Thursday, August 4, 2016



Facebook blocks Michael Savage for posting news on Muslim migrant crime

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Facebook has previously banned Pamela Geller from posting and deleted her SIOA page. They’re avid to cover up evidence of the devastation caused by the political elites’ immigration policies.
“Facebook blocks Michael Savage for posting news on Islamic crime,” WND, August 1, 2016:
Facebook has temporarily blocked talk-radio host Michael Savage from posting stories to his page after he put up a link to a story about a Muslim migrant killing a pregnant woman in Germany.
A message from the social media giant on Savage’s page said: “You recently posted something that violates Facebook policies, so you’re temporarily blocked from using this feature.”
The message then refers the user to Facebook’s “Community Standards” and states the block will be active for 21 hours.
Facebook’s “Community Standards” page lists “hate speech” as one of its prohibitions, along with “violence and graphic content,” and nudity.
The article linked by Savage was about a pregnant woman in Reutlingen, Germany, who was hacked to death with a meat cleaver by a 21-year-old Syrian refugee.
On his show Monday, Savage chastised Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, saying he “doesn’t care about my audience.”
“He doesn’t care about the audience of conservatives. He’d rather you all drop dead and go home,” Savage said.
Savage described Zuckerberg as a “classless citizen who enjoys all the benefits of America, enjoys all of the wealth that America has given him, and he stabs America in the back by siding with the Islamic terrorist nations of Iran and Saudi Arabia.”
“That’s why he would ban me from posting an article, which I didn’t write, incidentally,” Savage said. “It was a link an article about a Muslim in Germany, about a week ago, who cut a nine-month pregnant woman to death in the street.
“Zuckerberg found that offensive and anti-Islamic.”…



Who’s in Putin’s Pocket — Clinton or Trump?
SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

