Warning: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /home/tbrnew5/public_html/wp-includes/post-template.php on line 284

TBR News October 9, 2019

Oct 09 2019

The Voice of the White House Washington, D.C. October 8, 2019:

“Working in the White House as a junior staffer is an interesting experience.

When I was younger, I worked as a summer-time job in a clinic for people who had moderate to severe mental problems and the current work closely, at times, echos the earlier one.

I am not an intimate of the President but I have encountered him from time to time and I daily see manifestations of his growing psychological problems.

He insults people, uses foul language, is frantic to see his name mentioned on main-line television and pays absolutely no attention to any advice from his staff that runs counter to his strange ideas.

He lies like a rug to everyone, eats like a hog, makes lewd remarks to female staffers and flies into rages if anyone dares to contradict him.

It is becoming more and more evident to even the least intelligent American voter that Trump is vicious, corrupt and amoral. He has stated often that even if he loses the election in 2020, he will not leave the White House. I have news for Donald but this is not the place to discuss it.

Commentary for October 9: “One has the distinct feeling that Trump has backed himself into a corner from which he cannot escape. There is an old saying in Washington that sums this matter up very well:

Admit nothing

Deny everything

Demand to see the proof

Refuse to accept it.”


The Table of Contents 

  • Refuse, block, stonewall – but Trump’s strategy leaves little margin for error
  • Impeachment: White House refuses to comply with inquiry
  • The Kurds lose out again
  • Explained: Why Turkey wants a military assault on Syrian Kurds
  • An informative top level Nato conversation report
  • The Turkish massacre of Armenians: A Holocaust to remember
  • The CIA Confessions: The Crowley Conversations
  • Encyclopedia of American Loons

Refuse, block, stonewall – but Trump’s strategy leaves little margin for error

  • Trump is counting on the loyalty of subordinates who will face increasing pressure to testify, and analysts say that is risky
  • Democrats to subpoena ambassador blocked by Trump

October 9, 2019

by Tom McCarthy

The Guardian

In the opening exchanges of the impeachment inquiry against him, Donald Trump has adopted a hardline strategy of angrily denying congressional requests for documents and testimony and attacking the proceedings as illegitimate. Analysts say this is risky.

For now, a Republican majority in the Senate insulates Trump against the threat of removal from office. But that advantage does not appear to be guiding the president’s hand.

In contrast with Bill Clinton’s deflect-and-minimize approach, Trump has taken a more Richard Nixon-like route, treating impeachment as an existential attack and digging in for a gunfighter’s last stand.

It is a strategy with little margin for error, analysts say, with Trump depending all at once on keeping public approval behind him, on blocking myriad avenues by which Congress might collect evidence and, crucially, on retaining the loyalty of subordinates who will come under increasing pressure to testify.

A major poll released on Tuesday indicated that Trump might be miscalculating badly about public opinion. A 58% majority now support the inquiry versus 38% who oppose it, the Washington Post-Schar School poll found. Support for an impeachment inquiry has grown 20 points in three months, the poll found.

Regardless, Trump redoubled his strategy of stonewalling, blocking the testimony at the last minute of Gordon Sondland, the ambassador to the European Union who had flown to Washington to tell Congress what he knew about the president’s efforts to pressure Ukraine to announce investigations Trump could use against Joe Biden. Those efforts are at the core of the impeachment inquiry.

Sondland was prepared to exonerate Trump, the president tweeted, “but unfortunately he would be testifying before a totally compromised kangaroo court.”

In a statement issued by his lawyer, Sondland, a hotelier whose support for Trump wavered during the last presidential primary, sent a different message.

“Ambassador Sondland is profoundly disappointed that he will not be able to testify today,” the statement said. “He stands ready to testify on short notice, whenever he is permitted to appear.”

Hours later, congressional Democrats said Sondland had been blocked from testifying by a voicemail from superiors in the state department left at 12.30am. They announced they would subpoena Sondland’s testimony and his personal messages, ratcheting up the stakes.

The blocking of Sondland is part of a wagon-circling throughout the executive branch. On Friday, secretary of state Mike Pompeo missed a deadline to turn over documents. Congress has also issued subpoenas to the White House, the defense department and the Office of Management and Budget. Vice-president Mike Pence also faces a documents request.

Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, announced on Tuesday he would defy a congressional subpoena and said: “The position I’m stating is now the position of the administration.

“Let them hold me in contempt, Giuliani told the Washington Post. “We’ll go to court. We’ll challenge the contempt.”

The non-appearance of Sondland would only accelerate proceedings, said Adam Schiff, chair of the House committee leading the impeachment inquiry.

“The failure to produce this witness, the failure to produce these documents, we consider yet additional strong evidence of obstruction of the constitutional functions of Congress,” Schiff said.

Even if Trump’s stonewalling damages the ability of Democrats to collect evidence in the short term it could add to the case against him, said Bradley P Moss, a national security lawyer.

“Although it arguably would be better from a factual record standpoint to have all relevant fact witnesses testify and produce relevant documentation,” Moss wrote in an email, “if the House Democrats believe they have enough evidence already to proceed to impeachment, they can simply lump in the White House’s refusal to let witnesses testify into an all-encompassing ‘obstruction’ article of impeachment and throw that on the pile with everything else.”

Kamala Harris, a California senator and candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, tweeted: “Someone should tell Donald Trump that you can definitely be impeached for obstruction of justice.”

Trump’s reliance on the loyalty of subordinates also could represent a strategic misstep – because former officials are already talking.

After resigning, Kurt Volker, the former special envoy to Ukraine, last week delivered to Congress pages of WhatsApp messages between himself and other diplomats that damaged Trump’s efforts to characterize his negotiations on Ukraine.

Schiff has said he wants to speak with another diplomat, Bill Taylor, who wrote in the message exchange: “I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign.”

In a piece on the Just Security site comparing proceedings against Nixon, Clinton and Trump, former Clinton aide and impeachment trial witness Sidney Blumenthal noted that Nixon’s resistance to Congress accelerated his decline.

“When the Senate Watergate hearings began, Nixon’s standing in public opinion began to erode, a decline accelerated at each stage by his stonewalling of Congress and the courts,” Blumenthal wrote.

By refusing subpoenas and blocking testimony, the White House appears to hope to slow the process down. Trump loyalist Jim Jordan, a House Republican from Ohio, launched an attack on Tuesday against “the Democrats’ reckless haste”. Republican senator Lindsey Graham announced a new inquiry that would seek testimony from Giuliani and could compete with the House inquiry in the public mind.

