Tuesday, April 21, 2015

Warships of SE Asia

This chart from the ONI report helps explain why China thinks it can deter its neighbors. It just has far more ships and resources than any of its immediate rivals.


Monday, April 13, 2015

Chinese Bio-Attacks on USA

I am sitting across from a man who I call Doctor Doom. He's in his late 40s, is non-descript, and is Chinese. His insists that I don't use his real name, so I will call him "Wang". His life's work, his creation, will kill more than a billion people (probably closer to two billion), and in the very near future everyone on the planet will know his real name. He doesn't look like a monster, but then again most true monsters rarely appear like the role. He doesn't hate the West, he loves American TV and McDonalds, but that won't stop him from killing more people than Mao, Stalin, and Hitler combined. He is a viral geneticist that works in the area of agriculture and his "creation" will kill off a huge potion of humanity, and incite conflicts around the world (mainly for food). To just get a brief interview with "Doctor Doom" took me over a year; my step-mother is American Chinese and she knows his mother (who is openly terrified of her son's research). "Wang" works outside of Beijing, at a military-funded research facility with over 500 associates, all specializing in some form of virology. He has invented a virus that kills (for decades or more) specific plants that are used by the West: corn, wheat, and barley. Wang's mother, deeply worried about the response to her sons "invention", believes that open dialogue on the issue will prevent its use. She is terrified that the United States is working in the same field to develop a virus that specifically targets rice (we are, so confirms my 30+ year nurse boyfriend who lives in the LA area). She loves rice and knows if a tit-for-tat biological exchange occurs, most of the planet could be wiped out. Other scientists agree, which was one of the reasons why there has been a strong push for "agricultural arks" being created around the world, the most famous of which is in the ice-bound Svalbard region of Norway. It always puzzled me why they would put a global seed ark in such a remote and plant-hostile region, until I realized during this interview that it was placed in an area the virus couldn't easily spread too (an ice zone). China's leaders have already decided that conflict with the West, Japan, and the USA will occur, but how and when it will occur is the key and Beijing hopes to make it on terms in its favor. By launching a bio-attack on the USA foodstocks, it will ensure the Americans will stay out of any future fights because they would have to cope with food rationing, riots, and continent-wide starvation instead of waging war. A successful Chinese bio-attack against the US was completed late last year, when eight two-man teams spread a remote pig virus from central China across the heartland of America. This was a deliberate act and resulted in the deaths of over 2 million pigs in the US. The teams were infected with Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea virus (or PEDv) and deliberately spread the virus by traveling to the US and handling as many pigs as possible in and around Iowa. Their efforts were a part of the plan by Beijing to wage war by a thousand cuts, to attack the USA subtlety and quietly, before it knew it was even under attack. Massive cyberattacks centered in China are also part of this war and are occurring on a daily basis. Chinese leaders decided more than a decade ago to use biological, chemical, nuclear, and asymmetrical attacks against the US and other foes. Their decision to not follow the rules of war set out in the Geneva Accords was based on the fact that China isn't a European country, and shouldn't follow European rules of war. By funding "Wang's" research in the area of deadly bioweapons, we can only conclude that Beijing will continue down this path to global destruction, in spite of the fact that other nations are preparing counter-measures; ones that could kill off most of the people on the planet. In the Book of Revelation, it talks about Apocalytic Horsemen who kill billions of people; starvation and plague and death. I hope to not see these Horsemen in my lifetime....I wonder if Wang cares.

Hillary's Stealth Announcement

Dick Morris Report

Hillary began her Presidential campaign yesterday.  How's she doing it? Stealthily, quietly, secretly, weirdly.

It started with a tweet.  The least technical savvy person on the planet is now hip.

It's really a lot easier that way.  No more speeches, no elaborations of her message, and, most of all, no room for annoying press questions.  Just a set number of characters and a quick message.

She tweeted that she was taking a "road trip."  She's actually sneaking into Iowa, riding in an unmarked secret service van for the more than1000 miles from Chappaqua to Des Moines.  Along with Huma Abedin and another aide, they're taking an undisclosed route, stopping randomly at gas stations for photo ops.  When she gets to Iowa, she'll attend meetings closed to the public.

What's she hiding from?

Emails, Benghazi, the Clinton Foundation.

To grasp the essential differences between Hillary and Bill, all you need to do is to compare their two political journeys -- Hillary's stealth trip to Iowa and Bill's boisterous train ride to Chicago to claim his renomination in 1996.

