First Round of French Presidential Election a Blow to the Establishment

/0 Comments/in , /by

France held a presidential election Sunday under the looming threat of Islamist terrorism, and winnowed the field to two candidates at opposite ends of what has become the new ideological battle line of our era: nationalism vs. globalism, for lack of better terms.

One candidate, Marine Le Pen, hails from the pitchfork end of European blood-and-soil nationalism. The other candidate, Emmanuel Macron, is a We-Are-The-World internationalist cut in the mold of Barack Obama and Justin Trudeau.

According to initial results, Macron won 23.7 percent of the vote, while Le Pen won 21.7 percent in what was the first round of this election. They will face off in the second runoff round of elections on May 7. None of the other nine candidates running Sunday got above 20 percent support. Le Pen wants to end immigration to France, saying the country is full.

Macron is heavily favored to win in the second round, though. Of course, polls have been wrong in the past.

The two are archetypes of the new global struggle that has replaced the old left-right paradigm. Their reactions to a terrorist attack on Thursday on France’s main boulevard, the Champs Elysees, for which ISIS claimed responsibility, epitomized their outlooks.

Following the attack, Macron wondered on French Radio whether terrorism is a new normal to which the French must become accustomed.

“This threat, this imponderable problem, is part of our daily lives for the years to come,” Macron said.

Le Pen said she would deport everyone on the terror watch list, even those born in France, shut down all Islamist mosques, and close French borders.

Le Pen leads the far-right National Front, founded by her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, whom she ousted as leader to “de-demonize” the party after years of anti-Semitic and racist statements by him.

Macron founded his own movement, En Marche!, after serving as economy minister for the current Socialist president, Francois Hollande.

Their victory amounted to a complete collapse of the two parties that have mostly alternated in power since Gen. Charles de Gaulle created France’s Fifth Republic in 1958, the right-of-center Gaullists and the leftist Socialists. The only exception to this two-party system was the election of centrist President Valerie Giscard d’Estaing in the 1970s.

Because Macron and Le Pen come from parties without large political bases, it is unlikely that either will benefit from a legislative majority that will emerge after elections on June 11 and 18. Macron, however, is widely expected to be able to cobble together a supportive coalition should he win the presidential election in May.

There’s no question that Le Pen’s suite of policies and stances fit much better with President Donald Trump’s outlook. Trump predicted two days ago that she would benefit from the terrorist attack.

Le Pen, 48, wants to pull France out of the “Schengen Area” of 26 European countries that have dissolved external borders, and out of the European Union’s common currency, the euro.

But she is also close to Russian President Vladimir Putin, from whom the Trump administration is now trying to put some distance. Le Pen said she would consider lifting economic sanctions on Russia if elected. Her campaign has benefited from Russian bank loans and the support of Putin’s vast propaganda empire.

Macron, 39, is the candidate that best fits the style of Angela Merkel, Germany’s powerful chancellor. Of the 11 candidates who ran on Sunday, Macron most closely echoes Merkel’s staunch support for a strong and expanding European Union, her pro-immigration policies, and her desire to keep in place economic sanctions on Russia. His promises to introduce economic reforms also please Berlin.

Merkel’s aversion to Le Pen is so strong—and so richly reciprocated—that The Economist remarked on Sunday, using the name of the German foreign ministry, that “There is no file sitting in a locked drawer somewhere in the Auswärtiges Amt with contingency plans for a Le Pen win.”

But even a Macron-led France can work with the Trump administration. In Africa, for example, Paris can make the case to the White House that its troops fight terrorism every day in a place that seems to be next front line for ISIS and al-Qaeda. It is likely that the administration would see even a Macron-led France as a partner in this endeavor.

Despite their differences, Le Pen and Macron have distinct similarities. They are both big government types.

Le Pen is a champion of public services, would tax companies that outsource manufacturing, and would not touch France’s economically nefarious 35-hour workweek. She also refuses to cut down France’s bloated civil servant rolls.

