the Kurds were not Muslim, they would have a far better chance of succeeding.
#4
The Kurds are mostly Sunni Moslem, but also Yezidi, Christian, Jewish, and atheist. Most of the Jewish Kurds moved to Israel after 1948, but several hundred families chose to remain.
#5
I left feeling that it is time for the administration either to scale back what it claims it will do or actually begin to marry actions to our words.
This is Trump we're talking about here. Sell the sizzle. There is no steak.
#7
The message to U.S. client states and wannabes like the Kurds, if the U.S. tells you to not try to expand your territory into an ethic bomb i.e Kurkuk, and then you do anyway, then expect to get nothing for your disrespect of our guidance.
I have supported the Kurds and their national project for 20 years, but Barzani's referendum to include independence for the associated territories was rightly opposed by the U.S. In the past, he would have been deposed and a better policy would have been espoused by his successor. In these kinder and gentler days, his failure to understand the limits of U.S. support will doom his countrymen to another hundred years of servitude to local strongmen.
So sorry. Learn from your mistakes. No one in the U.S. feels bad for the Kurdish leadership. And I mean it, not a single person I have spoken with for the last month feels that the U.S. was responsible for the Kurdish leadership's mistake in calling for independence including Kurkuk. The U.S. did everything to make it not happen. They overstepped and lost. We all feel bad for the Kurdish people. Choose better leaders.
[ENGLISH.ALARABIYA.NET] Of a total population of less than 1 million Rohingya present in Myanmar in mid August this year, more than 600,000 have already been pushed out of the country by a concerted military operation led by the Myanmar military authorities. As a backgrounder, the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army staged a series of concerted attacks on the Burmese army. Unwilling to tolerate another Moslem jihad, the Rohinyas have been expelled to Bangla, where live some of those funding and leading ARSA. Saudi Arabia is too far away to dump them.
These military operations included the burning down of villages (visible from satellite imagery), widespread reports of extensive use of rape as a weapon of war, the extrajudicial killing of civilian men, women, and children, as well as laying down mines on the paths taken by those fleeing the carnage towards the border with Bangladesh.
The UN, in its characteristic conservative tone has described the ongoing intervention by the Myanmar army as ‘textbook ethnic cleansing’, while other world leaders such as French President Emmanuel Macron have more accurately described it as ‘genocide’. The number of corpses hasn't been that overwhelming. The Karens, Kachins, and Shans have been similarly suppressed by the ethnic Burmans occasionally. I realize that being dead is overwhelming to the person departing this Vale of Tears. I also realize that jihad has a habit of sprouting where local Moslem majorities (or near so) coexist next to non-Moslems. We can probably take the Philippines as a case study. You can also chart the decline of the Christian population in Paleostine, and then ask the Yazdis and the Zoroastrians of Iraq for details.
As for the international response? My conversations with Western diplomats circles seem to have conceded as inevitable that the entire remaining Rohingya population in Myanmar will be pushed over the border, and everyone is resigned to just waiting for it to be over and done. Thanks to ARSA.
But one group of people who are not quite so complacent are those who are perpetrating this genocide and those who are urging them on. Their goal is within reach, but they will not take their success for granted until they see it accomplished.
So what do these people fear if obviously not the wrath of the international community or censure from the West? Apparently, the unwelcome intervention of human empathy and remorse. On 30 October, a revered Burmese Buddhist monk by the name of Sitagu Sayadaw has given a rather telling sermon to army officers at the Bayintnaung garrison and military training school in Kayin.
The Pali chronicle The sermon is 3 hours long but the translated transcript of one small section of it is certainly worth reading (here). It involves a tale from the Pali chronicle the Mahavamsa, detailing a 5th Century CE civil war in Sri Lanka between Pali Buddhists and Tamil non-Buddhists. Hmmm... Sri Lanka? Sounds familiar...
The conflict kills ‘millions’ of Tamils, Who're a different ethnic groups from the Singhalese, mostly Hindoos, and speak Tamil dialects.
and after his victory, the triumphant Pali Buddhist king Duttagamani is unable to savor his achievement of winning the conflict and politically reuniting the country due to remorse over the loss of life. Did what he needed to do, and didn't like that he had to do it...
But the king is swiftly released from his anguish by eight helpful Buddhist ‘saints’, who show up at his palace and proceed to put his mind at ease: yes, millions of beings have been destroyed in the conflict, but only one and a half of the millions of Tamils were in fact humans: one of the Tamils had adopted the 5 precepts of Buddhism, and another one accepted the precepts and “taken the three refuges in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha”. I'd have my quibbles with the translation. Theravada Buddhism, as far as I can recall, doesn't regard any humans as non-human, nor even as "infidels." They use the word "unenlightened."
The death of those two was unfortunate, but the slaughter of millions of non-Buddhists is in no way a problem, and will not impede king Duttagamani’s ascent to heaven upon his death. More likely it won't impede the king's possible achievement of Nirvana.