Bill traveled on a train loaded with media, making highly publicized stops as he wended his way through every swing state en route to Chicago.  Hillary is traveling in a van with no media, in secret.  Nobody knows her schedule and no media is there to witness her trip.  Bill spoke from the rear of the train a la whistle-stop at each station along the route.  Hillary is not giving a single speech, but is tweeting about her trip stops so nobody asks any questions.  Bill spoke for hours, often having to be practically dragged off the stage to be as on time as possible for the next stop.  Hillary communicates by tweeting.  140 characters is perfect for her message.  Bill wanted as many people as possible to participate in his triumphant passage.  Hillary wants privacy and secrecy.

The two voyages illustrate the key differences between the two people -- and why Bill won and Hillary won't.

Bill is an extrovert.  Hillary is introverted.  Bill is almost naively open.  Hillary is closed.  Bill loves publicity.  Hillary fears it, distrusts it.  Bill needs to hide his private life.  Hillary must conceal her public one.  Bill welcomes questions and is at his best at town halls fielding them.  Hillary wants controlled situations.  Bill loves microphones.  Hillary avoids them.  Photo ops are her style.

Bill is a born politician.  Hillary is a born bureaucrat.  Bill thinks as he speaks.  Hillary hues to a script, blundering when she make the slightest departure.  Bill enjoys the give and take.  For Hillary there is only the take.

And so begins a campaign like no other -- hidden, paranoid, secret, controlled, and scripted.  Just like the candidate.

Always Remember


EWWW Hillary! EWWWW!!!


Wednesday, April 08, 2015

Death to the Tsarnaev's


To Obama: The Victims are Christians and Jews

by Newt Gingrich


President Obama has a strange pattern of citing Christians for violence and intolerance on the one hand but refusing to identify them as the targets of Islamist supremacists on the other.

In fact, in his remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast the President stretched back more than 800 years to declare that "during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ."

This was a remarkably one-sided history of a long series of wars between Christians and Muslims in which atrocities were common on both sides. The President may not know that Saladin had more than 200 knights beheaded on July 4, 1187, or that in 1680 Turks cut off the heads of 813 Christians in Otranto, Italy (a group Pope Francis declared saints for their willingness to die for Christ). There were atrocities on both sides of these wars. Yet President Obama only found the violence perpetrated by Christians worth mentioning.

Referring to more recent history, this is how President Obama chose to describe an Islamic supremacist murdering Jews in France earlier this year “violent, vicious zealots who...randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris."

The dishonesty of this statement is breathtaking. There was nothing random about the attack. It was deliberate. The attacker didn't "randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris". The attacker himself said in the media that he went out to kill Jews. The "folks" in the President's language were Jews. The “zealots” were Muslim supremacists.

Why does President Obama find it impossible to say "a Muslim supremacist deliberately killed a group of Jews in a religiously inspired attack"?

President Obama was similarly abstract when commenting on the beheading of Egyptian Christians by ISIS in a televised act of religious hatred. He issued a statement saying it was a "despicable and cowardly murder of 21 Egyptian citizens in Libya." He described it as "the wanton killing of innocents."

Once again President Obama hides from what truly motivated the killing. ISIS wasn't randomly killing Egyptians. ISIS was killing Christians. The victims weren't, as the President asserted, just "innocents". The victims were guilty of being Christian.

Finally, consider the recent killing of Christians in Kenya. When radical Islamist terrorists killed more than 140 people at Garissa University College, the Associated Press reported, “The attackers separated Christian students from Muslim ones and massacred the Christians.”

How did the Obama Administration describe this religiously motivated massacre? The President's statement referred only to "innocent men and women...brazenly and brutally massacred."

Once again he failed to identify the religion of the dead or the religion of their killers--in both cases the factor that explained the events.

Sarah Kaplan of the Washington Post captured this refusal to describe Christian and Jewish victims in a remarkable recent article, "Has the world ‘looked the other way’ while Christians are killed?"

She reports:
David Curry, president of the nonprofit Open Doors USA, which advocates for persecuted Christians worldwide, believes so.

“We see a continued pattern in many of these regions of violence and persecution against Christians,” he said in a phone interview. “But the West and Western governments, including the U.S., when they conflict-map these issues, they refuse to address the fact that Christians are being targeted.”

