Military cadets, families were profiled long before the coup attempt, secret documents reveal

Levent Kenez

Turkish intelligence agencies secretly investigated thousands of cadets at military academies and high schools and looked into their families in order uncover any links to government critic the Gülen movement, confidential documents obtained by Nordic Monitor show. 

The documents laid bare of the real motive behind a massive purge of cadets and the closure of military schools immediately after a failed coup on July 15, 2016 that was deemed by many observers to be a false flag operation to transform NATO’s second largest army into a bastion for Islamists and neo-nationalists. The documents reveal that the intelligence agencies found no link to the Gulen group in almost all cases in which an investigation was requested. The allegations leveled against the cadets turned out out to be fabricated in nearly every instance. In a very few cases some association was found through family members, which was not sufficient evidence for the military to dismiss the cadets under the laws in force at the time, which barred any punishment by reason of guilt by association.

This revelation explains why the government of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan orchestrated a limited mobilization during the 2016 events with the involvement of hundreds of cadets who were sent unarmed into the streets on the pretext of a military exercise. Although the evidence showed they did not participate into the failed coup and were acting in line with orders from their commanders, the government charged them with a crime and the courts convicted and sentenced the young students to life in prison. Using the coup as a pretext, all military schools were shut down and all students were dismissed.

A secret interagency working group was established to administer the purge of the military cadets, according to the documents. Yet the result was frustrating for the government not only because the evidence did not support such dismissals in most cases but also since the laws in effect at the time and legal safeguards did not allow unlawful dismissals. Some cadets who were dismissed managed to return to military schools after they contested the evidence in the military courts.

According to a secret annotation penned in April 2016 by now-retired Maj. Gen. İzzet Çetingöz, the then-commander of the Turkish Military Academy, a disciplinary committee within the Turkish army was established to gather evidence and documents on students at military high schools and academies who were allegedly affiliated with the Parallel State Structure (PDY), a term used to refer to the civic Gülen movement at the time. 

The annotation reads that members of the committee met with the Ankara chief public prosecutor and judges who had ruled on cases involving the Gülen movement, and they were advised that the committee must work with Turkey’s National Intelligence Organization (MİT) and the police to gather information about students and their families since judicial procedure might not allow the collection of private information. This confirms the view that the government profiled both officers and cadets long before the failed coup and prepared a list of people marked for dismissal with no justification.

The Turkish General Staff reportedly asked MİT and the police to investigate 4,813 military cadets and students who were enrolled in 2014 and 2015.

The secret document confirms that both MİT and the police complied with the request and submitted their findings to the General Staff. The committee noted that they had received complete intelligence reports about all students.

The intelligence reports from MİT and the police alleged that only 140 students (or his/her families) out of 4,813 were affiliated with the Gülen movement, 11 with the terrorist Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), two with Hizbullah and 39 with “others” that are not indicated by name.

Another internal memo that appears to be a compilation of previous intelligence reports and the General Staff’s own investigations claimed there were 149 military cadets from all classes under suspicion and that 128 of them were affiliated with the Gulen movement. Twenty-four out of the 128 had direct links to the movement, while family members of the remaining 104 cadets were affiliated. These family members include fathers, brothers and uncles. Five cadets were suspected of connections to the PKK and 16 to other organizations not indicated by name.

According to the same documents, 20 students were discharged from the military due to links to the Gülen movement, nine of whom returned after the evidence was challenged in a court of law. One hundred twenty students were put on probationThe official documents refute the long-circulating propaganda that Gülen movement followers made up the majority of officers in the military as well as students at military schools. However, during a state of emergency declared after the coup attempt, a total of 16,409 military cadets allegedly affiliated with the movement, consisting of 4,090 military high school students, 6,140 students from the Vocational School for Noncommissioned Officers and 6,179 undergraduate students at the Military Academy, the Naval War College, the Air War Academy, the Gülhane Military Medical Academy and the Nursing College were dismissed under decree-laws without any judicial process.

In addition Defense Minister Hulusi Akar announced in August 2019 that more than 17,000 military personnel including 150 generals and 7,595 officers had been purged from the military since the coup attempt.

Meanwhile, 259 military cadets were detained on coup charges on July 16, 2016 and were arrested four days later. The cadets were indicted one year after they were sent to pretrial detention, and their trial was concluded in May 2018. One hundred eighty-seven of the cadets were given life sentences on charges of attempting to overturn the constitutional order and attempting to overthrow the Turkish government and parliament by use of force as well as membership in a terrorist organization.

Military cadets claimed that they did not have any idea about the coup attempt unfolding as their superiors told them there was a terrorist attack on the  Bosporus Bridge.

Murat Tekin

Murat Tekin, a military cadet who was taken to the bridge on the night of the coup attempt, was killed by an angry mob.

More interesting is that a government decree published on December 24, 2017 stated that regardless of the person’s official title, individuals who acted “within the context of quashing the July 15 coup attempt, terrorist acts or acts transpiring as a follow-up to any of these do not bear any legal, administrative or penal responsibility.” In other words, civilians who took to the streets to stop the coup were granted immunity from prosecution, including those who committed crimes.

Turkey shut down military academies and all military schools due to alleged involvement in the coup attempt only 10 days after the incident. With a government decree on July 25, 2016 the National Defense University was founded as a replacement for the academies.

President Erdoğan said on July 12, 2017 that thanks to the state of emergency, they had gained ground against the Gülen movement. He also called the failed coup “a gift from God” a few hours after abortive putsch began.

The movement strongly denies any role in the failed coup, and the government has failed to present any evidence of the movement’s complicity in the putschist attempt.


Iran Unrest Gave Israel a Window to Strike. Now the Danger Lurks Elsewhere

Though it was Israel that struck most of the blows and took the initiative in the two recent rounds of escalation in Syria and the Gaza Strip, there appears to be a big difference between the two fronts.

Almanya tarafından Ankara’da görevlendirilmiş! Türkiye casusu yakaladı

Yeni Şafak gazetesinde yer alana habere göre; Türkiye’den kaçan binlerce FETÖ’cü ve PKK’lının gittikleri ülkelerdeki iltica trafiğini yöneten avukat Yılmaz S., dört ay süren dikkatli takip sonucu yakalandı. Almanya adına çalışan Yılmaz S.’nin, üzerinde ve İstanbul’daki bürosunda FETÖ soruşturmalarında adı geçenlere ait binlerce belge bulundu. Tutuklanan Yılmaz S., “casusluk”tan yargılanıyor.