In terms of public support, Trump does not have nearly so far to fall as Nixon did at a similar juncture.

It took five months of hearings against Nixon before public approval for the process hit 58%, noted Greg Dworkin, an editor at the liberal Daily Kos.

Impeachment proceedings against Trump are only two weeks old.



Impeachment: White House refuses to comply with inquiry

Eight-page letter to Democratic leaders sets stage for constitutional crisis, as legislative and executive branches clash

October 9, 2019

by David Smith in Washington

The Guardian

Donald Trump pushed the United States towards a constitutional crisis on Tuesday when his legal counsel said the White House would refuse to cooperate with Congress’s impeachment inquiry.

“Given that your inquiry lacks any legitimate constitutional foundation, any pretense of fairness, or even the most elementary due process protections, the Executive Branch cannot be expected to participate in it,” the counsel Pat Cipollone said in a letter to Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives.

The eight-page missive came after the Trump administration abruptly blocked a key witness in the Ukraine scandal from appearing before the congressional impeachment inquiry and sets up a clash between the White House and Congress – the executive and legislative branches – in the weeks ahead.


The letter appeared to put the emphasis on political rebuttal rather than structured legal argument – perhaps marking a new strategy to counter the impeachment threat with stalling and counter-attacking.

Trump aides have begun honing their approach after two weeks of what some allies have described as a listless and unfocused response to the inquiry.

The inquiry was launched by the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, last month after it emerged that, in a July phone call, Trump had pressed the leader of Ukraine to investigate a political rival, Joe Biden. The president and his allies have sought to question the inquiry’s legitimacy.

In particular, the White House objects that the House did not formally vote to begin the impeachment inquiry, breaking with precedent set in the inquiries into Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.

Pelosi has insisted the House is well within its rules to conduct oversight of the executive branch under the constitution regardless of a vote.

The administration is also sharply critical of the conduct of House intelligence committee chairman, Adam Schiff, whose committee is leading the inquiry, and it appears determined to stonewall Democrats for as long as possible.

In its most aggressive response yet, Cipollone wrote in the letter, released in the late afternoon on Tuesday: “Your unprecedented actions have left the president with no choice. In order to fulfill his duties to the American people, the Constitution, the Executive Branch and all future occupants of the Office of the Presidency, President Trump and his administration cannot participate in your partisan and unconstitutional inquiry under these circumstances.”

Cipollone’s letter threatens to end cooperation with Congress on important oversight matters, accusing members of formulating their investigation “in a manner that violates fundamental fairness and constitutionally mandated due process”.

It adds: “To comply with the Constitution’s demands, appropriate procedures would include – at a minimum – the right to see all evidence, to present evidence, to call witnesses, to have counsel present at all hearings, to cross-examine all witnesses, to make objections relating to the examination of witnesses or the admissibility of testimony and evidence, and to respond to evidence and testimony.”

In a statement responding to the letter, Pelosi said: “The White House letter is only the latest attempt to cover up his betrayal of our democracy, and to insist that the President is above the law. The letter is manifestly wrong, and is simply another unlawful attempt to hide the facts of the Trump Administration’s brazen efforts to pressure foreign powers to intervene in the 2020 elections.”

Earlier, the state department said the US ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, a Trump political donor, would not be allowed to appear, even though he had already travelled from Europe to testify behind closed doors. Trump decried the Democratic-led inquiry into whether he abused his office in the pursuit of personal political gain as a “kangaroo court”.

Democrats condemned the move, calling it an attempt to obstruct their inquiry, and issued a subpoena for Sondland, seeking documents by 14 October and a deposition on 16 October.

Schiff said the ambassador’s no-show was “yet additional strong evidence” of obstruction of Congress by Trump and the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, that will only strengthen a possible impeachment case.

Meanwhile, Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, has said he will not testify before the House intelligence committee unless committee members vote to remove Schiff. “I wouldn’t testify in front of that committee until there is a vote of Congress and he is removed,” Giuliani told the Washington Post. “Let them hold me in contempt. We’ll go to court. We’ll challenge the contempt.”

He added: “The position I’m stating is now the position of the administration.”

The House committees leading the fast-moving investigation intend to call and subpoena a number of Trump administration witnesses. The investigation could lead to the approval of articles of impeachment against Trump in the House. A trial on whether to remove him from office would then be held in the Senate, where Republicans have the upper hand.

Trump’s supporters in the House endorsed the letter. The House Republican leader, Kevin McCarthy, said: “House Democrats have wanted to undo the results of the 2016 election for three years, and now they’re rushing a sham impeachment process.

“President Trump is right to call out this rushed process because Democrats refuse to protect the transparency and basic fairness that have been integral to previous impeachment proceedings.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report


The Kurds lose out again

By pulling out of Syria, the US has betrayed its closest ally in the fight against the “Islamic State.” It may turn out to be a grave mistake with serious security consequences for Europe,

October 8, 2019

by Matthias von Hein


The latest news from Washington would seem to confirm the old Kurdish proverb: “No friends but the mountains.” On Sunday evening, the US announced it would no longer stand in the way of a Turkish incursion into Kurdish-controlled areas in northern Syria, which Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan had announced the day before.

Thus, the US has abandoned its closest ally in the fight against the so-called “Islamic State” (IS), leaving Kurds at the mercy of Erdogan’s overpowering military.

More than 10,000 Kurdish fighters have been killed battling IS over the past several years. Kurdish militia fighters have been the backbone of the Syrian Defense Forces (SDF), which did the lion’s share of fighting IS on the ground in Syria. Now, it is painfully clear: The Kurds were blinded by the hope that their effort would earn them US protection against a Turkish attack.

Is the ‘safe zone’ safe?

The Turkish president has been eyeing northern Syria for quite some time. Recently, Erdogan presented his plan for a 30-mile-wide (48-kilometer-wide) Syrian “safe zone” south of the Turkish border during the United Nations (UN) General Assembly in New York. At 500 kilometers in length, that would make the area roughly the size of the US state of New Jersey.

To date, Kurdish-controlled areas were like oases of stability in war-torn Syria. But that will very likely change when the Turkish incursion begins. To get an idea of what the pending operation may bring, one need only look back to another operation that took place in early 2018. Cynically named “Operation Olive Branch,” it saw Turkish forces marching into the city of Afrin alongside jihadist militias. The UN estimates that the operation forced some 140,000 people to flee Afrin and the surrounding area.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), an information office opposed to the Syrian government, has said that far more people were forced to flee. The group claims that as many as 350,000 people were displaced. Human rights organizations decried the systematic destruction of livelihoods, in which Kurdish houses were plundered and, ultimately, Syrian Arabs were settled in the area.

