Ponderable

Hmmmmmmmmmmm.........
EXPLOSIVE: Report Says WaPo Reporter Killed In Saudi Consulate May Have Been Foreign Agent
gettyimages-460492708.jpg

Photo by Mohammed Al-Shaikh/AFP/Getty Images
ByHank Berrien
December 27, 2018
views
A new report asserts that Washington Post reporter Jamal Khashoggi, who was killed inside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul on Oct. 2, may have been a foreign agent working for the government of Qatar in order to change U.S. policy against Saudi Arabia and in favor of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Writing in The Federalist, Jim Hanson, president of Security Studies Group, and a former member of U.S. Special Forces, notes that the Post admitted in an article on December 21 that an executive at Qatar Foundation International worked with Khashoggi to influence Khashoggi’s columns so they aggressively targeted the Saudi government. The Post wrote, “Text messages between Khashoggi and an executive at Qatar Foundation International show that the executive, Maggie Mitchell Salem, at times shaped the columns he submitted to The Washington Post, proposing topics, drafting material and prodding him to take a harder line against the Saudi government.” Hanson notes, “The Qatar Foundation denies they were paying him to produce the anti-Saudi material.”

But then Hanson ups the ante considerably as to Khashoggi’s possible status as a foreign agent, writing:

But during Security Studies Group research for our report on the information operation after his death, we heard from reliable sources familiar with the investigation that documents showing wire transfers from Qatar were found in his apartment in Turkey. They were immediately put out of reach by Turkish security services, so they did not show the collusion between Khashoggi, Qatar, and Turkey prior to his death. We have published a new, unredacted set of findings about the case. It is damning to Qatar, Turkey, and the Washington Post. Khashoggi may have been operating in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act by doing this on behalf of Qatar.

Hanson points out Qatar supports the Muslim Brotherhood, which is regarded as a terrorist organization by many Gulf nations; members of Congress have pushed for naming the group a terrorist organization.

Hanson adds that Turkey and Qatar drove the narrative after the killing of Khashoggi, and fed their chosen information to “major Western English-language journalist outlets.”

Hanson points out that Qatar is currently flirting more seriously with Russia, Iran, and Turkey, which is inimical to American interests; that Qatar has hacked into the personal information of Americans; that Qatar is friendly with extremist groups including the Taliban in Afghanistan.

In January 2017, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies delineated Qatar’s support for terrorist groups:

The State Department revealed in its 2015 Country Reports on Terrorism that “entities and individuals within Qatar continue to serve as a source of financial support for terrorist and violent extremist groups, particularly regional al-Qa’ida affiliates such as the Nusrah Front.” Qatar has historically also been described by the U.S. as a site for the private financing of other terrorist groups besides Nusra. Al-Qaeda’s senior leadership is alleged by Washington to have received support from Qatar- based donors, as is al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, al-Shabaab, al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent, al-Qaeda operatives in Iran, and al-Qaeda in Iraq, the forerunner to IS.

According to Treasury, the Islamic State’s “Amir of suicide bombers” made arrangements “to receive approximately $2 million from a Qatar-based ISIL facilitator,” who enlisted his “assistance with fundraising efforts in Qatar.” There is no sign Qatar ever acted against this unnamed financier. Qatar hosts Hamas moneymen under U.S. counterterrorism sanctions and has even directly financed the group. The U.S. has also reported the Taliban and Lashkar-e-Taiba having fundraised in Qatar
Making excuses for torture and murder now I see.
 
Much, much better than being an anti-American rube like you and your brainwashed brethren. t is taking us down and you applaud.
Trump is attempting to put us back together after Clinton, bush and the Kenyan, if you douche bags would get out of the way everything would be just fine.
 
I'm sure this will make the Trollskis and Nutters in here howl with rage, as facts always seem to do. So consider this post as being for the non-nutters, who don't see Trump as the second coming. Also let me say, damn, Anne Applebalm's got some heavy hands...

Anyway, I had no idea that there are now more Canadians entering the US illegally every year then Mexicans? But think my favorite paragraph is this one:
"A wall can only be effective if people, drones, cameras and spy planes are deployed to protect it, as so many other examples well demonstrate. The “wall” that separates Israel from the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza — often cited by the president as an effective example to follow — isn’t a wall at all; it is a “multi layered composite obstacle ” composed of multiple fences, barricades and ditches that are constantly patrolled and monitored. Unless you are prepared to pay for all of that as well, a U.S.-Mexican border wall is pointless."