While serving as secretary of state to President Obama, Hillary Clinton delivered one fifth of America’s uranium deposits to Russia. So charge investigators who have been delving into the murky — and very alarming — dealings of Secretary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation with a company known as Uranium One, and various “private” Russian companies and official Russian agencies. Moreover, her critics accuse Hillary and Bill Clinton of raking in a huge fortune (over $130 million) from the American, Canadian, and Russian investors who helped arrange for these Russian companies — under the control, ultimately, of Vladimir Putin — to take control of 20 percent of our strategic uranium assets. Indeed, according to some calculations, the Uranium One deal, involving top Clinton donors Frank Guistra and Ian Telfer, has transferred as much as 50 percent of projected American uranium production to Kremlin control.
This incredible story, with enormously important implications for our nation’s security, has been percolating for over a year, since Peter Schweizer’s bestselling exposé Clinton Cash — The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Richbrought it to light. (See alsohereherehere, and here.)
Why does the explosive Clinton-Uranium One story — which has been buried (naturally) by the pro-Hillary establishment media for the past year — now take on new meaning and urgency? Well, for one thing, for the past several days Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton has been trying to make hay with the charge that recent comments by her Republican rival, Donald Trump, show “a very troubling willingness” to support Russian President Vladimir Putin.
In an interview with Fox News Sunday on July 31, Mrs. Clinton reiterated the narrative that her campaign and her media allies had been flogging since the Democratic National Convention the previous week: that Trump’s off-the-cuff comments about her e-mail scandal amounted to Trump calling on a foreign adversary (Putin and Russia’s intel agencies) to meddle in a U.S. election and engage in cyberespionage against this country. Russia’s alleged hacking of her e-mail accounts, she said,  "raises serious issues about Russian influence in our election."
"And for Mr Trump to both encourage that and to praise Putin despite what appears to be a deliberate effort to try to affect the election, I think, raises national security issues," she charged. In the interview with Fox’s Chris Wallace, Mrs Clinton charged that Trump’s remarks on this issue show he is not “temperamentally fit” to be president. "If you take the encouragement that Russians hack into email accounts, if you take his quite excessive praise for Putin, his absolute allegiance to a lot of Russian wish-list foreign policy issues," she said, it suggests that "he is not temperamentally fit to be president and commander-in-chief."
Is that not rich? Hillary and Bill take massive bribes from Putin cronies to transfer ownership and control over the fuel for our nation’s nuclear power plants (which provide one fifth of our national electrical energy) and our nuclear weapons to Putin & Company — and then accuse her opponent of being in bed with Putin! Like the brazen thief who makes his getaway by pointing at a random passerby and yelling “Stop! Thief!,” Hillary is hoping to distract the American electorate from her own corruption, criminality, and treason by accusing her opponent of the very thing of which she herself is most guilty. That is hardly surprising considering the crime wave that has followed Team Clinton all the way from the governor’s mansion in Little Rock to the White House, to the Senate, to the Clinton Foundation, and on to Foggy Bottom — and beyond. Remember the Clintons and Whitewatergate, Chinagate, Filegate, Fostergate, Travelgate, Troopergate, Lincoln Bedroomgate, Bimbogate, Pardongate, Wacogate, etc., etc., ad nauseum? The Clintons’ penchant for criminality virtually saturated our political vocabulary with new “gate”-suffixed scandals.
However, with the help of their “mainstream media” JournoLista friends, the Clintons have always managed to escape justice in this temporal sphere. For the past 15 months or so, these same media pals have shielded Hillary from having to face hard questions about her central role in the uranium-for-cash deal with Putin’s minions. However, that could still be forced to the surface as a major stumbling block before the elections.
But wait — the Uranium One deal, as important and stunningly corrupt as it may be, is only the proverbial tip of the iceberg. As we have been reporting here for years, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been one of Putin’s biggest enablers, facilitating enormous transfers of advanced technology to the Russian regime she now sees as a threat. It was Secretary Clinton, please recall, who, in May 2009, presented Putin’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov with a red “reset” button, and then mugged with Lavrov in a giggly photo-fest celebrating the U.S.-Russian “convergence” agenda. Clinton and Lavrov then served as joint coordinators of the U.S.-Russian Bilateral Presidential Commission established in July of that year by President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. The annual reports of the Bilateral Presidential Commission are replete with chummy photos of Clinton-Lavrov, Obama-Medvedev, Biden-Putin, etc., as well as details of the many deals worked out to give technology, knowhow, capital, and other resources to Moscow.
Among the many important projects of this type promoted by the Clinton-Lavrov team is the huge Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, which we warned about repeatedly in The New American as far back as 2010 (see, for instance, "’Breathing Pixie Dust’ Investing in Russia,” August 5, 2010). Putin’s new Skolkovo research and innovation center on the outskirts of Moscow, heralded as “Russia’s Silicon Valley,” is benefiting from billions of dollars of investment and prime technology from Cisco Systems, Boeing, Microsoft, Intel, Hewlett-Packard, General Electric, and other U.S. tech giants, thanks to support and promotion by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. 
Then there is the case of billionaire Russian playboy Mikhail Prokhorov (see here and here), who, during Clinton’s reign at State, was allowed not only to buy up the New Jersey Nets (now the Brooklyn Nets) NBA franchise and the Barclays Center in New York City, but also to play a major role  through his control of the Russian investment companies ONEXIM Group and Renaissance Capital, both of which played key roles in the Clintons’ aforementioned Uranium One scandal.
Yes, Mr. Trump has made statements that may give security-conscious Americans cause for concern, but deeds speak louder than words. And Hillary Clinton’s deeds speak in 5,000 decibel thunderclaps, declaring to all (except her willfully deaf devotees) that she belongs not sitting behind the president’s desk in the White House, but serving time behind bars in the Big House.
Related articles:


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
By Frosty Wooldridge
May 31, 2016