Now Erdogan is openly plotting a similar course. He claims he wants to create space for more than three million Syrian refugees who are no longer welcome in Turkey. In the end, that means Erdogan is planning ethnic cleansing to enable the relocation of refugees along the Turkish-Syrian border.

Who will deal with the remnants of IS?

Despite all of that, one must not forget that the fight against IS is far from over. True, the terror group lost all of its territory at the beginning of the year, but IS fighters are still hiding out across Syria. And the group’s ideology remains alive in the minds of the 12,000 IS fighters currently being guarded by the Kurds in northern Syria, as well as 70,000 IS adherents in refugee camps in the area.

When the Turks invade, Kurds will have a more pressing task than keeping an eye on the human remnants of the terrorist “caliphate.” US President Donald Trump may claim that Erdogan and Turkey are now responsible for IS prisoners and adherents, but a Turkish incursion into northern Syria certainly won’t make the world a safer place.


Explained: Why Turkey wants a military assault on Syrian Kurds

A Turkish military operation against Syrian Kurdish territory could unleash instability, displacement and intense fighting. The Kurds are warning of ethnic cleansing and all-out war.

October 8, 2019

by Chase Winter


Turkey appears poised to launch a military incursion against a US-backed, Kurdish-led militia alliance in northeast Syria, setting the stage for a potential bloodbath and instability across the region for years to come.

US President Donald Trump surprisingly announced US troops would pull away from the Turkish-Syrian border, allowing Turkey to carry out an operation against the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

Trump’s apparent green light to Ankara — despite opposition from the Pentagon, State Department and much of Congress — marks a stunning abandonment of the SDF, which has said it lost more than 11,000 fighters spearheading the battle against the “Islamic State” (IS) group in Syria.

Why would Turkey want to attack?

Turkey considers the Kurdish YPG, the main component of the SDF, a terrorist group linked to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which has fought a nearly four-decade war for Kurdish rights against the Turkish state.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has repeatedly threatened military action in northeast Syria, where the Kurds and local Arab and Christian allies have established a relatively stable, de facto autonomous region during the Syrian civil war.

More than a military threat, the Syrian Kurdish experiment in “democratic autonomy,” based on the libertarian socialist principles of imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan, represents an ideological challenge to Turkey.

What is Turkey planning?

The scale and size of a potential Turkish operation remain unclear. Turkey wants to create a 32-kilometer-deep, 480-kilometer-long corridor (20 miles deep, 300 miles long) inside Syria along the border to protect its security.

Turkey says it plans to resettle nearly 1 million of its 3.6 million Syrian refugees who hail from other parts of Syria inside the “safe zone.” In reality, a buffer zone may only extend several kilometers inside Syria and be formed around several pockets, and the operation conducted in stages.

With the support of the Turkish military, Turkey plans to use a motley group of its Syrian rebel allies to do much of the ground fighting and holding of territory.

The extent of the operation may be hampered after the US military said it was closing Syrian airspace to Turkish warplanes and US officials warned Turkey about any major operation.

What do the Kurds say?

Syrian Kurds are warning of ethnic cleansing and demographic engineering of areas along the border.

There are an estimated 1.8 million Kurds in Syria, about half of whom live within Turkey’s proposed buffer zone. SDF-controlled areas are believed to have around 1.5 million Arabs and tens of thousands of Christians.

In a statement, the SDF said it was “determined to defend our land at all costs.” The SDF has an estimated 60,000 fighters.

The landscape of northeast Syria is open plains, which would make it difficult for the lightly armed SDF to resist NATO’s second-largest army.

A Turkish military incursion into northeast Syria would likely send hundreds of thousands of civilians fleeing into SDF-controlled areas further south and into neighboring Iraqi Kurdistan.

Turkey’s plans would also exacerbate ethnic tensions for years to come and leave Ankara battling a long-run Kurdish insurgency.

The SDF warns that a fight with Turkey would force it to redeploy fighters and distract from securing the gains of its fight against IS. It has also warned that around 11,000 IS fighters in SDF prisons could flee in any chaos.

What led up to the proposed buffer zone?

US support for the SDF has been a major source of tension with NATO ally Turkey.

In December 2018, Trump announced that the roughly 2,000 US troops in Syria would be withdrawn because IS had been “defeated.” Under pressure from the Pentagon, Congress and European allies, he then reversed course.

Even Turkey, caught off guard by an unexpected US intention to retreat, was cautious about a hasty US withdrawal. But the announcement paved the way for months of talks between Turkish and US officials that led in August of this year to an agreement on a joint security mechanism to establish a “safe zone” in northeastern Syria.

Despite the agreement, both the US and Turkey remained at odds over the extent and long-term nature of the “safe zone.”

The agreement led to joint US-Turkish patrols inside a limited buffer zone to address Turkey’s concerns over the Syrian Kurds and the SDF dismantling its defenses along the border and pulling back heavy weaponry.

The agreement, which had buy-in from the SDF, was meant to buy time and appease Turkey.

Unsurprisingly, the SDF feels betrayed by Trump’s announcement to pull US troops from the border.

“We are not expecting the US to protect northeast Syria,” SDF spokesman Mustafa Bali said on Twitter on Monday. “But people here are owed an explanation regarding security mechanism deal, destruction of fortifications and failure of US to fulfill their commitments.”

“US forces did not fulfill their responsibilities and began withdrawing from the border, leaving the area to turn into a war zone. But SDF is determined to defend northeast Syria at all costs.”

What has Turkey done in the past?

Turkey has carried out two previous military operations inside Syria to thwart Kurdish ambitions.

In 2016, the Turkish military and its rebel allies launched Operation Euphrates Shield. The cross-border invasion cleared IS from an area spanning Jarabulus on the Euphrates River to Azaz in the west near the Kurdish-held enclave of Afrin.

The military operation was intended to block the Syrian Kurds from linking territories under their control in the northeast with Afrin. Unlike northeast Syria, the Turkish-controlled Euphrates Shield zone is predominately Arab. Turkey has resettled Syrian refugees in the area.

In 2018, Turkey launched an operation into Afrin that displaced roughly half of the enclave’s population of nearly 300,000. The YPG continues a low-level insurgency against the Turkish military and its Syrian rebel allies.

Rights groups have accused Turkish-backed forces of gross human rights violations, including forcible displacement, confiscation of property, pillaging, arbitrary arrest, torture, kidnapping and extortion. Turkey has moved the families of rebel fighters and other refugees into Afrin.