Almanya tarafından Ankara'da görevlendirilmiş! Türkiye casusu yakaladı

Ankara Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığınca yürütülen soruşturma, İstanbul Barosu‘na kayıtlı avukat Yılmaz S.’nin bazı yabancı ülke büyükelçilerine Türk vatandaşlarıyla ilgili bilgi sızdırdığı ihbarı üzerine başlatıldı. Ankara Emniyeti Organize Suçlarla Mücadele Şube Müdürlüğü ekiplerince şüpheli S. takibe alındı. Yaklaşık 4 ay boyunca teknik takip yapılan S.’nin, geçtiğimiz eylül ayında otobüsle İstanbul’dan Ankara’ya geçeceğinin tespit edilmesi üzerine ekipler düğmeye bastı. Soruşturmada görevli bir polis, Yılmaz S.’nin bindiği otobüse bilet aldı. Kendisini takip eden polislerden habersiz yolculuk yapan S. Ankara’ya geldiğinde beraberindeki avukat B.D. ile gözaltına alındı. Şüpheli S. emniyet ve savcılıktaki sorgusunun ardından tutuklanırken B.D. ise adli kontrolle serbest bırakıldı.


“Kişisel verilerin izinsiz kullanılması”, “Soruşturmanın gizliliğini ihlal” ve “Yasaklanan bilgilerin casusluk maksadıyla temini” suçlamalarının yöneltildiği şüpheli Yılmaz S. hakkında yürütülen soruşturmada önemli ayrıntılara ulaşıldı. İstanbul’da avukatlık bürosu bulunan S.’nin, özellikle 15 Temmuz’un ardından yasadışı yollarla Avrupa’ya kaçan ve gittikleri ülkelerde siyasi sığınma talebinde bulunan FETÖ ve PKK‘lılarla ilgili rapor hazırladığı belirtiliyor. S.’nin hazırladığı raporlarda, araştırdığı kişiler hakkında soruşturma ya da yakalama kararı olup olmadığı gibi bilgilerin yer aldığı öğrenildi. S.’nin sadece sığınma talebinde bulunanlarla değil, ilgili ülkelerde vatandaşlık talebinde bulunan kişilerle ilgili de araştırmalar yaptığı ortaya çıktı.

Almanya'nın Ankara Büyükelçisi Martin Erdmann ve elçilik binası....Almanya’nın Ankara Büyükelçisi Martin Erdmann ve elçilik binası….


Gözaltına alınmadan önce adım adım izlenen şüpheli S.’nin yakalandığı sırada üzerinde 10’un üzerinde rapor ele geçirildiği belirtildi. Ayrıca polis ekiplerince arama yapılan şüphelinin İstanbul’daki ofisinde de hazırlanmış binlerce araştırma raporu ele geçirildi. İncelenmek üzere el konulan raporlardaki kişilerin önemli kısmının FETÖ soruşturmalarında adı geçtiği, bazıları hakkında adli işlem yapıldığı tespit edildi. Soruşturma kapsamında tutuklanan şüpheli S.’nin dijital verilerinin incelendiği, para hareketlerinin de mercek altına alındığı belirtildi. Suçlamaları kabul etmeyen şüpheliye söz konusu bilgilere nasıl ulaştığı da soruldu. Şüpheli, bu bilgileri kendisinin bulmadığını, konsolosluk tarafından verildiğini iddia etti.


Alman medyası şüpheli avukatın, büyükelçilik tarafından Almanya’ya sığınma başvurusunda bulunan Türk vatandaşlarının gerekli belgelerinin hazırlanması için görevlendirildiğini aktardı. Ancak Türkiye‘nin taraf olduğu uluslararası sözleşmelere göre sığınma talep edilen ülkenin, ilgili kişi hakkında vatandaşı olduğu ülkenin Dışişleri Bakanlığı’ndan bilgi talep etmesi gerekiyor. Bu kapsamda Dışişleri ile irtibata geçmediği öğrenilen Almanya’nın görevlendirdiği şüpheli Yılmaz S.’nin “gizli” bilgilere erişerek rapor hazırlaması, akıllarda soru işareti bıraktı. Raporlarda yer alan bilgilerin, UYAP’ta herkesin ulaşamayacağı “gizli” bilgiler olduğu belirtilirken, şüphelinin bu bilgilere nasıl ve kimler aracılığıyla ulaştığı hususu araştırılıyor. 1997’den bu yana Almanya Büyükelçiliği’nin avukatlığını yapan Yılmaz S.’nin ayrıca Hollanda, Norveç ve İsveç büyükelçiliklerinin de avukatlığını yaptığı belirtildi. S.’nin, Hollanda ve Norveç elçiliklerinin yaklaşık 10 yıl, İsveç elçiliğinin ise 1 yıldan beri avukatlığını yaptığı öğrenildi.

Almanya'nın Ankara Büyükelçisi Martin Erdmann....Almanya’nın Ankara Büyükelçisi Martin Erdmann….


Tutukluluğun neden 2 ay sonra ortaya çıktığı sorgulanırken, olay üzerine yoğun diplomatik temaslar yapıldığı öğrenildi. Almanya’nın Ankara Büyükelçisi Martin Erdmann, Yılmaz S. ile ilgili “hukuk danışmanı” ifadesini kullandı. Tutuklamanın kendileri için anlaşılabilir olmadığını ve isnat edilen suçların açıklığa kavuşturulması için yoğun girişimlerde bulunduklarını belirten Erdmann, “Hukuk danışmanımız Büyükelçiliğimize, uluslararası düzeyde olağan ve kanaatimizce yasak olmadığı tartışmasız bir destek sağlamıştır. Bu işbirliğinin engellenmeden mümkün olması gereklidir” dedi.


NATO’dan Türkiye itirafı: Haritaya bakın anlarsınız!

NATO Genel Sekreteri Jens Stoltenberg, Türkiye’nin NATO için çok önemli bir ülke olduğunu belirterek, “Bunu anlamak için haritaya bakmak ve Türkiye’nin jeostratejik durumunu incelemek yeterli. Bu, fikir ayrılığı bulunan konuları konuşmayı engellemeyecektir.” dedi.

NATO'dan Türkiye itirafı: Haritaya bakın anlarsınız!
Stoltenberg, Le Figaro gazetesine bir demeç verdi.
Fransa Cumhurbaşkanı Emmanuel Macron’un NATO‘nun beyin ölümü gerçekleştiği” şeklindeki yorumunu değerlendiren Stoltenberg, “NATO, güvenlik konularında hayati önem taşıyor. Her gün bir milyara yakın insanı koruyarak ve savunmaya en büyük katkısını on yıllarca sürdürerek bunu kanıtlamıştır.” ifadelerini kullandı.

Barış Pınarı Harekatı’na da değinen Stoltenberg, geçen ay Türkiye‘ye gerçekleştirdiği ziyarette harekat ile ilgili endişelerini dile getirdiğini belirterek, şu görüşlerini paylaştı:

“Bütün müttefikler harekatı eleştirdi ancak kimse Türkiye’nin NATO’daki yerini sorgulamadı. Türkiye, müttefiklerinin üslerini kullanmalarına izin vererek, DEAŞ ile mücadeleye katıldı. Türkiye, NATO bünyesinde Suriye ve Irak ile sınırda bulunan tek ülke. 3,6 milyon mülteciyi ağırlıyor. Türkiye, NATO için çok önemli. Bunu anlamak için haritaya bakmak ve Türkiye’nin jeostratejik durumunu incelemek yeterli. ”

Stoltenberg, NATO ve Avrupa Birliği’nin (AB) birbirlerinin rakibi olmadığını, ikisi arasında bir seçim yapmak durumunda kalınmaması gerektiğini vurguladı.