At the Democratic National Convention in July, Pakistani immigrant and Muslim Brotherhood member Khizr Muazzam Khan held up a booklet containing our U.S. Constitution in condemnation of Donald J. Trump’s plans to ban Muslim immigration.
Did the mainstream media speak up to expose the fact that Khan advocates for Sharia Law to be implemented in the United States? Did “Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd expose the fact that Khan’s membership in the Muslim Brotherhood equates to conquering and destroying America’s constitution? Did John Dickerson at “Face the Nation” expose Khan’s legal firm ‘buying’ U.S. citizenships for his Muslim brothers in Saudi Arabia?
Not a word! In fact, the mainstream media jumped all over Trump rather than defend their own country from the Muslim immigration threat. Its consequences play out all over Europe in accelerating lone wolf massacres and subsequent parallel societies.
Journalist Daniel Greenfield wrote, “When you turn on the evening news and see a running death toll, it’s happening more and more often. The new brand of Islamic terror only needs one thing… Muslims. Lone wolf terrorism operates off the existing Muslim population in a particular country. The bigger the Muslim population, the bigger the risk. The FBI or other law enforcement agencies cannot monitor even a fraction of the Islamic settler population sympathetic to terror. As the Muslim settler population in the country increases, the number of cases will grow.” (Source: Right Side News, Stop Lone Wolf Terrorism by Ending Muslim Immigration, August 2, 2016)
Notice none of the mainstream outlets expose Hillary Clinton’s top aid Huma Abedin stands first, last and always—a Muslim. The same media that enjoys our 1st Amendment rights never touches the fact that Obama employs 13 Muslims on his staff. One of them named Mr. Magid works on implementing Sharia Law in America. He’s known as the Sharia Law czar in the White House.
Ironically, Khan conned our nation with its sympathies toward his son killed in 2004. In the intervening years, Khan’s work to bring in more Muslim Brotherhood members and selling citizenship to Saudi Arabian Muslims—illustrates his long term goal: to displace the U.S. Constitution with Sharia Law wherever his Muslim immigrants grow in numbers and strength. If allowed or he gained the power, Khan would implement Sharia Law across America in a heartbeat.
Journalist Theodore Shoebat said, “Khan is a promoter of Islamic Sharia Law in the U.S. He was a co-founder of the Journal of Contemporary Issues in Muslim Law. During the eighties Khan wrote a paper titled Juristic Classification of Islamic Sharia Law. In it he elucidated on the system of Sharia law expressing his reverence for “The Sunnah — authentic tradition of the Prophet Muhammad.” (Source:, August 2, 2016)
In other words, Khan advocates for total subjugation of women’s rights, loss of free speech, loss of religious choice, loss of children’s rights and loss of women’s rights to dress as they choose. He works to undermine everything that Americans fought and died for in the last 240 years.
Make note of this reality: Hillary’s work with Huma ABedin and men such as Khan illustrates how deep Islam imbeds itself into our country. Khan pulled out all the stops on sympathy for his son, when in fact; he works to destroy the foundation of our country with every day and every breath.
Search Al-Wathaiq, Al-Siyasiyah from Arabia on violent jihad. Khan promotes it in his writing and actions.
Which brings a huge question as to the final intent of America’s mainstream media: why don’t Scott Pelley, David Muir, Lester Holt, John Dickerson, Chuck Todd, Terry Gross, Steve Inskeep, Robert Siegel and a host of other top journalist ferret out the accelerating Islamic invasion of our country?
Why not expose what’s really happening to Europe and to the USA? Are they waiting for Sharia Law to snuff out their voices? Are they waiting for more terror attacks by ‘deranged’ men following the Quran? Why haven’t they exposed Obama’s continuous assault on our country with his open borders and unconstitutional executive orders amnesties?
Passage from Governor Richard Lamm’s famous 2003 speech on “How to Destroy America”:
Lamm said, “If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let’s destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall, and that, “An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.”
We gallop toward that destiny!



Obama Admin Hid Details of Multi-Million Dollar Cash Payout to Iran From Congress