An informative top level Nato conversation report

A CTS report from NHQC35 concerning Turkish/American relations under date of 2/October 2019 is concerned with the apparent movement by Turkey into the Russian orbit.

On Monday, 30. September a telephone conversation was held between American President Trump and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, President of Turkey dealt with worsening Turkish/American relations. Mr. Trump was concerned about the Turkish purchase of Russia’s advanced S-400 air defence system for $2.5bn and that Turkey had sent members of its armed forces to Russia for training.

During the conversation, which lasted 23 minutes, President Trump was initially negative in his approach but President Erdoğan became even more negative.

He informed President Trump that he should be aware that Mr. Trump’s real estate holdings in Turkey, viz Trump Towers Kuştepe, Mecidiyeköy Yolu Cd. No:12, 34381 Şişli/İstanbul could, and would, be seized by the Turkish government for housing known anti-government rebels.

This had an effect on President Trump and he agreed to modify his views towards Turkey.

The final agreement was that the US government, upon the President’s personal orders, would withdraw American troops from Syria and allow Turkey to negate the activites of Kurdish terrorists.

Further, the American government would take into custody one Muhammed Fethullah Gülen, a dangerous anti-Turkish government rebel now resident in Saylorsburg, Pennsylvania and return him to Turkish custody.

In return for these two acts, President Erdoğan agreed to remain in Nato, lessen his dealings with Russia and assist the United States in securing specified area of the Middle East that were oil-producing.


The Turkish massacre of Armenians: A Holocaust to remember

Before World War I the Ottoman Empire came under the Young Turks government. At first some Armenian political organizations supported the Young Turks in hopes that there would be a real change from Abdul Hamid’s policies towards the Armenian population. There were Armenians elected to the Ottoman Parliament, where some remained throughout the ensuing world war. However they were later to be disappointed. Other parliamentarians such as Muradyan and Garo would go on to lead Armenian rebels in ethnic cleansing campaigns against Muslim and Jewish Ottoman villagers. The Young Turks feared the Armenian community, which they had believed was more sympathetic to allied powers (specifically Russia) than to the Ottoman Empire.

In 1914 Ottomans passed a new law that required all adult males up to age 45, to either be recruited in the Ottoman army or pay special fees in order to be excluded from service. Most of the Armenian recruits were later turned into road laborers and the executed. Those who escaped joined the Russians on the east.

In early 1915, simultaneously with a disastrous Ottoman defeat at the hands of Russia at Sarikamish, with the loss of over 80% of a huge military force, battalions of Russian Armenians organized the recruiting of Turkish Armenians from behind the Turkish lines. In response the Young Turk government executed 300 Armenian nationalist intellectuals, although a partisan source as Peter Balakian’s “The Burning Tigris” tells us most were imprisoned and there were even survivors. The fact that most Armenian men were also butchered in the army and many influential figures arrested and killed, places a question mark over certain arguments that Armenians organized revolts and that there was a civil war, given that Armenians were outnumbered, outmanned and outgunned. On the other hand, there were articles in the New York Times as early as November 7, 1914, days after Russia had declared war, attesting to Armenian uprisings (“ARMENIANS FIGHTING TURKS — Besieging Van—Others operating in Turkish Army’s Rear”), and accounts from Armenians themselves, such as Boghos Nubar’s 1919 letter in the Times of London stressing Armenian belligerence. In addition, there is evidence of Russian financial support, testimony from even those such as Ambassador Henry Morgenthau to the effect of “…In the early part of 1915… every Turkish city contained thousands of Armenians who had been trained as soldiers and who were supplied with rifles, pistols, and other weapons of defense,” and even accounts from Armenian newspapers hailing the rebellion. Chronology here is important and not incontestably established.

After the recruitment of most men and the arrests of certain intellectuals, widespread massacres were taking place throughout Ottoman Empire. In desperate attempts at survival, upon hearing of massacres of nearby villages, Armenians in Musa Dagh and Van organized their self defense. In Van, they handed over control of the city to advancing Russians. After waves of massacres and countermassacres, the Ottoman government ordered the deportation of over 1 million Armenians living in Anatolia to Syria and Mesopotamia though this figure has not been conclusively established. Indeed, there is another consensus this number did not exceed 700,000, and Arnold Toynbee reported in his Wellington House (British propaganda division) report of “The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire” that 500,000 were alive in 1916. Although the word deportation seems pretty innocent (some would prefer the word “relocation,” as the former means banishment outside a country’s borders; Japanese-Americans, for example, were not “deported” during WWII), things were not, because the deportations themselves were a silent method of mass execution that led to the death of many of the Armenian population, by forcing them to march endlessly through desert, without food or water or enough protection from local Kurdish or Turkish bandits.

In the process several hundred thousand died in the resulting death marches from starvation, dehydration, disease or exhaustion. Several hundred thousands more were massacred by Kurdish militia and Ottoman gendarmes (while other gendarmes gave up their lives defending the Armenians), giving an estimated total under certain counts of 1,500,000 Armenians dead. Then again, the Armenians contend one million survived, and even the Patriarch Ormanian provided a pre-war population figure of 1,579,000. Sympathetic sources as Le Figaro, prompted by Armenian terrorism in 1977 France, figured only 15,000 Armenians as having died from shootings, sickness and deprivation on the march. It also must be borne in mind that of the 2.5-3 million Turkish mortality, many succumbed to the same factors as famine and disease.



The CIA Confessions: The Crowley Conversations

October 9, 2019

by Dr. Peter Janney

On October 8th, 2000, Robert Trumbull Crowley, once a leader of the CIA’s Clandestine Operations Division, died in a Washington hospital of heart failure and the end effects of Alzheimer’s Disease. Before the late Assistant Director Crowley was cold, Joseph Trento, a writer of light-weight books on the CIA, descended on Crowley’s widow at her town house on Cathedral Hill Drive in Washington and hauled away over fifty boxes of Crowley’s CIA files.

Once Trento had his new find secure in his house in Front Royal, Virginia, he called a well-known Washington fix lawyer with the news of his success in securing what the CIA had always considered to be a potential major embarrassment.

Three months before, on July 20th of that year, retired Marine Corps colonel William R. Corson, and an associate of Crowley, died of emphysema and lung cancer at a hospital in Bethesda, Md.

After Corson’s death, Trento and the well-known Washington fix-lawyer went to Corson’s bank, got into his safe deposit box and removed a manuscript entitled ‘Zipper.’ This manuscript, which dealt with Crowley’s involvement in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, vanished into a CIA burn-bag and the matter was considered to be closed forever.