NATO Genel Sekreteri Stoltenberg, Norveç, İzlanda, Türkiye, ABD, Kanada ve İngiltere’nin Avrupa’nın güvenliği konusunda önemli rol oynadığına da işaret etti.

5. Ortadoğu Gazetesi İlk Sayfası

Harbi Gazete Gazetesi İlk Sayfası



Türkiye’den F-35 resti! Bakan Akar duyurdu…

Milli Savunma Bakanı Hulusi Akar, ”F-35 alınmazsa başka arayışlara girmek zorunda kalacağımızın bilinmesi lazım.” dedi.





Yaşar Büyükanıt ve mezara giden sırlar


Ağustos 2006’da ordunun başına geldiğinde, askeri vesayet rejiminin üniformalı ve üniformasız bekçilerinin kendisinden büyük beklentileri vardı.

Onlara göre selefi Hilmi Özkök sivil yönetimle uyumlu olmaya gayret etmiş, sivil asker ilişkilerini ilgilendiren konuların birçoğunda demokratik bir duruş sergilemiş, bu nedenle de laik cumhuriyetin değerlerini aşındırıcı izler bırakarak emekliye ayrılmıştı.

Halbuki, o pozisyonda bulunan birisi ‘kodumu oturtmalı’, ‘vurdu mu inletmeliydi.’

Göreve geldiğinde kendisine böyle bir rol biçilmişti.

Zihin dünyası kendisinden beklenenlerle büyük ölçüde uyumlu sayılabilirdi ama karakteri bu işler için biraz ‘mülayim’ kaçıyordu.

Tabi zamanın ruhu da öyle bir performans sergilemesini zorlaştırıyordu.

Perşembe sabahı dünyaya gözlerini kapatan Türkiye’nin 25’inci Genelkurmay Başkanı Yaşar Büyükanıt’tan söz ediyoruz.

İleride Türkiye’nin siyasi tarihi yazılırken, 2006/2008 arasını, ama özellikle de bu iki takvimin ortasında yer alan 2007 yılını Büyükanıt’ı dışarıda tutarak ya da o sayfalarda kendisine yeteri ölçüde yer vermeden geçiştirmek mümkün olmayacaktır.


Anayasa değişikliği ile halk oylaması ile seçimler dönemi başlayana kadar Türkiye’de Cumhurbaşkanlığı seçimlerinin tamamının büyük gerilim ortamlarında geçtiği biliniyor.

O geçiş dönemini engellemeye dönük olarak son kurşunu ise, PKK sıkmıştı.

21 Ekim 2007’de toplum cumhurbaşkanlarını halkın seçmesini öngören anayasa değişikliği için sandık başına giderken, referandumun yapılacağı günün gecesinde Hakkari Dağlıca’da saldırı düzenleyen terör örgütü, 12 askeri şehit etmişti.

Zamanlamanın referanduma göre ayarlandığı besbelliydi.

Ama PKK’nın kendi ajandasıyla uyumlu gözükmeyen böyle bir günü sabote etmek için ilave nasıl bir motivasyona sahip olduğu, bugün için de karanlık bir nokta olarak durmaya devam ediyor.

21 Ekim sabahından akşamına kadar televizyon kanallarının kırmızı renkli altyazıları, halkoylamasını değil, bu saldırıya dair haberleri vermişti.

Ama 21 Ekim’e gelene kadar 6 ay içerisinde normal bir ülkede 100 yıla sığabilecek kadar enteresan gelişmeler yaşanmıştı.


12 Nisan’da yani, meclis çoğunluğuyla kendi cumhurbaşkanını seçebilecek durumda olan Ak Parti’nin adayını ilan etmesine 12 gün kala, Yaşar Büyükanıt, Genelkurmay Karargahı’nda gazetecilerle bir araya geldi.

Söylediklerinin özeti, “Cumhuriyet değerlerine sözde değil, özde bağlı bir Cumhurbaşkanı görmek istiyoruz” cümlesine sığabilecek bir tonda kaldı.

Ama salondaki bazı isimler için bu yeterli değildi.

Emin Çölaşan, Taki Doğan gibi isimler, ‘vurdu mu inleten’ bir açıklama yapması için sorularıyla Büyükanıt üzerinde baskı kuruyordu.

Aslında söyletmek istedikleri şey, “Eşi başörtülü bir aday olmasın” lafını Genelkurmay Başkanı’nın ağzından çıkarabilmekti.

23 Nisan 2007 akşamı TBMM’de verilen resepsiyonda, ertesi sabah açıklanacak olan kararın ne olduğunu anlamak için deli danalar gibi oradan oraya koşturup duruyorduk.

Adaylık başvurusu için saatler sayılıyor olmasına rağmen kimin aday olacağıyla ilgili senaryolar açıkta duruyordu.

Ertesi sabah Başbakan Tayyip Erdoğan tarafından “adayımız” diye ismi açıklanan Abdullah Gül’ün bile gerilimi yüzünden okunuyordu.


27 Nisan akşamı, şapkadan ‘e-muhtıra tavşanı’ çıkarıldı.

Öyle bir bildirinin ne anlama geldiği, önceki tecrübeler nedeniyle ortadaydı.

Yeni olan, muhtıranın muhatabı olanların şapkayı alıp gitmek yerine, sert bir karşı cevapla buna cevap vermesi olmuştu.

Kabine üyeleri, Ak Parti’nin ileri gelenleri, Genelkurmay’ın internet sitesinden yayınlanan bildiriye nasıl bir karşılık vereceklerini tartışmak üzere dönemin Başbakanı Erdoğan’la birlikte Dışişleri konutunda bir araya geldiler.

Görüşmeler devam ederken, Erdoğan Büyükanıt’la konuşmak istedi.

Telefon edildi ama önce, ‘komutanımız istirahatte’ denildi.

Ta ki, hükümetin bu bildiriye hükümet sözcüsü üzerinden bir cevap vereceği haberi televizyon kanallarına son dakika olarak düşene kadar.

Büyükanıt, böyle bir cevap verileceğini öğrenince, işlerin umduğu gibi gitmeyeceğini anladı, başbakana telefonla geri dönüş yaptı.

Askeri yöntemlerle sonuç alınamayacağı anlaşılınca, nöbet yüksek yargıya devredildi.