Classified details never disclosed to leading lawmakers on intel committee

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

The Obama administration took steps to withhold from lawmakers the details of a $400 million cash payout to Iran and continues to rebuke inquiries from Congress for information about how another $1.3 billion in taxpayer funds was awarded to the Islamic Republic, according to multiple conversations with congressional sources apprised of the matter.
U.S. officials familiar with the recent transfer of $400 million in hard currency to Iran withheld details of the exchange from Congress during briefings in classified and unclassified settings, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.
The disclosure threatens to complicate efforts by the administration to downplay new reports detailing how U.S. officials used an unmarked aircraft to transfer $400 million in “pallets of cash” to Iran on the same day it freed several U.S. hostages.
Lawmakers and others have claimed for months that the payment was part of a “ransom” aimed at securing the release of the hostages. The White House denies this claim and has said the payment was part of a settlement to resolve decades-old legal disputes with the Islamic Republic.
Nearly eight months after congressional officials demanded a formal accounting of this payment–which amounted to $1.7 billion in total–the administration is still declining to provide lawmakers with the full story, sparking outrage on Capitol Hill.
“It has been seven months since President Obama announced that he was giving the Islamic Republic of Iran almost $2 billion,” Rep. Mike Pompeo (R., Kan.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, told the Free Beacon on Wednesday.  “And we are just now finding out damning details about how $400 million, which is less than half of the total, was sent to Iran using foreign aircraft and foreign currencies.”
Pompeo led several unsuccessful inquiries into the cash payout. He said the administration has been stonewalling efforts to obtain a full readout of the exchange in both classified and unclassified settings since January.
Pompeo expressed anger that the administration is “totally stonewalling congressional inquiries,” while leaving it to the press to unearth the details of the exchange.
“That is far too long of a timeline, especially as it is in the face of the Obama administration totally stonewalling congressional inquiries into this matter since January,” Pompeo said.
“We still do not know how the other $1.3 billion was sent, and we still have three Americans sitting in prisons in Iran,” Pompeo said, explaining that the bulk of the cash to Iran remains shrouded in mystery.
Congressional sources with knowledge of the situation told the Free Beacon that the State Department and other administration officials withheld details regarding the payment for more than three months–and only then provided a barebones accounting of the payout that omitted all mention of the secret cash delivery.
Sources who spoke to the Free Beacon said this was an intentional effort by the administration to keep lawmakers in the dark and prevent them from receiving a full accounting of the $1.7 billion payout.
A timeline centered around these inquires reveals that administration officials stonewalled Congress for months before providing responses that omitted any mention of the hard currency transfer.
Pompeo launched an inquiry seeking further details in January, when the legal settlement was first announced.
By mid-March, the State Department still had not responded, as was first reported by the Free Beacon.
The State Department informed Pompeo later that month in a hand-delivered letter that the information he was seeking was classified.
A classified briefing was held in late April. Sources familiar with the briefing told the Free Beacon that administration officials made no mention of the $400 million cash delivery. This information was only made public when the Wall Street Journal reported it late Monday.
One congressional source working on the issue said that the Obama administration could now spend funds set aside for American victims of terrorism on further payments to Iran.
“This just makes you wonder how far President Obama is willing to go to appease the Iranians,” the source said. “Iran keeps taking American citizens hostage because it knows the administration will cave. It wouldn’t surprise me if the president has authorized negotiations with Iran over the $2 billion that is meant to go to the families of the victims of Iranian terror.”
“Every action this administration has taken toward Iran has been in furtherance of the regime’s interests and at our expense,” the source added. “What else is currently being negotiated between the administration and Iran? The American people deserve to know and they should demand full transparency.”
A second congressional source involved in the issue told the Free Beacon that obfuscation by the administration has become a pattern and practice when it comes to Iran.
“Congress continues to press the Obama administration on every change and new policy regarding Iran,” the source said. “At every turn, we are met with ‘no comment’ and further secrecy, which is why the American people do not like this deal and understand it does not make them safer.”
Another source familiar with the administration’s thinking said that administration efforts to downplay the latest disclosures do no comport with the reality that this payment was part of a secret negotiation.
“The Obama admin is hoping to convince people that there’s nothing new in this scandal,” the source said. “But they can’t convince members of Congress because members know that they weren’t told all the details about this cash payment for hostages. For instance, the administration has refused to fully disclose all the ways in which it has transferred money to Iran all of the time.”
The White House declined on Wednesday to offer further details to reporters.

State Dept Spox: We Can’t Rule Out $400 Million Payment to Iran Will Be Used for Terrorism

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
State Department spokesman Mark Toner told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday the United States cannot rule out that the $400 million in cash the Obama Administration gave to Iran will be used to fund terrorist activities.
The administration airlifted $400 million to Iran in January as Tehran released four Americans it had detained, causing critics to call the payment ransom money, which the White House denies.
Blitzer asked Toner if there were any restrictions on how the Iranians could use the funds.
“Are there any restrictions on how the Iranians can use that $400 million?” he asked.
Toner said the cash is officially Iran’s money and he could not comment on any possible restrictions on it. He added that from what the United States government could see, the money has been used towards projects such as infrastructure improvement.
“I can’t speak to what restrictions that may be in place regarding that,” he said. “That is Iran’s money. But, what we have seen, and I think some U.S. officials have spoken to this, is that the money has not been used–as far as we can see, for any nefarious purposes. It has been used for infrastructure improvement, development projects, et cetera.”
He then pointed out that Iran could possibly use the money to conduct “bad behavior” in the Middle East.
“We haven’t seen it used,” he said. “Now, we can’t rule that out again because we’ve seen Iran continue to exercise bad behavior in the region. We can’t change that overnight.”
Blitzer noted that the Iranian government “has still been providing military financial aid” to groups that the U.S. considers terrorist organizations or destabilizing forces, such as Lebanese Hezbollah and the Assad regime in Syria, among others.
Toner said this was true and the U.S. has seen this behavior continue.
He then explained that the $400 million was a settlement payment.
“But again, this was a settlement of a claim that, frankly, had the tribunal settled it, might have gone more in Iran’s favor and cost the Americans taxpayers more money,” he said.
“These are claims that are outstanding from the downfall of the government in 1979,” Toner said.