Macron says he wants “flexibility” for young Frenchmen when it comes to the workweek. But he can see reducing the workweek for people above 50 to 32 hours or even 30 hours. “Why not?” he asks.

Macron also wants to spend an additional 50 billion euros during the upcoming five-year presidential term. He wants a eurozone budget and finance minister. He would not raise France’s low retirement age of 62, but at least he would not lower it even further to 60, which is what Le Pen promises to do.

And there’s no question that in choosing these two candidates, French voters have snubbed the political establishment. If the election of Trump was American voters throwing a brick through the window of the East Coast establishment, this was the French voters hurling a Molotov Cocktail into the still smoke-filled rooms of France’s political class. (For more from the author of “First Round of French Presidential Election a Blow to the Establishment” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

UN Elects Largest Oppressor of Women, Saudi Arabia, to Women’s Rights Commission — Seriously

/0 Comments/in , /by

Saudi Arabia isn’t known for gender equality. In fact, the Saudi government’s idea of fair play among the sexes is ensuring women their husbands can only have three more wives. Saudi women truly have zero rights in society. Ranking Saudi Arabia among the 10 worst countries for women, the Toronto Star wrote,

In oil-rich Saudi Arabia, women are treated as lifelong dependents, under the guardianship of a male relative. Deprived of the right to drive a car or mix with men publicly, they are confined to strictly segregated lives on pain of severe punishment.

So, imagine the surprise and dismay the world is now exhibiting with the knowledge the United Nations has elected Saudi Arabia as a member of its Women’s Rights Commission called the “Commission on the Status of Women.”

Geneva-based UN Watch president Hillel Neuer likened the election to, “making an arsonist into the town Fire Chief!” Neuer went on a Twitter tirade to drive home the significance of his opposition to allowing Saudi Arabia to have a seat anywhere near a women’s rights council.

“The news the @UN never wanted you to see—but we made it go viral. Saudi Arabia elected to women’s rights commission,” he tweeted. Calling on opponents to rise up, he stated, “But why not show moral courage & condemn this UN betrayal of Saudi women’s rights activists? UNESCO’s chief condemned its election of Syria.”

And in another tweet, he said, “How does Saudi Arabia win seats on U.N. human rights bodies? Cash & secret deals—even with adversaries like Russia.” Neuer’s reference to Saudi money, certainly a factor in buying their way onto the commission, is nothing new. The Free Thought Project has been chronicling their monetary influence for years.

Earlier this year we told you the Saudis heavily influence John McCain’s politics, leading some to question his motives for encouraging the U.S. to join the Syrian Civil War. And on the Democratic side of the two-party-paradigm, the Saudis have given millions to the Clintons. So, it should come as no surprise watch dogs like UN Watch are saying the same thing about the Saudis.

What does it mean for the world now that the Saudis have a seat at the women’s rights table? Glad you asked….UN Watch describes the election as very significant.

The fundamentalist monarchy is now one of 45 countries that, according to the U.N., will play an instrumental role in “promoting women’s rights, documenting the reality of women’s lives throughout the world, and shaping global standards on gender equality and the empowerment of women.”

The election, also, was anything but transparent. The kingdom of Saudi Arabia was elected by a “secret ballot” last week at the U.N.’s 54-nation Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). The U.S. reportedly objected to a Saudi nomination and pressed the countries of the world to take a vote, in protest of the ECOSOC’s customary practice of “rubber stamping” nominations. Unfortunately for women, the vote passed and the Saudis were placed on the commission.

Saudi Arabia, who was exposed by the 28-pages for helping to fund the 9/11 terrorist attacks which brought down the World Trade Center’s twin towers, and who is being sued in court by families of the victims, is the same country which kills homosexuals and stones adulterers.

When 9/11 happened, instead of going after the Saudis — who made up the majority of the hijackers — the George W. Bush administration attacked and overthrew Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq, and destroyed the country of Afghanistan.