The small group of CIA officials gathered at Trento’s house to search through the Crowley papers, looking for documents that must not become public. A few were found but, to their consternation, a significant number of files Crowley was known to have had in his possession had simply vanished.

When published material concerning the CIA’s actions against Kennedy became public in 2002, it was discovered to the CIA’s horror, that the missing documents had been sent by an increasingly erratic Crowley to another person and these missing papers included devastating material on the CIA’s activities in South East Asia to include drug running, money laundering and the maintenance of the notorious ‘Regional Interrogation Centers’ in Viet Nam and, worse still, the Zipper files proving the CIA’s active organization of the assassination of President John Kennedy..

A massive, preemptive disinformation campaign was readied, using government-friendly bloggers, CIA-paid “historians” and others, in the event that anything from this file ever surfaced. The best-laid plans often go astray and in this case, one of the compliant historians, a former government librarian who fancied himself a serious writer, began to tell his friends about the CIA plan to kill Kennedy and eventually, word of this began to leak out into the outside world.

The originals had vanished and an extensive search was conducted by the FBI and CIA operatives but without success. Crowley’s survivors, his aged wife and son, were interviewed extensively by the FBI and instructed to minimize any discussion of highly damaging CIA files that Crowley had, illegally, removed from Langley when he retired. Crowley had been a close friend of James Jesus Angleton, the CIA’s notorious head of Counterintelligence. When Angleton was sacked by DCI William Colby in December of 1974, Crowley and Angleton conspired to secretly remove Angleton’s most sensitive secret files out of the agency. Crowley did the same thing right before his own retirement, secretly removing thousands of pages of classified information that covered his entire agency career.

Known as “The Crow” within the agency, Robert T. Crowley joined the CIA at its inception and spent his entire career in the Directorate of Plans, also know as the “Department of Dirty Tricks. ”

Crowley was one of the tallest man ever to work at the CIA. Born in 1924 and raised in Chicago, Crowley grew to six and a half feet when he entered the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in N.Y. as a cadet in 1943 in the class of 1946. He never graduated, having enlisted in the Army, serving in the Pacific during World War II. He retired from the Army Reserve in 1986 as a lieutenant colonel. According to a book he authored with his friend and colleague, William Corson, Crowley’s career included service in Military Intelligence and Naval Intelligence, before joining the CIA at its inception in 1947. His entire career at the agency was spent within the Directorate of Plans in covert operations. Before his retirement, Bob Crowley became assistant deputy director for operations, the second-in-command in the Clandestine Directorate of Operations.

Bob Crowley first contacted Gregory Douglas in 1993 when he found out from John Costello that Douglas was about to publish his first book on Heinrich Mueller, the former head of the Gestapo who had become a secret, long-time asset to the CIA. Crowley contacted Douglas and they began a series of long and often very informative telephone conversations that lasted for four years. In 1996, Crowley told Douglas that he believed him to be the person that should ultimately tell Crowley’s story but only after Crowley’s death. Douglas, for his part, became so entranced with some of the material that Crowley began to share with him that he secretly began to record their conversations, later transcribing them word for word, planning to incorporate some, or all, of the material in later publication.

Conversation No. 51

Date: Saturday, November 30, 1996

Commenced: 11:30 AM CST

Concluded: 11; 45 AM CST

RTC: I was reading over your analysis of the present political and business status and I thought it was interesting. At least I thought your final conclusions were not at all outrageous. But I should caution you against sending such things to Kimmel or Bill. Kimmel would be outraged and Bill will pass this on to Langley because that’s what he does.

GD: None of that surprises me, Robert. I was just stating the obvious. At least it is obvious to me. I suppose if you read history, everything is so compressed and obvious but if you are living it, the end is not always clear. Distance is always important in making conclusions. People don’t like to do this because they want this or that kind of ending so they twist and distort the obvious to suit themselves. When I was writing such reports in the Army, I learned very quickly on not to express attitudes that were opposite of my superiors, no matter how obvious they might be.

RTC: A manifestation of early survival instinct, Gregory.

GD: Yes, why not? No one cares about inconvenient truths but they dearly love convenient lies. But the truth is still there, isn’t it?

RTC: Yes, but we never see it until it’s too late.

GD: The French Revolution was entirely predictable but only if you could stand back from it. Not a revolt of the masses but initially a perfectly reasonable desire for a burgeoning middle business class to gain parity with the great triumvirate: The Monarchy, the Nobility and the Church. Of course the latter trio did not want to share power and the ensuing struggle spilled over and the mob got it. Reasonable beginnings but terrible endings.

RTC: But could have anyone foreseen the end?

GD: Good point. A few but not the ones that mattered. A Polish writer, Bloch, very accurately foresaw the deadly trench warfare of the First World War but at the time he wrote, the great bulk of military theorists had more conventional views so no one heard him. Afterwards, of course, he became famous. At the time, not. The same with my views.

RTC: I must confess, Gregory, that I am a little conventional and predictions of social upheaval, anarchy and economic collapse are a bit alien to me.

GD: Yet you were accustomed to predict such things in other governments you wanted to either replace or destroy. Correct?

RTC: Well, we fomented more than one revolution and collapsed more than one economy but we didn’t predict these things, Gregory, we made them happen. You don’t plan to make a revolution or collapse our economy.

GD: No, I don’t. But if you see a man building a house on the beach, doesn’t it occur to him that a good storm might easily topple it? After all, Robert, the Bible says this but, of course, it’s only common sense.  No empire, and we have an empire now, ever lasted forever. Rome did not and England did not. They rise and they fall. It will be the same with us. After two major wars, we rule. Of course we contested with Russia but since we were better grounded economically, we survived. They may yet come back but it’s not for certain. I see China as our immediate rival but they have uncontrolled capitalism under the control of an aging dictatorship and I would predict that they will shoot up economically and this boom will frighten the leaders. Money creates the desire for power and an empowered mass is very dangerous. And we learned after 1929 that if our marketplace had no controls, it would indulge in peak or collapse on a regular and very destructive basis. Remove these controls would be like blowing up a dam and flooding all the countryside below it. Money for a few and disaster for the rest. Clinton has not encouraged this decontrol but God help us if the right wing ever gets into power. We have all kinds of fiscal dinosaurs waiting in the wings, mating with the lunatics of the religious right and they may yet have their day. Unfettered markets and Jesus in every home, no stores open on Sunday and the Ten Commandments in every classroom. Oh, and not to mention a stake through the heart of the evil Darwin. Nuts. The world is only 6,000 years old and the Grand Canyon was created by Noah’s mythical flood. Action and reaction. If that dismal project comes to pass, there will be a reaction, believe me.