According to Open Doors, 2014 saw a huge increase in violence against Christians. Researchers for the group found that 4,344 Christians were killed for faith-related reasons between Dec. 1, 2013 and Nov. 30, 2014 — more than twice the number killed during the same period the previous year. Curry says those numbers are a low estimate, as the group only counts incidents in which the victim can be identified by name and an exact cause has been attributed.

In its annual “World Watch” report, which ranks the 50 countries where persecution of Christians is most severe, the group said the past year “will go down in history for having the highest level of global persecution of Christians in the modern era” and suggested that “the worst is yet to come.”

Kaplan went on to quote Pope Francis over Easter weekend:
“Our brothers and our sisters … are persecuted, exiled, slain, beheaded, solely for being Christian,” he said, his expression tense, his cadence slow but deliberate. Speaking from a window of the Apostolic Palace, the Pope said that there have been more “martyrs” for Christianity in recent years than in the early centuries of the faith.

“I hope that the international community doesn’t stand mute and inert before such unacceptable crimes, which constitute a worrisome erosion of the most elementary human rights. I truly hope that the international community doesn’t look the other way.”

The persecution of Christians is a theme that ran through most of the pope’s speeches this weekend. At a Good Friday procession, he decried the world’s “complicit silence” while members of his faith are killed. On Sunday, he devoted his Easter address to a grim accounting of global conflicts where Christians and others have been killed.

I was moved to write this lengthy newsletter by Cardinal Wuerl's Easter Sunday homily at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception (where Callista sings in the choir).

The Cardinal enjoined: "Today we must raise our voices on behalf of suffering Christians around the world, victims of terrorist/extremist attacks simply because they dare to say Christ is risen....”

He went on: "Pope Francis, in his Easter message...asked all of us not to remain silent...in the face of this terrible plague --violence on our Christian brothers and sisters and all others suffering religious persecution.”

His plea inspired me to ask you to join in speaking out and telling the truth.

If enough of us insist on identifying the religious victims of this war against Christians and Jews, perhaps the President will have the courage to join us in telling the whole truth.

Once we confront the truth, we can begin designing strategies to defeat the Islamist supremacists who would force us to submit or die.

Tuesday, April 07, 2015

Sidneys Emails

What's With The Emails To Hillary From Secret Spook Sid Blumenthal? And Who Was Bankrolling His Secret Ops?

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Published on TheHillaryDaily.com on April 7, 2015



Revelations from emails purloined by a Romanian hacker show that Hillary Clinton was being secretly advised about Libya -- before and after the Benghazi terrorist attack -- by an off-the-shelf private spook group associated with controversial former Clinton confidante Sydney Blumenthal that claimed to be helping the Libyan opposition and considered placing ground operatives near the border.

What's this all about?

It's not completely clear, but apparently the goal of the rogue group, which included a former high level CIA covert operative and a former U.S. General, was, at the very least, to gather and provide sensitive reports to the Secretary of State from foreign intelligence sources in Libya, Algeria, and Europe.

But there was lots more going on.  Two- time Pulitzer Prize winner and investigative reporter Jeff Gerth and Sam Biddle wrote about the secret spy network in ProPublica, reporting that Blumenthal indicated in one email that "he and his associates worked to help the Libyan opposition."  You can read the full article here.

What is a private citizen doing "helping the Libyan opposition" and reporting to the Secretary of State, who then does nothing about it?

It's likely that the rogue group feared that the State Department bureaucracy was not providing the same information to Hillary -- information that they definitely wanted her to know about.  Gerth noted that the State Department didn't even have a Libyan desk at that time.  So, they would have limited information about what was happening on the ground there.

Enter Sid Blumenthal.

In addition to Blumenthal, the secret network included Cody Shearer (a well-known Washington insider and negative dirt digger who was close to the Clintons) and former CIA spook Tyler Drumheller (who once ran CIA's operations in Europe).  Also involved was retired Army Major General David L. Grange, who, ProPublica reported, ran "a secret Pentagon special operations unit before retiring in 1999."

This is stunning.  It is hard to imagine how -- and why -- Blumenthal became involved in this clandestine spy ring.  What's even more puzzling is who was paying for it.

The group clearly had an agenda. Indeed, one of the firms that worked with Blumenthal -- Osprey Global Solutions -- owned by the former General, contracted with the Libyan National Transition Council in anticipation of Gaffafi's removal.  Its mission: to help establish an intelligence operation there in the new regime.