If you need any evidence on just how oppressive the Saudi regime is, look no further than the video below that aired on national television — an instructional video on how to beat your wife.

The video features a Saudi doctor, Khaled Al-Saqaby, who deals with the often ‘thorny’ issue of how and when to beat your wife. Al-Saqaby begins the video by telling husbands not to immediately attack their wives, but to discipline them properly first.

When speaking of how women some women say they would like to be treated with equality, Al-Saqaby called this a “very grave problem.”

He says, “The first step is to remind her of your rights and of her duties according to Allah. Then comes the second step – forsaking her in bed.”

The third step, beating, has to correspond with the “necessary Islamic conditions” before taking action.

“The beating should not be performed with a rod, nor should it be a headband, or a sharp object.”

Instead, husbands should use a ‘tooth-cleaning twig or with a handkerchief’ to beat their wife.

Hopefully, then, the wife will “feel that she was wrong in the way she treated her husband.”

At the end of the video, Al-Saqaby lets the wife-beating husbands of Saudi Arabia know that sometimes, you may have to dole out an extra beating outside of the world of just discipline. Sometimes, according to this sicko ‘doctor,’ they just deserve to be beaten. (For more from the author of “UN Elects Largest Oppressor of Women, Saudi Arabia, to Women’s Rights Commission — Seriously” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Netanyahu Welcomes ‘Great Change’ Under Trump During Mattis Visit

/0 Comments/in , /by

The leader of Israel is no longer hiding his relief that he gets to move on from the anti-Israel policies of former President Barack Obama.

Greeting U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis Friday morning, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu noted the “welcome change” in the new administration under President Donald Trump.

Mattis is in Israel as part of a greater Middle East trip in which he has been meeting with American allies throughout the region. The retired decorated general turned secretary of defense had stops in Egypt and Saudi Arabia before arriving in Jerusalem for the third leg of his trip. He will visit Qatar on Saturday and Djibouti on Sunday, before heading back to Washington.

“Israel has no better friend than America. America has no better friend than Israel,” Netanyahu said upon greeting Mattis for their joint press conference. “This is a partnership based on common values in the deepest sense of the word.”

Netanyahu praised Mattis and President Trump for their “clear and forthright” language used to describe the threat from the terrorist regime in Iran.

America and Israel face “twin threats” in today’s global security environment, Netanyahu explained, discussing how their common adversaries include the “Shiite extremists led by Iran and the Sunni extremist led by Daesh (the Islamic State).”

Mattis added: “Especially the week before Holocaust Remembrance [Day], I think it’s important that we remind ourselves that if good people don’t band together, then bad people can do a lot of damage in this world.”

Earlier, Mattis met with Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman. The two discussed the major threat posed by the Iranian regime’s use of terrorist proxies to achieve its goals, and how Tehran continues to threaten global stability with its nuclear program.

Israeli leaders, Netanyahu especially, appear relieved that they no longer have to deal with the Obama administration’s constant harassment of the Jewish state.

Obama accused Israel of “humiliating” Palestinians. His top diplomat, John Kerry, accused Israel of becoming an “apartheid” state, and claimed Israel could not be both Jewish and democratic. The Obama administration also delivered the theocratic regime in Iran over $100 billion in unfrozen assets, and empowered Islamic supremacists worldwide with his support of the Arab spring revolts. In Obama’s last days, he allowed the United Nations to pass an anti-Israel resolution that was so vehemently toxic even Democrats rebuked the former president for his hostility to Israel.

That’s why it surprised nobody when Netanyahu accepted what he called “a great change in the direction of American policy.” (For more from the author of “Netanyahu Welcomes ‘Great Change’ Under Trump During Mattis Visit” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Sees No Role for U.S. In Stabilizing Libya

/0 Comments/in , /by

President Donald Trump said Thursday that he does not see the U.S. playing a role in helping to stabilize Libya, because the U.S. has enough roles right now.