RTC: But your predictions of revolution?

GD: People get bored sometimes, Robert, get tired of taxes and dream of some kind of social paradise where everyone is equal. Who knows what monsters are waiting to be born? But the economy is based on credit and like a Ponzi scheme, credit has its limits. You can only use it so far and no further and if we go too far with our credit cards and loans, the end can be easily seen as the python said as he wrapped himself around the tree.

RTC: Well, it won’t happen during the rest of my lifetime, Gregory. Perhaps in yours.

GD: Probably. We need a Bismarck now but we won’t get him. Democracy is its own worst enemy, Robert. Greed, lack of coordination, corruption, and God alone knows what else. And our national education system is a horror. We are cranking out generations of the illiterate and ill-informed and these know-nothings will eventually get into power. Then we need all the help God can give us. Well, we always get what we pay for, don’t we? Political correctness is idiotic. We should teach our children to question, to evaluate and to analyze, not bleat in their pens like placid sheep. It’s like trying to stab someone with a pound of butter.

RTC: (Laughter) Well, a fat and comfortable public….

GD: Yes, a fat public. Well, it’s only a matter of conjecture, isn’t it? What is it the Bible says? While we are in the light, let us walk in the light for the darkness cometh. Something like that. Enough realistic pessimism for the day, Robert. I recall telling Kimmel, when I found out he taught Sunday school, that he ought to let his little charges read the Song of Solomon and he had a fit. But, I told him, it’s in the Bible so it can’t be wrong. He didn’t see it that way. One dimensional. Never ask questions because you might not like the answers. The truth will not make you free but cause spastic colon. Anyway, I like to speculate, Robert, that’s all. If a dam is leaking, is it wrong to predict a collapse?

RTC: The real estate people down below it would not approve of such sentiments.

GD: No, but they probably live on higher ground.


(Concluded at 11:45 CST)



Encyclopedia of American Loons

Theodore Shoebat

We suppose some readers may take a morbid interest in checking with on Theodore Shoebat on a regular basis with the question “who does Theodore Shoebat want to murder today?” (There is a list of people Shoebat wants murdered here.) Theodore Shoebat is the deranged spawn of fake ex-terrorist Walid Shoebat, and even more unhinged than his father. A self-proclaimed “Christian Militant”, Shoebat jr. regularly engages in incoherent screeds fuming with impotent, murderous bloodthirst, which are so over the top that even many other American Taliban figures want little or nothing to do with him. Shoebat is also a self-proclaimed “proud fascist” and fan of Franco.

There is a list of people Shoebat wants murdered:



Women who receive abortions

Doctors who give abortions

Gay Priests

Families of ISIS

Victims of ISIS


Satanists/Rock bands

Witches and Wizards

Hillary Clinton

Milo Yiannopoulos

Gavin McInnes

Everyone who works at Chick-fil-A

Pamela Geller

Donald Trump

Stefan Molyneux, Stephen Bannon, Bill Whittle, Jared Taylor, Richard Spencer[


Anybody who disagrees with him, especially people who support LGBTQ causes.

Non-Christians and religious freedom

Shoebat is explicitly opposed to freedom of religion: only “idiots” and “morons” support the freedom of religion, according to Shoebat. He has therefore called for establishing blasphemy laws, for atheist and other non-Christian books, including the Qur’an, to be burned, for blasphemers to be “burned at the stake” and for atheists to be subjected to an inquisition and then put to death (the aim of the inquisition being thus somewhat unclear). Laying out his theocratic vision for America, Shoebat explains that “[o]nce someone begins to teach and to exhibit the signs of a diabolical belief system or an explicitly anti-Christian sentiment, then that person is most definitely determined to be a threat to the body. Once that person is determined to be a threat, then he has to be coerced to either stop what he is doing, reject it, or once he has become so obstinate about it, then the last resort is death.” Expressing non-Christian viewpoints cannot be tolerated, according to Shoebat, “because as soon as you allow attacks on Christianity [non-Christian viewpoints = attacks on Christianity, of course] to be enabled and to thrive, then the Christian spirit begins to decay, it begins to decline and all sorts of moral evils take place like public acts of sodomy, public acts of desecration and degenerate behavior and murder. It just spirals and it goes on and on and pretty soon you have cannibalism, pretty soon you have bestiality and pedophilia.” Part of the problem is of course how fanatic non-believers are: “when you see how fanatic they are, how much they hate Christianity, how much they hate God, how much they hate the church, you really can’t tolerate people like that and those people need the death penalty.” No, we still remain pretty convinced that this is not a poe.

He is, however, especially opposed to Muslims. Of course, he agrees with the most deranged radical Islamists on most issues, in particular the treatment of homosexuals (he has called on God to bless Chechnya for killing gay people, for instance), but sees no problems harmonizing his hatred of Islam and his hatred of homosexual people: according to Shoebat, Islam in general, and ISIS in particular, are “homosexual cults”. He has therefore suggested that Muslims should be hunted down and killed just like we did to the Native Americans – yes, Shoebat also thinks that was the right thing to do with Native Americans: “Any Indian that expressed any sort of anti-American sentiment, [Andrew Jackson] killed them. He had no tolerance for evil and wicked people. He got rid of them and he purged the society of these pagan heathens and he did an American Inquisition and that’s what we need now … Homosexuality? Death penalty. Blasphemy? Should be punished. Pagans coming in to your land? Kill the pagans, defeat them, convert the to Christianity.” Apparently, Andrew Jackson was the epitome of American Values, as Shoebat sees it. MLK, meanwhile, was a “modernist antichrist and Christ-denier

Still, Shoebat did praise ISIS for the Paris terror attacks, or, as he put it, for murdering “Satanists” in Paris. In his article “France Is a Godless Nation that Deserves to Be Attacked”, Shoebat argued that France has a long history of killing Christians and therefore needed to be punished, and that those who died while attending an Eagles of Death Metal concert were “worshippers of the devil” and got what they deserved. Similarly, he praised the Manchester terrorist attacks, declaring that he had no sympathy for the victims because they are all “sodomite-lovers” and “sluts.”

Shoebat has also called for the invasion of India, forced conversion of its “natives” to Christianity (“You need to Christianize the land. We need to destroy these false religions, end of story. Hinduism is an evil, demonic, anti-Christ religion. It needs to be uprooted from the earth and it has no place in the world”), and for SWAT teams to shut down yoga studios in the US: “I think the U.S. government needs to crack down on this evil, demonic thing called yoga … You’re teaching yoga, have the SWAT team bust open the doors to that place and just arrest everybody.” Oh, and “Judaism is Satanic” as well, of course.