Sabih Kanadoğlu’nun 367 içtihadı, Anayasa Mahkemesi’nden artık ezber haline gelmiş olan 2’ye karşı 9 oy sonucu, Meclis’te seçimlerin yapılamaması, 22 Temmuz için erken seçim kararının alınması, MHP lideri Bahçeli’nin katkısıyla Cumhurbaşkanlığı seçimlerinin yapılabilmesi.

Tabi arada bir de 5 Mayıs Dolmabahçe buluşması var.

Sivil yönetimi hizaya getirmesi için Yaşar Büyükanıt’a umut bağlayanların ilerleyen dönemlerde ‘konuşulan muhayyel konular’ üzerinden kendisini ‘nefret objesine’ dönüştürdükleri meşhur buluşma.

Büyükanıt, “Orada konuştuklarımız benimle mezara gidecek” demişti, öyle oldu.



Hollanda Başbakanından itiraf: Türkiye’den almak zorundayız

Hollanda Başbakanı Mark Rutte, terör örgütü DEAŞ üyelerini, Türkiye’de ya da Erbil’de Hollanda misyonlarına başvurdukları takdirde mecbur geri almak zorunda olduklarını söyledi.

Hollanda Başbakanından itiraf: Türkiye'den almak zorundayız
Hollanda Başbakanı Mark Rutte, Hollanda’dan giden DEAŞ‘lıların ve çocuklarının ülkeye geri getirilmesine ilişkin, Bakanlar Kurulu toplantısı sonrası basın mensuplarına açıklamalarda bulundu.

DEAŞ’lıların bulundukları bölgede yargılanması taraftarı olduğunu belirten Rutte, “DEAŞ’lılar Türkiye’de ya da Erbil‘de Hollanda misyonlarına başvurdukları takdirde mecbur almak zorundayız. Bu hafta bu gerçekleşti zaten” dedi.


Rutte, DEAŞ’lıların çocuklarının bulunduğu durumun “çok korkunç” olduğuna dikkat çekerek, şunları kaydetti: “Fakat onlar da büyüdüğü zaman risk oluşturabilir. 1 ve 2 yaşındaki bebeklerden değil ileri yaşta olan çocuklardan bahsediyorum. Çocukların velileri ilk etapta kendileri ölümcül olan tehlikeli bir bölgede teröre destek vermek için gitme kararı aldı ve çocuklarını da bu ortamda bulunmaya maruz bıraktı. Bu velilerin sorumluluğudur, benim değil. O çocukları Suriye‘ye ben göndermedim.”



Gelecekte başka DEAŞ’lının ülkeye gelmeyeceği garantisini hiç bir zaman veremeyeceğini ifade eden Rutte, diğer AB ülkeleri ile yoğun iletişim halinde olduklarını ve onların bu konuda nasıl bir yol haritası çizdiklerine de baktıklarını dile getirdi.


Hollanda’da Lahey Mahkemesi 11 Kasım’da, hükümetin Suriye’nin kuzeydoğusundaki gözaltı kamplarında bulunan terör örgütü DEAŞ’lıların çocuklarının hızla geri getirilmesi için her türlü çabayı göstermesi gerektiğine karar vermişti. Yüksek mahkeme ise bugün, hükümetin buna zorunlu olmadığına hükmederek, bunun kararını hakimin değil hükümetin kendisinin vermesi gerektiğini açıklamıştı.



Kuala Lumpur’da beşli zirve

Türkiye, Malezya, Pakistan, Katar ve Endonezya İslam dünyasının sorunlarına çözüm için Kuala Lumpur’da 18-21 Aralık’ta biraraya gelecek. Malezya Başbakanı Mahathir Muhammed, zirveyi küçük bir başlangıç olarak niteledi. Muhammed, “Müslümanların bu inisiyatifi desteklemesini istiyoruz. Ümit ederim ki dünyaya bir mesaj verebiliriz” dedi.

Kuala Lumpur’da beşli zirve


ABD ‘derhal ondan kurtulun’ deyip Türkiye’yi tehdit etti

İngiliz haber ajansı Reuters’ta yer alan son dakika haberine göre, ABD Dışişleri Bakanlığından yapılan açıklamada “Türkiye, Washington ile ilişkileri düzeltmek istiyorsa, S-400’lerden kurtulması gerek” denildi. ABD’nin bu açıklamasının yapıldığı sırada Bakan Hulusi Akar, TBMM’deki görüşmelerde S-400 hava savunma sistemlerinin aktif olarak kullanılacağını duyurdu. Cumhurbaşkanı Erdoğan da “Geri adım yok” demişti.



İran’da kaos! BBC günler sonra ilk görüntüleri yayınladı

Benzine yapılan yüzde 50 sonrası protestoların patlak verdiği İran’da, internetin kesilmesi nedeniyle günlerdir haber alınamıyor. Dünya gelişmeleri İran ajanslarının geçtiği bilgilerle öğrenirken, BBC’nin Farsça Servisi günler sonra sokak gösterilerinden görüntüler yayınladı. Başkent Tahran’da çekildiği belirtilen görüntülerde sokakların karıştığı görülürken, güvenlik güçlerinin halka sert müdahale ettiği görülüyor.


ABD’yi çıldırtacak hamle!

Rusya’nın S-400 hava savunma sistemini gelecek yılın başında İran’a satacağı iddia edildi.


Trump: Ben olmasaydım 14 dakikada yeryüzünden silinirdi

ABD Başkanı Donald Trump, Çin’in Hong Kong Özel İdari Bölgesi’ndeki hükümet karşıtı protestolara ilişkin, “Ben olmasaydım, Hong Kong 14 dakikada yeryüzünden silinmiş olurdu.” dedi.


Macron aylar sonra itiraf etti: Hata yaptım

Fransa Cumhurbaşkanı Emmanuel Macron, sarı yeleklilerin gösterilerinin başlamasına neden olan akaryakıt zamları konusunda hata yaptığını itiraf etti.


 Liberman Refuses to Endorse Netanyahu Or Gantz, 3rd Election Likely

Pompeo Looking to Leave State Department, Run for Senate

Israel Strikes Iranian Targets in Syria Killing 23, Mostly Iranians

IDF Readies for Iranian Retaliation Following Israeli Airstrikes in Syria

U.K. Summons Chinese Ambassador in ‘Outrage’ Over Tortured Consular Employee

Britain on Wednesday summoned the Chinese ambassador to express “outrage” at the detention and torture of a former employee of the British consulate in Hong Kong, which came after he took part in the five-month-long pro-democracy protests in the city. …

Foreign Ministers take decisions to adapt NATO, recognize space as an operational domain

NATO Foreign Ministers met in Brussels on Wednesday (20 November 2019) to address a wide range of security challenges in preparation for the meeting of NATO leaders in London. “We all agree that NATO remains indispensable for our security, and that despite our differences, we are stronger as we face the future together,” said NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. …

‘Attack Israel by Day, You Won’t Sleep at Night,’ Bennett Warns Iran and Syria

Gantz Fails to Form Coalition, Third Elections Loom

Shaked Praises Netherlands Decision to Cut Palestinian Authority Funding

Zionist Group Hosts Pro-IDF Event in Toronto, Defying Violent Threats

Secretary General welcomes US Secretary of State to NATO

NATO Secretary General discusses Leaders’ Meeting with Estonian President

NATO encourages women’s participation in cyber security


Peggy Noonan Reminds Us Why Trump Won

The NeverTrumpers’ fundamental error.


Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

Three years after outsider Donald Trump blew up the political world with his implausible victory over the consummate insider, Hillary Clinton, many establishment Republicans still don’t get it. From their elite cocoon, they continue to indulge the hauteur that put off ordinary voters who had grown tired of a fossilized political class that serially ignored their interests, and seemed more concerned with their own insider perks and privilege, rather than in repairing the damage that decades of bipartisan progressive technocracy had inflicted on the Constitutional order.

The grande dame of the disgruntled NeverTrump Republicans has been the Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan, whose columns on Trump usually sound like a mash-up of the prescriptions of Emily Post and a snobbery redolent of Lady Violet Crawley from Downton Abbey.

Noonan’s latest is an attack on the Republicans’ behavior during the House impeachment hearings, coupled with a scolding of the anonymous author of the anti-Trump book A Warning. We should credit her takedown of “anonymous” as “self-valorous and creepy.” But her comments about the Republicans reveal the underlying grounds for NeverTrump hatred: the resentment against those who don’t accept the progressive assumptions that politics is the business of a self-proclaimed guild possessing knowledge, techniques, and professional manners and decorum that the voting masses don’t have.

As typical of a Noonan column, she starts with some sly preening of her insider-status as a wise political guru: “A young foreign-affairs professional asked last week if the coming impeachment didn’t feel like Watergate.” Unlike hoi polloi, Noonan knows “foreign-affairs professionals,” and they seek her out for her wisdom. She then proceeds to contrast the “dignity and professionalism of the career diplomats” whom the Democrats––“disciplined in their questioning and not bullying and theatrical”––called on to testify, with the Republicans’ “interruptions and chaos-strewing” that she compares to “some of what the Democrats did during the Kavanaugh hearings.”

We see here the NeverTrumper’s fundamental error: prizing sizzle over steak, words over deeds, appearance over reality.  And, as usual with NeverTrumpers, she indulges an egregiously false comparison. The Kavanaugh hearings were a contrived political stunt constructed from preposterous charges from long ago, with no direct corroborating evidence to support them, but an abundance of evidence casting them in doubt. The current House hearings are yet another Democrat political stunt, made up of witnesses who are recycling office gossip with varying degrees of separation from the originals, the contents of which are mainly subjective opinions or feelings that have no relevance for establishing facts.

Consider this example from the testimony of acting ambassador to Ukraine William Taylor–– which the mainstream press hyped as a “bombshell,” and whom Noon praises as an exemplar of professionalism––as summarized by David Marcus in the New York Post: “He said David Holmes, a counselor for political affairs at the US embassy in Kiev, told him that he had overheard a phone conversation between Ambassador Gordon Sondland and President Trump.” In what courtroom other than the old Soviet Union or Cuba today would this twice-removed hearsay be admitted?

Likewise in the Kavanaugh hearings, the Democrats were contriving specious charges to derail a confirmation they had no plausible merit-based arguments for rejecting. In the current hearings, the Democrats are again contriving specious charges for impeaching a president against whom three years of a Special Prosecutor’s investigation have not produced credible charges that rise to the “high crimes and misdemeanors” Constitutional standard. That’s why the Dems have dropped the “quid pro quo” and are attempting call the legal and obligatory conditions for giving a country foreign aid “bribery” and “extortion,” using the same Orwellian corruption of words that turns a mutually consensual but later regretted sexual encounter into “sexual assault.”

After three years of Dem calumny and dirty tricks, can we blame the Republicans for forgoing the usual preemptive cringe and vigorously contesting this blatantly partisan attack?

Noonan’s focus on her subjective disapproval of the Republicans’ unmannerly response to what is in effect an illiberal political show trial, replete with secret hearings, leaks to the press, and pre-coaching of witnesses, ignores the substantive consistency of the Democrats’ despicable and desperate attempts to invalidate the results of an election and disenfranchise 63 million American voters.

Noonan goes on to expand on her elevation of “professionalism” by giving us the res gestae of acting ambassador William Taylor, consisting mainly of his military record. She also singled out George P. Kent, highlighting his degrees from Johns Hopkins and Harvard, and his 27 years in foreign service. Again, the NeverTrump preference for sizzle over steak, evident in Noonan’s “They seemed [N.B.] to have capability and integrity.” Why? The right credentials––military service and Ivy League degrees–– are assumed to bespeak achievements benefitting the American people, just as a polished delivery suggests “integrity.” Maybe these gentlemen have such achievements and virtue, but reading off their CVs and praising their demeanor are not dispositive, and say nothing about the veracity or worth of their testimony.

Indeed, when it comes to foreign affairs, generations of highly credentialed foreign policy mandarins have not compiled a record that would suggest those credentials contribute to success. The two most consequential failures include misreading the Iranian Revolution as an anticolonial bid for freedom and popular sovereignty, rather than a religious revolution aimed at creating an Islamic theocracy; and failing to foresee and thus prepare for the collapse of the Soviet Union, something that was unthinkable to the big brains of our foreign policy establishment.

Moreover, the great foreign policy success in the postwar period was victory in the Cold War, which was the accomplishment of an ex-actor and foreign policy amateur looked down on by the government agency “professionals.” They contemptuously dismissed Reagan’s common-sense wisdom like “we win, they lose,” “evil empire,” and “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” The latter iconic phrase, by the way, was argued against by the State Department and National Security Council because it was too provocative and naïve.

The simple truth that people like Noonan miss is that credentials, including military service, no matter how sterling or impressive, do not necessarily bespeak wisdom or future achievement, any more than exquisite manners, as Jane Austen has taught us, bespeak a true gentleman. They represent instead a promise that is broken more often than kept. What infuriates them about Trump, aside from his affrontery of getting elected over the highly credentialed Hillary Clinton, is that though lacking such credentials, and contemptuous of the political decorum of the ruling caste and their advice, he has been remarkably successful both at home and abroad.

Moreover, the government agencies Noonan extolls are large, hierarchically organized, public-funded bureaucracies. This means they are riddled with group-think, received ideas, and outmoded paradigms that determine advancement. And being funded by taxpayers and protected by a union and civil-service regulations, they are unaccountable to the voters, and so can fail for years without any consequences. Worse yet, mediocrity and politicization flourish in such environments, and those who think beyond the ruling paradigm find it difficult to make changes. In short, they are the “deep state” that Noonan claims doesn’t exist.