So if you are one of those foot soldiers in the Myanmar army who is ordered to rape a young Rohingya girl for religion and country, you need not consult your conscience: she’s a Muslim, ergo not a human being. You are doing the work of a Buddhist saint. Thais, Laos, Burmese (more properly Burmans or even more properly Bamar), Shans, and Mons spent many happy years fighting periodic wars with each other. They once fought a war over a lacquered box that somebody filled with elephant poop. More recently the Laos, who are normally a pretty gentle folk, did terrible things to the Hmong in the vicinity of the Plain of Jars. They weren't religious conflicts, but wars over politics or territory and sometimes for looks.
If you are one of the officers ordering wanton extrajudicial killings of unarmed civilians, you are doing nothing more than your solemn duty for the protection of the sanctity of the Buddhist state. These ‘beings’ are not Buddhist, and therefore pose a threat to the religious purity of the state and need to be removed and/or destroyed. That's a part of Islam, not Buddhism. I'm not a Buddhist, but I was pretty interested in it when I was in Southeast Asia. I not only read up on it, but discussed it with practitioners.
Western audiences are accustomed with the idea of using the Christian religion or Islam to encourage and justify mass murder (crusades, jihads, the European Wars of Religion etc.), but genocide in the name of nirvana by and towards beings which expect to be reincarnated is a much more bizarre proposition. It's also one the author pulled out of his butt. The Tamil Tigers weren't religiously motivated, but ethnically. There are something like 165 different ethnic groups in the country. Burmans make up not quite 70 percent of the population of Myanmar. The Shan are just under 10 percent, then the Karens and Kachins. Others are Mon, Chinese, and Indians. Hill tribes are four percent of the population. Rakhine are three and a half percent. The groups split mostly by language, to include the Rohingya, who are of Indian ethnicity, and don't make up the majority in Rakhine state. Even though the country's mostly Lesser Vehicle Buddhist, there's no religious homogeneity. A large number of Karens, for example, are Lutherans. Nobody cares except Moslems -- except when the Moslems decide it's time for jihad. Three and a half percent of the population declaring jihad against the other 96.5 percent will not end well.
Still, there we have it. Zen masters ... are Japanese, a part of their particular strain of Greater Vehicle Buddhism...
inciting and justifying genocide to soldiers who are in the middle of carrying out a genocide. Expelling a population is now called ethnic cleansing...
And we are all failing to identify the religious bigotry dimension of a genocide carried out under the auspices of holy and revered Buddhist monks. Despite the occasional lunatic Buddhist holy man, I still call it an ethnic war. Or maybe you could call it a counter-jihad, which is how I think most people with even a passing knowledge of the subject see it. Myanmar's not sinless by any means -- it was Ne Win, back in the Upper Paleolithic (1962, I think) who instituted the policy of "Burmanization."
Posted by: Fred ||
11/10/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army
[Daily Caller] Not so long ago, mere mention of the deliberate murder of whites in South Africa‐country folk and commercial farmers, in particular‐was called "racist." "Raaacist!" the media collective brayed when candidate Trump retweeted a related "white genocide" hashtag.
It’s still "racist" to suggest that the butchering of these whites, almost daily, in ways that beggar belief, is racially motivated. Positively scandalous is it to describe the ultimate goal of a killing spree, now in its third decade, thus: the ethnic cleansing of white, farming South Africa from land the community has cultivated since the 1600s.
To the bottom line:
Why?
The South African state’s stout indifference to the plight of whites does not exist in a void. Witness the steady, anti-white venom the dominant-party cobra-head, the ANC, spits out. "The de facto situation is that whites are under criminal siege explicitly because of their race,"....
#4
When ZimBOB was encouraging attacks on white farmers and the gov of South Africa sat back and watched for the results, well it was a pretty clear sign to leave the region.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Wash Times] A federal judge tossed a lawsuit Thursday that would have pushed the State Department and FBI to do more to try to track down Hillary Clinton’s emails, ruling the government has done all it reasonably could to locate the former secretary of state’s messages.
[Free Beacon] NBC host Megyn Kelly said the saga of a woman who flipped off President Donald Trump's motorcade spoke "uniquely to what America's all about" during an interview with her on Thursday.
NEW YORK (AP) ‐ While Fox News Channel has spent hours talking about Hillary Clinton and an Obama-era uranium deal in recent weeks, its news anchor Shepard Smith avoided the story entirely.
... served two non-consecutive terms as prime minister, heads the Pakistain Moslem League (Nawaz). Noted for his spectacular corruption, the 1998 Pak nuclear test, border war with India, and for being tossed by General Musharraf, then by the courts...
[ENGLISH.ALARABIYA.NET] Of a total population of less than 1 million Rohingya present in Myanmar in mid August this year, more than 600,000 have already been pushed out of the country by a concerted military operation led by the Myanmar military authorities.
Just another tool in the kit bag of communist ideologues. 