He mostly takes a dim view of other Christians, too. When he learned that the Christian chain Chick-fil-a distanced themselves from anti-gay marriage statements made by the chain’s owner and sponsored an LGBTQ film festival, he declared that all employees of Chick-fil-a should be “burned at the stake”. Of course, such people are not, really Christians: As Shoebat sees it, Christians who don’t think every LGBTQ person should be killed are not Christian and should themselves also be executed. When radical anti-gay extremist Peter LaBarbera admitted that genocide might not be in line with mainstream Christian ideals, Shoebat called him a “filthy pig” and “demonoid”. Yes, even LaBarbera. The traitors are everywhere. Glenn Beck, for instance, is a practitioner of “Chrislam” trying to lure his audience into Islamo-Mormonic deistic universalism, with the help of guys like James Robison, Franklin Graham, and David Barton. Michael Brown, on the other hand, is in a Satanic conspiracy with “sodomites” and “La Raza terrorists,” and anti-Islam activist Robert Spencer is “now supporting the Islamic jihad”. Indeed, any version of Christianity except Catholicism is Satanic; after all, “Martin Luther gave birth to Nazi ideology, and Nazism is going to return again with Luther as its prophet. Catholic Christendom will rise again and destroy the demonic religion of Luther,” declares Shoebat.

Shoebat has also, in a moment of astounding lack of self-insight even for him, attacked Ayaan Hirsi Ali for suggesting that Christian Fundies can be just as bad as Muslim ones.


A fierce critic of homosexuality, homosexuals and gay rights, Shoebat regularly expresses his opposition to what he calls “gay sharia” and “homo tyranny”. As Shoebat sees it, “[t]he homosexual movement is the most hateful and most vile group in all of the Western world. The sodomites are supremacists; they believe that they have the superior lifestyle, a disposition and constitution more superior than the ‘others,’ who they consider as inferior breeders. This is the ideology of sodomism. Sodomism is the ideology of homosexual superiority, in which the homosexuals desire to usher in – through propaganda, violence and state coercion – a utopia in which homosexuality is seen as a supreme ideal, and those who believe in the conjugal union as is affirmed and established by the Christian Faith, are viewed and treated as enemies.” Ultimately, according to Shoebat, the gays will slaughter all the Christians in concentration camps. Yeah, we have freed us from the chains that anchor us to reality a long time ago.

To deal with the gay question, Shoebat suggests not only burning the rainbow flag but adopting thoroughly medieval views on homosexuality, and he has (repeatedly) declared his support for an “inquisition” with the goal of exterminating gay people. And it is urgent: gay people must be executed before they succeed in their effort “transform the Scouts into a Nazi-like gay youth club” that will be used to attack Christianity. And make no mistake (Shoebat will not hesitate to remind us): “there is only one solution to the homosexual agenda, and that is death”, since gays “are no different than terrorists and should be treated as such”. So the best solution is to “bring back the inquisition”. He did, however, receive some pushback from other anti-gay activists over his claim that Jesus would personally kill gay people, which led him to declare that there was an “inquisition” targeting him in order to make him renounce his views (thereby confirming our suspicion that he doesn’t quite understand what “inquisition” means). His father fortunately came to his defense, pointing out that Jesus destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, hence illustrating that according to the Bible, Jesus would, indeed, personally beat homosexuals to death if given the chance.

He has also complained that homosexuals have sent him death threats, promptly declaring that “all” homosexuals therefore want to kill all Christians. As an example, when the Duck Dynasty series landed in some controversy in 2013 over some comments by Phil Robertson, Shoebat concluded that “[t]he Sodomite nazis are going after Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty , simply because he pointed out a truth to the darkness of the sick, violent, and twisted mindset of homosexuals […] Now they they are suspending him. What the homosexuals want to do to Christians in America is what Muslims are already doing to Christians: slaughter and enslave them. This is why we must fight this evil, and help save persecuted Christians in the Muslim world. Donate now and save Christian lives.” (Note the coda.) “The only thing vile in this situation is what sodomites contrive and partake in, they indulge themselves in acts so diabolical, in things worthy of death (Romans 1:32), and yet we are so careful to make sure that they are tolerated. The sodomite just quoted spoke of ‘loving and committed gay and lesbian couples.’ Really? Let me show you how sinister these morally inept and demonic followers of Satan are …” (and then he cites exactly one example of an abusive gay couple.) Yes, according to Shoebat “the homosexual agenda” is “about conquest, and the persecution of Christians”: “If they succeed, we will live under an outright Homosexual inquisition, and if they really had their way, they would build a homosexual empire.” In conclusion, gay men hold a demonic hatred toward women, and homosexuality and cross-dressing should therefore be outlawed: “Outlaw the sodomite before he outlaws you,” says Shoebat: “You either make the sodomites submit to Christian morality, to the law of God, to the law of Heaven or they will force you to submit. There is no other choice;” and just to be clear: by “submit” he means “be put to death”, because homosexuals, like atheists and “fanatical feminists” and Muslims, “war against the Faith, promote death and hate life”: “a noble government will arise and give these perverts the only thing they need: the sword!”

Shoebat did, however, criticize the 2016 Orlando massacre. He criticized it because it should have been “The State”, not Omar Mateen, who “killed the sodomites”, by firing squad. Then he declared that the real victims of the attack were people like him who are being unfairly painted as radicals simply because they openly advocate putting gay people to death.

He is also a supporter of vigilantes in other countries who attack LGBT people, and wants the same to happen in the US, saying that “I wish America had this stuff”  – physically assaulting gay activists is, as he sees it theologically justified – though he also wishes the police would be “given the opportunity” to kill more gay people, of course. Killing homosexuals should certainly not be considered a hate crime; after all, “fags kill each other all the time, and the reason why they kill each other all the time is because they’re demon-possessed people and Satan wants them to kill each other because Satan hates humanity.”