Has the GOP retreated into a world of make-believe? The shutdown debate will tell us.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...1c95106d96a_story.html?utm_term=.da152f72b435

I know it’s a tiresome discussion. I know that most people would rather not be having it. I also know that the government shutdown is an appalling hardship for hundreds of thousands of government workers, from janitors to park rangers to NASA scientists, especially during the Christmas season. But, in its way, the gridlock that has settled in over Washington during this latest government shutdown is an important, meaningful milestone. How we resolve it — if we resolve it — will tell us whether we are still capable, as a nation, of making decisions using facts and evidence. Specifically, it will tell us whether Republicans in Congress, the White House and on Fox News live in the same reality as the rest of us, or whether they have retreated fully into a world of make-believe.

Take a step back and think about the “wall,” President Trump’s signature project at the center of the argument — and contemplate the fact that this wall will serve no purpose. Not only will it be ugly and bad for the environment; not only will it drain the budget; it also will fail to address the concerns of Americans who claim to oppose illegal immigration. This is the primary reason it should not be built.

In truth, if you say you care about illegal immigration, your focus shouldn’t even be on the border. The number of people crossing into the United States from Mexico illegally has actually been falling for many years, going back to the Obama administration and earlier. The numbers are down by 90 percent since 2000, thanks to better policing and a better Mexican economy (thank you, NAFTA). Meanwhile, a full two-thirds of those who have joined the illegal workforce in recent years did not illegally cross the southern border at all: They entered the country legally and then overstayed their visas. More than 700,000 people are thought to have used this method of illegal immigration last year. Within that group, the largest number are Canadians, followed closely by Mexicans, Venezuelans, Colombians and Brits. No wall will stop these illegal workers, whose total number far exceeds the asylum seekers from Central America.

But even if your concern is much narrower, even if you do think you really care about the border, you should also be against the wall because it will quickly become a symbol of waste. The U.S.-Mexican border, which is nearly 2,000 miles long, runs through deserts and wilderness. Sooner or later, people will find ways over and under it, just as they now find ways over and under the existing fencing. A wall can only be effective if people, drones, cameras and spy planes are deployed to protect it, as so many other examples well demonstrate. The “wall” that separates Israel from the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza — often cited by the president as an effective example to follow — isn’t a wall at all; it is a “multi layered composite obstacle ” composed of multiple fences, barricades and ditches that are constantly patrolled and monitored. Unless you are prepared to pay for all of that as well, a U.S.-Mexican border wall is pointless.

The hard truth is that the wall has no function. Its only purpose is to serve as a talisman, as a fairy tale, as a mythical, “beautiful” piece of concrete that will be paid for by Mexico. The only difference between the wall and the now-forgotten, equally mythical “caravan” that we discussed during the election is that construction will cost real money. We, not Mexico, will pay for it in taxes and, therefore, in lost productivity. Or we will pay for it in interest on the national debt. Or we will pay for it by sacrificing spending on fighter jets or health care or roads.

It will make our nation weaker and poorer — $5 billion poorer. That’s why this isn’t a debate about border policy. It’s a debate that tells us which of our politicians cares about the real world inhabited by real Americans and which prefer to live in a fantasy world created by the president’s imagination. For the future of the country, it’s important that reality wins.
 
EZ Whiskers. You're not that smart. You and the rest of the predictors lost your credibility two years ago.

Still working at the VA and ripping tax payers off by spending your on the clock time writing pro-republican online commentary instead the helping veterans. Personally I've always taken pride in my work and in doing a good job... but as always, I admire your gusto of living off the government cheese, while complaining about the government.
 
I'm sure this will make the Trollskis and Nutters in here howl with rage, as facts always seem to do. So consider this post as being for the non-nutters, who don't see Trump as the second coming. Also let me say, damn, Anne Applebalm's got some heavy hands...

Anyway, I had no idea that there are now more Canadians entering the US illegally every year then Mexicans? But think my favorite paragraph is this one:
"A wall can only be effective if people, drones, cameras and spy planes are deployed to protect it, as so many other examples well demonstrate. The “wall” that separates Israel from the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza — often cited by the president as an effective example to follow — isn’t a wall at all; it is a “multi layered composite obstacle ” composed of multiple fences, barricades and ditches that are constantly patrolled and monitored. Unless you are prepared to pay for all of that as well, a U.S.-Mexican border wall is pointless."
#1 All the Mexicans are already here.
#2 than
 
Still working at the VA and ripping tax payers off by spending your on the clock time writing pro-republican online commentary instead the helping veterans. Personally I've always taken pride in my work and in doing a good job... but as always, I admire your gusto of living off the government cheese, while complaining about the government.
My, you are tenacious.
 
Back
Top