The back door spying operation relied on Blumenthal to keep channels open to Hillary and may even have sought to induce greater U.S. involvement in the war.  And Blumenthal was a good choice.  He had access to Hillary's private email account and was in near constant touch with her.  The hacker's screen shot of Blumenthal's emails in the last two months of Hillary's tenure shows that he sent over 25 emails from December 9, 2012 through February 17, 2013, many with subject headings about Libya and Egypt.  And Hillary seems to have responded to Sidney: "Got your message" says one subject line.  Another references the "question you raised."  So this was not a one-sided deal.  Hillary knew about what Sidney was doing and did nothing to close it down.  Her aides claim that she handed the emails over to the Benghazi Committee.  Let's see if they are all there.

Because this was big.  It wasn't just about passing along high level foreign intelligence.  There were indications that the Blumenthal group may have even placed its own operatives on the ground in Libya to directly influence events there, without reference to Administration policy and without the approval of the Senate or House Intelligence Committees.

ProPublica noted the reference to a ground operation: "a May 14, 2011 email exchange between Blumenthal and Shearer shows that they were negotiating with Drumheller to contract with someone referred to as "Grange" and "the general" to place four operatives on a week-long mission to Tunis, Tunisia, and "to the border and back."  Tunisia borders Libya and Algeria.  "Sid, you are doing great work on this," Drumheller wrote to Blumenthal.  "It is going to be around $60,000, covering r/t business class airfare to Tunis, travel in country to the border and back, and other expenses for 7-10 days for 4 guys." (Emphasis added)

It's not clear what exactly Blumenthal was doing to earn the compliment about his "great work".  And, again, what were they all doing and who was paying for it?

The U.S. government had been reluctant to get more deeply involved in Libya.  But Hillary wasn't.  She wanted to get rid of Gaddafi and was very, very public about it.  Is it possible that the unverified information from rogue sources triggered, or at least fostered, Hillary's aggressive advocacy of U.S. military intervention in Libya -- a policy that many in the Obama Administration resisted?  That's something that should be looked at quite carefully.

Because it was Hillary's advocacy that was the prime moving force in triggering the U.S. involvement.  Beginning in 2011, she lobbied the Obama Administration to intervene in the civil war in Libya, warning of impending genocide at the hands of Gaddafi.  Hillary's warnings were not in synch with information the U.S. and its allies were receiving and were widely believed to be deeply flawed. Pentagon officials, including Secretary of Defense Gates and Admiral Mullen opposed Hillary on Libya, and, along with Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich, took the unprecedented step of opening up direct channels to Libya. Secret tapes obtained by the Washington Times "chronicle U.S. officials' unfiltered conversations with Col. Gaddafi...including criticisms that Mrs. Clinton had developed tunnel vision and led the U.S. into an unnecessary war without adequately weighing the intelligence community's concerns." 

This is extraordinary - and yet Hillary prevailed.

House Benghazi Committee Chairman Tray Gowdy recently asked his staff to listen to the tapes, so it's very possible that we'll hear more about this.  Let's hope so.

Perhaps stimulated by the Blumenthal intelligence, Hillary worked ceaselessly to get rid of Gaddafi and create a coalition for a no-fly zone. When the coalition started to fall apart -- especially the support of the Arab states, Hillary intervened and personally called their leaders indicating the importance of the mission.

According to the Washington Post, she told the Arab leaders: "This is important to the United States, it's important to the president, and it's important to me personally." (Emphasis added)

So why was it so important to her personally?  And was the Secretary of State telegraphing to Arab leaders that there might be consequences if they did not follow her wishes?

After Hillary's intervention, the coalition was back on board and Hillary viewed the Libya war as one of her finest accomplishments.  Not everyone concurs with her.

There was good reason for American reluctance to go into Libya.  The Times reported that, according to secret intelligence reports, "Libyan officials were deeply concerned that weapons were being funneled to NATO-backed rebels with ties to al-Qaeda and that well-armed insurgents could create a safe haven for terrorists."

And those concerns remain today: Have we and our allies actually delivered weapons that are now in the hands of terrorists?  What was going on there?

Was it Blumenthal's "intelligence" that led America into war?  A war which cost upwards of $1 billion?  A war to prevent alleged genocide that was never corroborated?  A war that kindled a massive flow to lethal weaponry to Islamic extremists in the Middle East, including some of the weapons ISIS is now using against us?

There are so many unanswered questions, but the biggest one is this: What was Sidney Blumenthal doing running a foreign intelligence network and reporting to the Secretary of State?  He has absolutely no experience in foreign affairs.  None.  His major credential is that he is close to Hillary and he can push her buttons.  And, he's willing to do anything and say anything to protect the Clintons.