Finally, like most NeverTrumpers, Noonan seems to think she can read Trump’s mind and discover his unsavory motives: “They know what this story is, and I believe they absolutely know the president muscled an ally, holding public money over its head to get a personal political favor.” Talk about a big begged question to go along with her other fallacies like the false analogy and argument from authority. (It would be mean to bring up this mixed metaphor describing the Democrats: “brick by brick they gave their testimony and painted a picture that supports the charge that yes, Donald Trump muscled Ukraine.” I didn’t know you could paint pictures with bricks.)

Of course, all the public evidence makes her claim false. It’s hard to believe Trump “muscled” or “extorted” or “bribed” the Ukrainians when they didn’t even know the aid Trump allegedly withheld had been delayed. By the way, wasn’t it Trump, not the credentialed Obama, who sent Ukraine the Javelin anti-tank missiles that Obama withheld? Instead, Obama sent them blankets, no doubt worrying over the “reset” with Russia and keeping his promise to Vladimir of more foreign policy “flexibility.” And how exactly does Noonan know what Trump was thinking, or whether he was so worried about the self-imploding Joe Biden? You want to see some “muscling” and quid pro quo, watch the video of Biden bragging about holding up a billion dollars in aid if Ukraine didn’t quash an investigation of the dodgy Ukrainian company Burisma, which was paying his son $50-80,000 a month.

So it has been since the day Trump became a candidate. The bipartisan ruling caste closed ranks and started fighting off the barbarian invader. Yet in focusing so much on Trump’s manner, lack of dubious credentials, and dearth of time served holding office, they diverted attention from Clinton’s lack of character, her off-putting personality, her venomous ambition, and her manifest violations of her oath to uphold the Constitution. Fortunately, they unwittingly validated Trump’s message and helped put him in office.

So keep it up, NeverTrumpers. All you accomplish is reminding voters why they voted for Donald Trump in the first place.


Prager: Does the Left Hate America?

Six reasons to believe it does.


Whenever leftists are charged with not loving or even with hating America, they respond angrily, labeling the question absurd, mean-spirited and an example of right-wing McCarthyism.

But there can be little doubt that the left has no love for America, just as there can be little doubt that liberals and conservatives love America. Love of America is one of the many dividing lines between liberalism and leftism. (For a description of six differences between liberalism and leftism, please see my PragerU video “Left or Liberal?”)

Here are six reasons to believe the left hates America:

1. No one denies that the international left — the left in Europe, Asia, Latin America and elsewhere — hates America. Therefore, in order to argue that American leftists do not hate America, one would have to argue that on one of the most fundamental principles of international leftism — hatred of America — American leftists differ with fellow leftists around the world: All the world’s left hates the U.S., but the American left loves it.

This, of course, makes no sense. Leftists around the world agree on every important issue. Why, then, would they differ with regard to America? Has any leftist at The New York Times, for example, written one column critical of the international left’s anti-Americanism?

2. Leftists want to “fundamentally transform” the United States. Five days before the 2008 presidential election, candidate Barack Obama told a huge audience in Columbia, Missouri, “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

More recently, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren announced that she plans to “fundamentally transform our government,” that America needs “big, structural change” and that her proposed Accountable Capitalism Act would bring about “fundamental change.”

Likewise, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders said earlier this year, “We’re going to try to transform the United States of America,” and last month he said, “This campaign is about fundamental change.”

Examples are legion.

So, here’s a question: How can one claim to love what one wishes to fundamentally transform?

The answer is obvious: It isn’t possible.

If a man were to confide to you that he wants to fundamentally transform his wife, would you assume he loves his wife? If a woman were to tell you she wants to fundamentally transform her husband, would you assume she loves him? Of course not.

3. Leftists have contempt for the American flag.

I am unaware of a single left-wing individual or organization that has condemned NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick for refusing to stand for the flag during the playing or singing of the national anthem that precedes NFL games. To the contrary, on the left, he is universally regarded as a hero. Indeed, Nike anointed him as one, making him its brand model.

Leftists might respond that Kaepernick’s public refusal to stand for the flag and national anthem says nothing about his love for America, as it is only a form of protest against racial injustice. But that is nonsense. Would leftists argue that anyone who publicly refuses to celebrate Martin Luther King Jr. Day really loves Dr. King?

4. Leftists routinely describe America as racist, sexist, xenophobic, imperialist, genocidal, homophobic, obsessed with money and morally inferior to most Western European countries. No moral person could love such a place. As one person commenting on a Paul Krugman column wrote, “Does loving your country mean you love or ignore the fact that we destroyed Iraq, shot down an Iranian commercial airliner, and waged a brutal war in Asia for reasons that today make no sense?”

5. America is the most successful country in world history — while being the most committed to capitalism and remaining the most religious of all the industrialized democracies. To the extent that America is great, that means two of the institutions the left most loathes — Christianity and capitalism — are also great.

6. Love is, among other things, an emotion. So, here is a question about leftists’ emotions: Do any leftists get the chills when the national anthem is played or when they see the American flag waving as the anthem is played? Given their rhetoric, it is most unlikely. Yet, every person I know who loves America does get a chill at such moments. Do leftists, as opposed to some liberals and conservatives, display the flag on any national holiday? How many leftists even own a flag?

Finally, if leftists do not love America, what do they love?

According to their own rhetoric, they love the planet — Mother Earth, as they frequently refer to it. And they love animals.

They really love power, and they claim to love material equality.

They don’t love Western culture — and they now dismiss praise for it as a euphemism for white supremacy.

Interestingly, while they often claim to love humanity, many don’t seem to love people. They give less charity and volunteer less time to the downtrodden than conservatives, for example. They have much less interest in having children and making families. They are far more likely than conservatives to cut off relations with friends or relatives with whom they differ politically. And if they really loved people, they would love capitalism because only capitalism has lifted billions of people from poverty.

But most of all, they love… themselves.

Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist.


Israel’s European ‘Friends’

It’s high time for the Jewish state to abandon its delusions about Europe.


Tuesday morning, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) released an anti-Semitic bombshell. It decreed that all EU member states must affix special labels to Jewish-made Israeli “foodstuffs” produced beyond Israel’s 1949 armistice and exported to EU member states. The ruling was made in response to a lawsuit brought before a French court by Psagot winery, located north of Jerusalem.

Psagot’s manager Yaakov Berg was represented by a consortium of attorneys led by Brooke Goldstein, the founder and executive director of the Lawfare Project in New York. The focus of the Lawfare Project’s work is defending Israel and Jews from discrimination.

Israeli political leaders and American Jewish leaders roundly and rightly condemned the court ruling as anti-Israel, biased and anti-Semitic.