“I do not see a role in Libya. I think the United States has right now enough roles. We’re in a role everywhere, so I do not see that,” Trump said when asked if he sees a role for his administration in helping to stabilize Libya and if stabilizing Libya means combating terrorism and ISIS.

“I do see a role in getting rid of ISIS. We’re being very effective in that regard. We are doing a job, with respect to ISIS, that has not been done anywhere near the numbers that we’re producing right now. It’s a very effective force we have. We have no choice. It’s a horrible thing to say, but we have no choice,” the president said in a joint press conference with Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni at the White House.

Trump said he considers getting rid of ISIS the United States’ primary role.

“And we are effectively ridding the world of ISIS. I see that as a primary role, and that’s what we’re going to do, whether it’s in Iraq or in Libya or anywhere else, and that role will come to an end at a certain point, and we’ll be able to go back home and rebuild our country, which is what I want to do,” he said. (Read more from “Trump Sees No Role for U.S. In Stabilizing Libya” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Sessions: We Will Seek to Put Leakers in Jail

/0 Comments/in , /by

Asked on Thursday if arresting WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is a Justice Department priority, Attorney General Jeff Sessions indicated the answer is yes.

“We are going to step up our effort — and already are stepping up our efforts — on all leaks,” Sessions told a news conference in El Paso, Texas.

“This is a matter that’s gone beyond anything I’m aware of. We have professionals in the security business of the United States for many years that are shocked by the number of leaks, and some of them are quite serious,” Sessions said.

“So, yes, it is a priority. We already have begun to step up our efforts, and whenever a case can be made, we will seek to put some people in jail,” he added.

CIA Director Mike Pompeo last week described WikiLeaks as a “hostile non-state intelligence agency.” He accused Assange of making “common cause with dictators,” by giving repressive regimes a free pass, while exploiting “the legitimate secrets of democratic governments.” (Read more from “Sessions: We Will Seek to Put Leakers in Jail” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Cause for Alarm? China Put in Charge of Iranian Nuclear Site

/0 Comments/in , /by

China and Iran have signed a deal to modify an integral part of the latter’s nuclear program at the Arak heavy water nuclear site. The news comes just one day after the Trump administration certified that Iran has committed to its responsibilities under the nuclear agreement signed by the former Obama administration and the Iranian regime in 2015. On the same day that President Trump verified Iran’s compliance in the agreement, the Iranian Supreme Leader declared the United States an “enemy” nation.

A heavy water plant is an essential element in producing the material needed to developing a nuclear weapons program. Iran insists that the Arak reactor is purposed with producing “isotopes for cancer and other medical treatments.” However, heavy water reactors are needed to cool down reactors that churn out plutonium, which can be used to create a nuclear bomb.

The Arak plant was uncovered thanks to 2002 satellite images from the Institute for Science and International Security.

As part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreed to by Iran and world powers, Iran is supposed to modify the heavy water reactor so it could not produce weapons-grade plutonium.

Whether the United States can trust China to lead the project is a matter of concern. Most geopolitical observer recognize that China views Iran as an ally and the United States as an adversary.

Moreover, China has previously helped supply the Iranian regime with nuclear material and advanced missile technology that would have been otherwise likely impossible to produce internally. Since the early 80s, the Chinese government has clandestinely and overtly helped the Mullahs develop their nuclear program.

International agencies such as the United Nations have been tasked with verifying compliance. No American inspectors are allowed on any of the Iranian nuclear sites, thanks to terms agreed to by the Obama administration. Therefore, whether or not Iran is cheating on the nuke deal is left completely to foreign bodies.

Iran has already breached the material limits used by the nuclear reactor that were imposed under the JCPOA. The IAEA, the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog, said Tehran exceeded the limit twice last year.

Beijing is looking forward to beginning the project. “The signing of this contract will create good conditions for substantively starting the redesign project,” said China Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang. (For more from the author of “Cause for Alarm? China Put in Charge of Iranian Nuclear Site” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

ISIS Starves Civilians to Force Them Into Fighting for the Caliphate

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Islamic State is withholding food and water from citizens in Mosul in an effort to force them into joining the terrorist organization, according to an Iraqi non-profit.