Apparently, part of the problem with homosexuality, according to Shoebat, is its link to cannibalism, apparently because of Jeffrey Dahmer. His explanation for drawing the connection is worth highlighting, since it is probably even more deranged than you imagined! You see, the problem with America is that it is too individualistic, only punishing criminals for the crimes they have committed instead of imposing collective punishments in an effort to root out the beliefs or behaviors that led to the crime in the first place. Hence, the correct response to the crimes of serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer would have been to not only punish him for his transgressions, but then also outlaw homosexuality because “it leads to serial killers, it leads to cannibalism, it leads to murder” and is a danger to the collective Christian society. And make no mistake, gay people really want to be murderers and cannibals and the only thing keeping them from doing that is that it’s against the law, as Shoebat sees it. Given Shoebat’s own predilection for murder and torture, combined with his stupidity, it is not hard to see where he is coming from. He did cite what he took to be evidence for a connection between homosexuality and Dahmer, though: a series of papers released by the American Psychological Association that suggest that “rates of military sexual trauma among men who served in the military may be as much as 15 times higher than has been previously reported,” from which he concluded that gay soldiers are committing tens of thousands of sexual assaults every year and that “[c]annibalism and homosexuality and rape are all interconnected.” Critics may point out some holes in the reasoning, but then they wouldn’t be true Christians

In his criticisms of Southern Decadence, an annual rave for gay people in New Orleans, Shoebat was determined merely to follow the evidence wherever it would take him. Where it took him was that he wanted all the participants killed, of course. They should be killed because they regularly kidnap young boys and rape and kill them during the event. A weakness of Shoebat’s argument is of course that the evidence he relies on is taken from nowhere but his own deranged excuse for a mind.

Shoebat also wanted the publishers of National Geographic tortured and “burned at the stake” (“this is the problem that I have with the First Amendment … In the Catholic Church, the whole damn crew behind National Geographic would be tried and once they are found guilty, they would be burned at the stake”) because they featured a nine-year-old transgender girl on their cover. Shoebat called the girl “Little Nazi Hitler”: “The kid is obviously evil, obviously a reprobate, obviously just diabolical. You’re a freak. You’re a little demon. You’re a little Nazi Hitler … This little freak would not mind sticking people like me in a gas chamber,” proclaimed Shoebat. “This is sick shit.” There is clearly some sick shit here, yes.

In general, Shoebat thinks that transgender children are “utterly wicked” and that “parents who encourage this behavior should be arrested and executed.” He wants the children executed, too.

On women

Shoebat believes that women should be banned from voting and holding office.

“I don’t believe in women in politics,” Shoebat has declared: “I don’t believe in women voting. I don’t believe in the suffragist movement, I don’t believe in women in politics. If they’re so righteous, let them stay at home and teach their children that righteousness.” Indeed, the failure of mothers to raise their children to be proper Christians, he warned, is leading to everything from “losers drinking out of beer bongs and smoking pot” to restaurants serving “steaks made out of human flesh;” yeah, that stream-of-consciousness rant took a somewhat surprising turn, even by Theodore Shoebat’s standards. Meanwhile, feminists who do things he doesn’t like should be “burned at the stake”, of course

When Trump suggested that women who undergo abortions should be punished, Shoebat agreed, and called women who undergo abortions “sluts”. Then he called for their execution by firing squad.

Miscellaneous politics

Shoebat is a sometime Trump supporter, criticizing what he takes to be a “Satanic conspiracy” against the president, mostly because he hopes that Trump will kill Muslims, but also because he hopes Trump will soon enact legislation to have gays and abortionists executed. However, after Trump waved a Rainbow Flag at one of his rallies, Shoebat withdrew his endorsement and called for Trump’s execution instead.

As mentioned above, Shoebat expresses deep admiration for (his image of) medieval Christianity, including the genocide of Cathars, Waldensians and heretical Christian sects on account of their “false beliefs”. He has also criticized evangelical Christian leaders for condemning the genocide. As Shoebat sees it, we ought to return to the Middle Ages, when they had no “fag problem”. Indeed, Shoebat has called for a a return to absolute monarchy, pointing out that he doesn’t believe in democracy: “Democracy. More like Demon crazy. The first attempt at democracy was in the Heaven, when Satan and the demons wanted to reform the government and oust out the King, God. God believes in monarchy, Satan believes in democracy. Hence democracy is demon crazy.” At least it looks like an argument. He has also called for a new “crusade”, claiming that “God wants one”.

Shoebat believes that one of the most serious problems facing us today is witchcraft, and he want “practitioners” of witchcraft to be put to death (but of course). And since Hillary Clinton, according to Shoebat, has been using black magic to gain popularity, she should be put to death. In fact, Clinton is also a devil worshipper – Shoebat literally cites his own imagination as evidence for the claim – and a lesbian who “would love to see the death of all Christians. I kid you not. Do not think for a second that that woman, if she had the chance, would [hesitate to] put people like me in concentration camps, would put Christians in concentration camps and kill Christians,” so “What do you think she deserves? This type of woman, this evil, wicked woman, what do you think she deserves? She deserves the death penalty. End of story.”

No fan of Obama, Shoebat has pointed out that “[i]n the most national prayer breakfast, Obama diverted the subject from ISIS and began to express his hatred against the Christian Crusades. The reason for this is because Obama hates Christians and Christianity, and is himself a Muslim jihadist. He continues to support Islam while hating Christianity, and heavily funds and supports the jihadists in Syria. His own family are Muslims and work with terrorists.”

Sensing some opposition from other rightwingers to some of his proposals, Shoebat has also declared that “both Stephen Bannon and Ann Coulter are absolutely evil, they are enemies of Christendom and are filled with the spirit of Antichrist;” Coulter, in particular, is a “fascistic bitch” who should be put to death for associating with “fags.” The same, apparently, goes for Pam Geller and Tomi Lahren, who is a “little Nazi’ worthy of being put to death for being pro-choice, as well as Milo Yiannopoulos and Gavin McInnes, and not the least Marco Rubio: Shoebat ostensibly longs for the days when Marco Rubio would be hung from the gallows. It is important to weed out the less-than-ideologically-pure in this crucial battle against the totalitarianism of the gay rights movement.

Shoebat has some views on Brexit, too: “Britain Just Left The EU, And This Will Eventually Lead To A Revived Nazi Germany That Will Go To War With Christendom,” Shoebat declared after the 2016 referendum in a completely random stream of consciousness. We haven’t bothered to determine whether he thinks the fulfillment of his prediction is a good thing or not.

To pull all the strands together, Shoebat has released 858-page book titled Christianity is at War: The Manifesto for Christian Militancy. We recommend maintaining a safe distance to anyone who has actually read it.

Diagnosis: Possibly the most deranged, hateful and bloodthirsty person with regular access to media in the Western world and possibly anywhere, Shoebat seems determined to demonstrate that there is, indeed, a position to be carved out on the extreme side of ISIS. An utterly repugnant character, of course, but it’s hard to look away.



No responses yet

Leave a Reply