Psagot brought suit before a French administrative court to appeal a 2016 French regulation requiring the special labeling of Jewish-made Israeli foods produced beyond the 1949 armistice lines. Psagot and its attorneys argued before the French court that the French regulation contradicted European law by imposing illegal trade barriers. The French court referred the issue to the ECJ in the form of two questions: does EU law require EU states to impose discriminatory labeling requirements on Jewish-made products from the disputed territories, and, if it doesn’t, does EU law still permit member states to adopt such labeling requirements on their own.

In the background of the case was a 2015 “interpretive notice” issued by the European Commission that had instructed all EU member states to apply the special discriminatory labels to all Jewish-made Israeli goods produced beyond the 1949 armistice lines. Senior jurists in and out of government explain that the interpretive notice was a blow to Israel, but it did not legally require EU states to do anything. The notice could only have become legally binding if it had been unanimously adopted by EU states in the European Council.

Israeli lawyers noted at the time that the European demand for discriminatory labels violated international trade law, but this made no impression on European decisionmakers.

The French court’s referral to the ECJ was a big deal. It created a means for anti-Israel forces in the EU to render the interpretive notice from 2015 legally binding on all EU states without obtaining unanimous consent. ECJ judgments bind all EU states.

Once the matter was moved to the ECJ for a determination, senior international jurists and Israeli government officials began requesting that Psagot and the Lawfare Project pull their lawsuit. Writing at Arutz 7, former Justice Minister MK Ayelet Shaked, who dealt with the issue during her tenure, revealed Tuesday that she and a senior Justice Ministry official repeatedly urged, indeed “begged,” Psagot and its attorneys to withdraw their lawsuit. Speaking to the media Tuesday, Foreign Minister Yisrael Katz said that Foreign Ministry officials submitted similar requests that Psagot withdraw its lawsuit.

Israel and Psagot never stood a chance of getting justice at the ECJ

In late June of this year, the urgency of the entreaties grew.

According to ECJ procedure, before the judges render their verdict, the court’s advocate general publishes his recommended verdict. It is rare for the court to rule in a manner that contradicts its advocate general’s recommendation. In late June, the advocate general recommended answering that it is obligatory for EU member states to affix discriminatory labels to Israeli Jewish imports from Israeli territory beyond the 1949 armistice lines.

Once his recommendation was published, any residual hope the ECJ would act in accordance with international trade law and reject the proposed discriminatory labelling policy was extinguished.

But then, with or without the advocate general’s recommendation, Israel and Psagot never stood a chance of getting justice at the ECJ. Before it is a judicial body, the ECJ is a political arm of the EU whose job it is to uphold EU policies and strengthen EU institutions.

The EU’s policy towards Israel has been clear for a very long time.

For decades, the EU has been waging a hostile campaign against Israel. The goals of its campaign are to call Israel’s right to exist into question, weaken Israel economically and politically, and strengthen Israel’s enemies at Israel’s expense. The EU wages its campaign through political, diplomatic and economic warfare.

Non-governmental organizations registered in Israel and financed and directed by the European Union and its member states are strategic weapons in this campaign

Non-governmental organizations registered in Israel and financed and directed by the European Union and its member states are strategic weapons in this campaign. These European-financed and directed Israeli registered and staffed NGOs routinely submit petitions to Israel’s High Court of Justice whose purpose is to stymie the government’s ability to implement duly promulgated policies and undermine the IDF’s ability to defend the country.

At the UN, EU member states vote against Israel and for its enemies as a general practice. They support UN bodies including the UN Human Rights Committee, UNRWA and UNESCO that routinely and maliciously target Israel.

The EU leverages its trade and scientific cooperation with Israel to normalize boycotts of Israeli companies, institutions and Jewish citizens who operate beyond the 1949 armistice lines.

As for Europe’s support for Israel’s enemies, led by Germany, the EU refuses to walk away from the nuclear deal with Iran, or reinstate economic sanctions against Iran in light of its open material breaches of the limitations the nuclear deal placed on its nuclear activities.

So too, led by Germany, the EU refuses to designate all arms of Hezbollah as a terror group. This pro-Hezbollah policy has the deadly result of enabling the Iranian-controlled terror group to operate and raise money openly in Europe.

Both of these policies, which pave Iran’s way to a nuclear arsenal and empower its foreign legion are hostile acts towards Israel.

Then there is the EU’s adulation of the Palestinians. EU institutions do not merely legitimize Palestinian terror groups, including Hamas and the PFLP. They enthusiastically embrace them. For instance, the European parliament has repeatedly hosted senior Palestinian terrorists. It has given standing ovations to senior Palestinian officials including Mahmoud Abbas as they revived medieval antisemitic blood libels. Abbas for instance, accused Israeli Jews of deliberately poisoning wells.

In the face of the EU’s implacable, long standing and steadily expanding efforts to harm Israel, the notion Israel can reasonably expect to ever receive a fair hearing from any EU body is ridiculous.

Stunningly, even after their defeat at the ECJ, the Psagot winery and its legal team refuse to accept this truth. In an interview Tuesday with JNS news service, Goldstein said that Europe itself is the verdict’s biggest loser.

In her words, “The ruling opens the floodgates where consumers in any EU country will be able to insist that any consideration important to them before they purchase a product – whether social, political, environmental or other – will have to be included on the labeling of any product being imported. Not just from Israel.”

This is untrue. The verdict – like the EU’s legally unsupported claim that Israeli “settlements” built beyond the 1949 armistice lines are illegal – is not general. It is very specific. It applies only to Israel. The ECJ’s ruling will not be applied on behalf of vegans and Tibetans. Everyone knows it was directed against Israel and its Jewish citizens alone. The verdict was political, not legal.

For all that, Justice Ministry and Foreign Ministry officials are wrong to attack the Psagot winery and its attorneys for their willful blindness. They themselves are afflicted by the same impairment.

In their contacts with the EU, its agencies and aligned organizations, government officials act on the basis of the mistaken belief that it is possible to convince the Europeans to abandon their hostile positions against Israel through reasoning and evidence. Perhaps the best example of this misguided Israeli practice is the respect Israel accords the prosecutors at the International Criminal Court (ICC).

ICC investigators are currently preparing charges against Israelis for so-called war crimes on the basis of false accusations submitted by the Palestinians. The Palestinian complaints relate both to the IDF’s military activities and to settlement activities carried out by the Israeli government and Israeli citizens.

Government officials have to abandon their delusion that Europe is Israel’s enlightened ally with whom Israel can reason

According to government officials, the reason Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is preventing the evacuation of the illegal Palestinian outpost Khan al-Ahmar despite the fact that the High Court of Justice ordered its dismantlement over a year ago is fear that implementing the court decision will subject Israel to war crimes charges at the ICC.

In September 2018, the Trump administration announced that it was ending all cooperation with the ICC due to its political nature and its institutional hostility towards the United States and Israel.

Following this announcement, the US denied a visa to an ICC prosecutor scheduled to visit the US to investigate complaints submitted to the ICC against US soldiers for actions they allegedly perpetrated in Afghanistan.