The beleaguered terrorist organization has suffered personnel and territory losses since the U.S.-backed Iraqi Security Forces began operations to retake Mosul in October. Combat operations in Mosul have led to intense, street-to-street fighting in the city’s western area. ISIS is now forcibly conscripting the thousands of locals who remain by withholding food and water, according to a report by the Iraqi Observatory for Human Rights.

“An infant and its sister [have] died last week in Uruba neighborhood due to lack of food,” the report stated. “Now their mother is facing the same fate as she is in a very bad health condition.”

Some local civilians have given into ISIS to survive.

A single hospital in Mosul has seen hundreds of cases of malnourished and dehydrated people, mostly children, a representative told the Observatory. (Read more from “ISIS Starves Civilians to Force Them Into Fighting for the Caliphate” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Lets Iran off the Hook … For Now

/0 Comments/in , /by

By certifying Tehran’s compliance in the Iran nuclear deal for at least the next 90 days, President Trump is sending mixed messages about an agreement he famously called the “worst deal ever.”

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson sent a letter to Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., Tuesday confirming that the Trump administration will continue to abide by the agreement made by the Obama administration with the world’s foremost state sponsor of terror.

“The U.S. Department of State certified to U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan today that Iran is compliant through April 18th with its commitments under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action,” the letter read.

Tillerson also “raised concerns about Iran’s role as a state sponsor of terrorism and alerted Congress to an effort directed by the President to evaluate whether continuing to lift sanctions would be in U.S. national security interests,” a press statement said.

Additionally, President Trump has directed the National Security Council to review whether the deal is “vital to the national security interests of the United States.”

Dealing with Iran comes with its downsides. The country remains a vital threat to global security.

Iran’s worldwide terror scheme involves arming and support of Palestinian terrorist outfits such as Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas. The regime also utilizes its proxy terror group Hezbollah to disrupt order and kill innocents in Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon. Hezbollah also participates in the global drug trade in order to boost relationships with western drug cartels and help fund the caliphatist endeavors of Tehran. Iran also funds and arms countless militias and jihadist outfits in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and elsewhere.

Additionally, the Institute for Science and International Security, which has been very skeptical about the Iran deal, has urged caution on moving forward with judgement on the president’s decision. They say that certification should be seen as a “tactical decision” to buy more time for a further review.

During his campaign for the presidency, Trump described the deal as the “worst deal ever negotiated.” He has used strong language in speaking out against the deal.

The president has the authority to unilaterally end the Iran deal, but he has instead chosen to give the Mullahs 90 more days. The Iran deal is not legally binding and can be dismissed immediately. Why the president has so radically changed from his initial anti-Iran deal platform remains a mystery unsolved, as the president has consistently spoken out publicly against the deal.

It remains unclear how the Trump administration will be able to wholly certify Iran’s compliance. A similar process failed to reveal that Syria kept stockpiles of chemical weapons. Much of the review process relies upon outside agencies, such as the United Nations and Russia, to confirm compliance. (For more from the author of “Trump Lets Iran off the Hook … For Now” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Photo of Soldier Raising Cross on Rubble of Mt. Sinjar Church Easter Sunday Goes Viral

/0 Comments/in , /by

Once Iraq’s largest Christian city, Sinjar is perhaps best known as the place where ISIS massacred more than 5,000 Yazidi men and captured 7,000 women for sex slaves in November, 2014. ISIS destroyed churches, buildings and homes. The city was left as a wasteland. But on Easter Sunday, one soldier put Sinjar back on the map with a simple act that went viral on Facebook.