Blumenthal worked closely with both Clintons during the Lewinsky scandal to discredit Monica and her allegations, calling her a "stalker."  He repeated Hillary's fabrication that Monica was just a troubled person who the President was "ministering" out of kindness and his religious convictions. (This is not a joke)

Sidney became an attack dog during Hillary's presidential campaign in 2008, but perhaps a too public one.  That's why Hillary's efforts to hire him at the State Department in 2009 were blocked, reportedly over lingering animosity about his role in the attacks on Obama during the campaign.  As far as we know, his was the only appointment nixed by the White House.

Sidney has always had the ability to take Hillary's paranoid side and lead her to exaggerate it even further.  It was Sidney who came up with one of her favorite phrases -- "the vast right wing conspiracy."  It's still part of her mantra.  And he's still her conspiracy theory alter ego.

So, what was going on here and what Sidney's portfolio included is anyone's guess.

If Hillary's erasure of her emails evokes remembrance of Watergate, so the new Hillary scandal involving her back door relationship with Sydney Blumenthal and his on-the-ground operatives evokes comparisons with Iran-Contra.  How Hillary can run for president with such baggage remains to be seen.

But at the very least, we need answers to the many questions that arise from this very weird turn in this very crazy relationship.

Chinese Biowarfare

I am sitting across from a man who I call Doctor Doom. He's in his late 40s, is non-descript, and is Chinese. His insists that I don't use his real name, so I will call him "Wang". His life's work, his creation, will kill more than a billion people (probably closer to two billion), and in the very near future everyone on the planet will know his real name. He doesn't look like a monster, but then again most true monsters rarely appear like the role. He doesn't hate the West; he loves American TV and McDonalds, but that won't stop him from killing more people than Mao, Stalin, and Hitler combined. He is a viral geneticist that works in the area of agriculture and his "creation" will kill off a huge potion of humanity, and incite conflicts around the world (mainly for food). To just get a brief interview with "Doctor Doom" took me over a year; my step-mother is American Chinese and she knows his mother (who is openly terrified of her son's research). "Wang" works outside of Beijing, at a military-funded research facility with over 500 associates, all specializing in some form of virology. He has invented a virus that kills (for decades or more) specific plants that are used by the West: corn, wheat, and barley. Wang's mother, deeply worried about the response to her sons "invention", believes that open dialogue on the issue will prevent its use. She is terrified that the United States is working in the same field to develop a virus that specifically targets rice (we are, so confirms  friend of mine). She loves rice and knows if a tit-for-tat biological exchange occurs, most of the planet could be wiped out. Other scientists agree, which was one of the reasons why there has been a strong push for "agricultural arks" being created around the world, the most famous of which is in the ice-bound Svalbard region of Norway. It always puzzled me why they would put a global seed ark in such a remote and plant-hostile region, until I realized during this interview that it was placed in an area the virus couldn't easily spread too (an ice zone). China's leaders have already decided that conflict with the West, Japan, and the USA will occur, but how and when it will occur is the key and Beijing hopes to make it on terms in its favor. By launching a bio-attack on the USA foodstocks, it will ensure the Americans will stay out of any future fights because they would have to cope with food rationing, riots, and continent-wide starvation instead of waging war. A successful Chinese bio-attack against the US was completed late last year, when eight two-man teams spread a remote pig virus from central China across the heartland of America. This was a deliberate act and resulted in the deaths of over 2 million pigs in the US. The teams were infected with Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea virus (or PEDv) and deliberately spread the virus by traveling to the US and handling as many pigs as possible in and around Iowa. Their efforts were a part of the plan by Beijing to wage war by a thousand cuts, to attack the USA subtlety and quietly, before it knew it was even under attack. Massive cyberattacks centered in China are also part of this war and are occurring on a daily basis. Chinese leaders decided more than a decade ago to use biological, chemical, nuclear, and asymmetrical attacks against the US and other foes. Their decision to not follow the rules of war set out in the Geneva Accords was based on the fact that China isn't a European country, and shouldn't follow European rules of war. By funding "Wang's" research in the area of deadly bioweapons, we can only conclude that Beijing will continue down this path to global destruction, in spite of the fact that other nations are preparing counter-measures; ones that could kill off most of the people on the planet. In the Book of Revelation, it talks about Apocalytic Horsemen who kill billions of people; starvation and plague and death. I hope to not see these Horsemen in my lifetime....I wonder if Wang cares.