Shortly after the policy was presented, the State Department announced it was ordering the closure of the PLO representative office in Washington, DC due to the PLO’s refusal to withdraw the complaints it submitted to the ICC against Israel.

Unlike the Americans, Israel continues its dialogue with the ICC prosecutor and permits the prosecutor’s representatives to enter Israel in the hopes of convincing the ICC of Israel’s innocence. But the fact the ICC is even giving a hearing, let along proceeding, with its investigations of false accusations against Israel is proof that it is a hostile body. It will never give a fair hearing to Israel.

Just as permitting the inherently hostile ECJ adjudicate issues related to Israeli Jewish exports from Israeli-controlled territory was a mistake that harmed Israel, so Israel’s legitimization of the ICC will come back to haunt it.

Berg, Goldstein and their associates insist that they were compelled to act because the Israeli government refused to lift a finger against the EU. Their allegation of government inaction is valid. The government has an obligation to aggressively respond to Europe’s hostile behavior.

To this end, the time has come to end the tax-exempt status of hostile European-funded and directed NGOs.

It is also time for Israel to act in the legal arena in jurisdictions that are not inherently hostile to the Jewish state. For instance, Israel should seek justice against the EU’s hostile and unfair trade practices at the World Trade Organization’s arbitration bodies and in US courts.

But before Israel can do any of these things, government officials have to abandon their delusion that Europe is Israel’s enlightened ally with whom Israel can reason.

Europe is not enlightened and it is not Israel’s ally. It is not susceptible to reason and evidence.

It is a hostile post-national governing structure that is conducting political, diplomatic and economic warfare against Israel to harm the Jewish state and assist its enemies.

So long as our leaders and our officials refuse to accept this basic truth, we will continue to experience defeat and discrimination as individuals and collectively at the hands of our European “friends.”


Pelosi’s Projection

A throwback to the Democrats’ great imposter.


In Adam Schiff’s “impeachment palooza,” as one Republican called it, not a single witness has flagged an impeachable offence on the part of President Trump. As the smears, hearsay and lies surge onward, an offstage player has provided the key to all mysteries of the 2016 election and beyond.

After former ambassador Marie Yvanovitch failed to signal any bribery or crime on the part of the president, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi promptly targeted President Trump. “I think part of it is his own insecurity as an imposter,” Pelosi told CBS. “I think he knows full well that he’s in that office way over his head. And so he has to diminish everyone else.”

Nancy’s keyword was “imposter,” a person posing as someone he is not. That profile hardly fits the current president of the United States.

Donald Trump has been a public figure for decades, putting up buildings, staging boxing matches, and appearing on television. Nobody has suggested that Donald J. Trump ever posed as somebody else, and nobody can point to mysteries in his ancestry. All that, and more, does apply to his predecessor in the White House.

The junior senator from Illinois, a virtual unknown, claimed that his father was a Kenyan goatherd who went to school in a tin-roof shack. That story came from the 1995 Dreams from My Father, which official biographer David Garrow proclaimed a novel and the author a “composite character.” That was apparent to the most casual reader of the Dreams book, which claims the Kenyan “bequeathed his name” to the Hawaiian-born American, and called him a “prop” in someone else’s narrative.

In all his writing from 1958-1964, the Kenyan Barack H. Obama makes no mention of an American wife and son. Barry, as his mother named him, was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, the Indonesian student his mother Ann Dunham married, and raised in Indonesia.

The Dreams account gives more attention to “Frank” than the Kenyan, and the 2017 Rising StarThe Making of Barack Obama, Garrow acknowledges that “Frank” is Frank Marshall Davis, a Stalinist and Soviet agent with an FBI file a mile long. With his beloved Communist Frank “politically radioactive,” rising star Barry needed the historical fiction of the Kenyan if he sought higher office.

The false notion that he was born in Kenya originated with the Clinton campaign in 2008, hoping to discredit Barry as a presidential candidate. The establishment media accepted Barry’s narrative and smeared as “birthers” anyone curious about his background. Toward the end of Rising Star, Garrow cites an unnamed reporter that Obama and his “narrator” David Axelrod made up the story, which was “not entirely true.”

In 2012, Paul Kengor’s The Communist showed the “remarkable similarities” between the politics of the Dreams author and Frank Marshall Davis. Also in 2012, Joel Gilbert’s Dreams from My Real Father, documented the remarkable physical similarities between the president and his beloved Frank. Republican candidate Mitt Romney ignored this material and would later call candidate Trump a “a phony, a fraud.” So Romney accepted the historical fiction and duly lost the election.

Back in 2008, the composite character set out to “fundamentally transform” the United States, already a top-heavy welfare state from the New Deal and Great Society programs. The 2008 winner transformed it into a state where the outgoing president picks his successor and deploys the deep state to clear her from any criminal charges and then attack her opponent.

That is the drama playing out since Donald Trump took the oath of office, first in the Russia hoax under Robert Mueller and now the Ukraine hoax under Adam Schiff.  As recent events confirm, leftist Democrats project onto others what they themselves are doing.

Democrats colluded with Russia, and charge that Trump did that. Democrats colluded with Ukraine and charge that Trump did that, and so forth. At the nadir of the absurdity, Nancy Pelosi tags president Trump an “imposter,”  more than a hint that Democrats have one of their own.

The composite character told the world the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. He assured Russian boss Dimitry Medvedev he would have “more flexibility” after the election and essentially gave the Russians everything they wanted. He deployed the deep state against political opponents and on his watch the economy barely had a pulse. So the people had good cause to reject his successor.

In what is now a criminal probe, Attorney General William Barr has John Durham looking into the 2016 election. Anti-Trump FBI drones Strzok and Page were on record that president Obama wanted to know “everything we’re doing.” And POTUS 44 was a recipient of emails sent through Hillary Clinton’s unsecure server, another reason the former First Lady had them destroyed.

“Let’s look into Obama the way they’ve looked at me from day one,” President Trump said in July. “They could look into the book deal that President Obama made. Let’s subpoena all of his records.” Plenty to see here, and much more interesting for the public than Schiff’s Stalinist show-trial.

The former Barry Soetoro, according to his official biographer a composite character in a fictional narrative, is the only president to have two identities. Barack Obama is the only imposter to occupy the White House. As President Trump likes to say, this should never happen again.

* * *

Photo by Gage Skidmore.


Fahreddin Paşa, ‘Kutsal Emanetler’i tüm zorluklara rağmen İstanbul’a getirdi!





Ο Αντγος ε.α Ιωάννης Ηλιόπουλος, νέος Διοικητής του ΓΝΑ “ΚΑΤ – ΕΚΑ


Διοικητής Στρατιάς ο Γιάννης Ηλιόπουλος

Ο Στρατηγός Γρηγόρης Ρουμάνης Διοικητής του Γενικού Νοσοκομείου Ρόδου