Sunday, June 25, 2017

Saudi Arabia

by -
Funding Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton appears to take a hard stance on terrorism and those who sponsor terror, but who is sponsoring her?

For one, Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has donated 20% of the total contributions to Hillary’s campaign.

The claim is coming off of comments by Hillary Clinton about Saudi Arabia sponsoring terror. Watch for yourself.

Notice how she condemns the citizens of Saudi Arabia for donating to terrorist groups, and not the leadership. Very slick.

Remember that in Saudi Arabia, even if you are married you can be stoned to death if you commit sodomy. A woman last summer was stoned to death for committing adultery.

It’s reported that Hillary has accepted over $30 million in donations from foreign countries–including some of the worst countries in the world when it comes to human rights like Saudi Arabia.

What does Trump have to say about all this? You know he has a comment.

“Here’s a woman that takes all of this money from these countries and then she says she loves women. How can she be? They want to kill, they throw them off buildings. They actually throw gays off buildings and she’s taking money and I’m calling for her to give back all of the money she’s taken form these countries,”

Just recently the families were given permission by a federal court to be allowed to sue the government of Saudi Arabia for their involvement in 9/11. These are the same people who are funding Hillary to be our next president.

To Hillary fans, foreign donations don’t matter. To rational thinking people, the connection to such a large sponsor of terrorism is scary and one that cannot and should not be allowed in our government, let alone in the oval office.

Do you think Hillary should give back all the money? Let us know in the comments what you think!

by -
syed farook

After Wednesday’s mass shooting in San Bernardino, California, there’s still a lot of questions—but here’s what we know (and what police have released to the public) already:

14 people have been killed at the Inland Regional Center, a nonprofit that works with people with developmental disabilities. The shooting happened during their Christmas party.

Both suspects fled the scene, but were killed in a shootout.

Police have confirmed that there were two shooters: Syed Farook, 28, and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, 27. A third person was suspected of being part of the crime, but was ultimately deemed to be uninvolved.

Farook attended the Christmas party at the Inland Regional Center, but left early after becoming angry.

Farook was described as a “very religious” Muslim—and he’s become dramatically more religious in the past two years. A neighbor described Farook like this: “He was quiet but always polite. Maybe two years ago he became more religious. He grew a beard and started to wear religious clothing. The long shirt that’s like a dress and the cap on his head.”

Farook recently traveled to Saudi Arabia—a country that churns out radical Islamic terrorists. He came back with Malik, who he met online. Farouk was an American citizen, Malik was not.

Farook had worked for the state government, and occasionally would have business at the Inland Regional Center, where the tragedy occurred. Though, at one point, he threatened to shoot up the place after getting into a fight with a coworker, it’s uncertain whether or not this was workplace violence or a terrorist attack.

However, it looks increasingly like terrorism: Farook and Malik were well-armed, set booby traps in their home, and wore tactical gear.

Democrats are already politicizing the tragedy. Obama, in an interview on Wednesday night, said there are more “steps we can take, not to eliminate every one of these mass shootings, but to improve the odds that they don’t happen as frequently.” Hillary Clinton called for increased background checks.

by -

Saudi Arabia wants to build 200 mosques in Germany.

Saudi Arabia has offered to “help” with the Syrian refugee crisis that’s quickly engulfing Europe–but is it really help if it’s nakedly self-serving?

The U.S.-allied kingdom, which has been one of the leading instigators of radical Islam over the last few decades, has offered help only in the form of building 200 new mosques in Germany.

That comes to about one mosque for every 100 refugees that have recently crossed the border.

Saudi Arabia has allowed 500,000 Syrian workers–which, worth noting, is not refugees, who usually don’t have an income–into their country.

But, along with their wealthy oil-rich neighbors, they have been heavily criticized for not doing much in response to the Syria crisis, which has forced millions to flee as ISIS continues to take over larger and larger portions of the embattled nation.

Part of the reluctance for the Gulf States’ to take in refugees is that Syria is closely allied with Iran, which has had a prickly and competitive relationship with the rest of the Arab world. These nations are concerned that, if they allow in refugees who are loyal to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, there could be increased sectarian tensions.

As a result, Western countries–mainly in Europe–have been forced to pick up the slack. Germany has taken the lion’s share of the burden, offering to take up to 500,000 refugees each year–equivalent to nearly 1% of their population.

But whether or not Germany plans to take Saudi Arabia up on their mosque proposal remains to be seen.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel simply said that, like all proposals, this one would “have to go through the federal authorities.”

by -

What if you threw a summit and nobody came?

Barack Obama learned that the hard way–when four of the six Persian Gulf heads of state he invited to Camp David stood him up.

The point of Obama’s summit was to calm fears about his potential nuclear deal with Iran. The potential deal created some strange bedfellows worldwide: uniting often-contentious Middle Eastern nations, and creating a bipartisan push for changes in Congress, who all feel the deal, as-is, will have a disastrous effect on the Middle East.

But, with so many no-shows from heads of state–who instead sent low-level dignitaries to pay lip service–it’s unlikely that Obama’s summit will have the desired affect.

Most notably absent was Saudi Arabia’s King Salman, who took office earlier this year. Embarrassingly, the White House had only barely announced his attendance when, two days later, Saudi Arabia announced he was skipping the summit.

Saudi Arabia has been one of the most vocal Obama critics of allies in the Middle East–not just because of Obama’s stance on Iran, a regional nemesis of Saudi Arabia, but also because of Obama’s flaccid response to ISIS and a revolution in Yemen, both of which are key security issues to the Saudis.

Also not in attendance was King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa of Bahrain, who instead attended a horse show.

Obama has pushed his new nuclear deal in order to bring Iran back to the bargaining table–hoping that they’ll agree to roll back its nuclear ambitions in exchange for weakened sanctions, which have crippled the Iranian economy.

So far, with an angry and unified Middle East, and an angry and unified Congress, things aren’t looking great for Obama’s Iran deal.


Guarding Republicans

Over the weekend, the New York Times was slammed for running a piece where the news outlet apparently tried to cover up the motives...