An anonymous soldier carried a wooden cross to the top of what once was Mt. Sinjar Church. He lifted it into place on top of the rubble. His act of faith was captured by a camera and posted on Facebook by Hazem Farraj, a Palestinian-American Christian televangelist. Above the photos, Farraj wrote:

With a rifle on his shoulder, tears in his eyes, he places the cross on the top of the now ISIS destroyed Mt Sinjar Church. What does resurrection look like? This. Happy Easter everybody. #Resurrection #Jesus

The images were re-posted by actor James Woods and other media personalities. As of Wednesday, the post has over 24,000 likes and almost 14,000 retweets.

(For more from the author of “Photo of Soldier Raising Cross on Rubble of Mt. Sinjar Church Easter Sunday Goes Viral” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

What next with North Korea?

/0 Comments/in , /by

There was a moment at Press Secretary Sean Spicer’s White House briefing Monday that was significant. Asked by a reporter about North Korea’s missile launch last weekend, Spicer said the administration was aware of the launch and that “it failed.” End of story. Next question, please.

Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the former Conservative foreign secretary in Britain, might provide an explanation for Spicer’s tight-lipped response. Rifkind told the BBC Sunday that “…there is a very strong belief that the U.S. — through cyber methods — has been successful on several occasions in interrupting these sorts of tests and making them fail.”

At present, there are no direct links to a cyber attack on North Korea from the U.S., but that hasn’t stopped media outlets from reporting the possibility of one.

American Actions

Last month, the U.S. began sending the first elements of its Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense system to South Korea, though China opposed the move. When it becomes operational will it, along with cyber attacks, be enough to deter North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Un from conducting new missile tests capable of hitting the U.S. with a nuclear warhead, which he has repeatedly threatened to do? Kim has said he will conduct missile tests “weekly” in response to U.S. threats.

On a recent visit to South Korea, Vice President Mike Pence vowed that “the era of strategic patience is over,” a strategy adopted by the Obama administration to explain its long-term view on global conflict resolution. Pence added, “North Korea would do well not to test (President Trump’s) resolve — or the strength of the armed forces of the United States in this region.”

How much of this is bluster on both sides no one can say for sure. After President Trump’s meeting with Chinese president Xi Jinping, there is some optimism that China might be able to exert sufficient pressure on its unpredictable ally to pull back from a direct confrontation with the U.S. Of greatest concern for the Trump administration, in addition to South Korean civilians who would likely suffer massive casualties should there be a North Korean invasion, are the more than 28,000 U.S. troops stationed in South Korea. Kim has threatened to attack them and flood South Korea with his ground forces.

What’s the Goal?

What is our goal with North Korea? Is it regime change? If so, who and what would follow if Kim is ousted? Kim, his father and grandfather have established such an atmosphere of complete control and cult-like obedience with North Koreans who have been cut off from all outside information that it is hard to predict how the people would react. It’s a good bet political prisoners in North Korea’s prison camps would be overjoyed if the regime fell and they were set free.

Humanrights.gov estimates between “80,000 and 120,000 political prisoners and family members are detained in these camps, where starvation, forced labor, executions, torture, rape, forced abortion and infanticide are commonplace.”

Those who wish to hold off on further challenges to North Korea must ask themselves a question. Given the erratic behavior of Kim Jong-Un and his bellicose promises to strike the U.S. with a nuclear missile, is it better to take him seriously and stop him now, or wait until he has the capability to carry out his threat?

Last week, Hawaii’s House public safety committee passed a resolution calling for the state’s defense agency to repair hundreds of fallout shelters that have not been updated since the 1980s and restock them with medical supplies, food and water.

We haven’t yet reached the tension level of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, which put the United States in direct confrontation with the Soviet Union and brought the world to the brink of nuclear war, but the current tension between the U.S. and North Korea could quickly spiral downward.

Will the “peace through strength” doctrine of the Reagan administration, which suggested that military power could help preserve peace, work today? During the Reagan years, Soviet leaders were not unstable, as Kim Jong-Un appears to be, and a nuclear confrontation was avoided. Perhaps a demonstration of what the U.S can do with cyber warfare, a missile defense system and help from China will be enough.

One can only hope. (For more from the author of “What next with North Korea?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.