• Home page of novelist William S. Frankl, M.D.
  • About author William S. Frankl, M.D.
  • Books by novelist William S. Frankl, M.D.
  • Reviews of the writing of author William S. Frankl, M.D.
  • Blog of author William (Bill) S. Frankl, M.D.
  • Contact author William S. Frankl, M.D.
Title: Blog by Novelist William S. Frankl, MD

Archive for the ‘Foreign Policy’ Category

Abu Bakr al–Baghdadi is Dead

Monday, October 28th, 2019

 

Pres. Trump was quite elated by the death of Abu Bakr al–Baghdadi. However, caution is necessary and much more needs to be done as clearly outlined in Richard Viguere’s  latest issue of ConservativeHQ.com.

The Death Of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi Was A Great Victory, But…

| 10/28/19

President Trump is to be commended for authorizing the successful operation to kill ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and he’s right the American military personnel who carried out the mission “are the very best anywhere in the world.”

But, now that al-Baghdadi is dead is the world a safer place as the President claimed? We’re skeptical, to say the least.

The problem is that we have been fighting the war Islam declared on the West by counting casualties and holding territory, while doing next to nothing to defeat the ideology of Islamism.

The truth is that the real enemy in the Near East is political Islam, and the only way to defeat it is to drop the fiction that “Islam is a religion of peace” and use all our national power to present an alternative worldview that undermines and eventually destroys Sharia-supremacism and Iranian “Absolute Wilayat al-Faqih” (Guardianship of the Jurist).

None of the generals who have been tasked with fighting and winning the wars in Syria and Iraq, and certainly none of the politicians who have advocated United States involvement in them, have been willing to accept and confront that truth, and as a consequence the war that was supposed to be a three month intervention to defeat the “JV forces” of the Islamic State became a seven year sinkhole of American lives and treasure.

One proof of this problem lies here; the United States designated Hezbollah as a terrorist organization way back in 1997, but we have done nothing to defeat its ideology.

Indeed, as David Daoud of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy noted, Hezbollah remains the most successful and most prominent Iranian revolutionary export. And Mr. Daoud is not the only one to hold that view.

Gilbert Achcar of the University of London has called Hezbollah “the most prestigious member of the regional family of Khomeinism.” The Lebanon-based terrorist group is cut from the same ideological cloth as the Islamic Republic, which, according to former CIA intelligence analyst Kenneth Pollack, is Hezbollah’s model and inspiration. Eitan Azani, the deputy executive director of the Institute for Counter-Terrorism at IDC Herzliya, has said that Khomeini and his successors serve as Hezbollah’s ultimate source of religious, political, and ideological guidance and authority. Hezbollah fully accepts the concept of Absolute Wilayat al-Faqih, and openly acknowledges Khomeini as its faqih, leading Augustus Richard Norton of Boston University to call Khomeini Hezbollah’s “undisputed, authoritative leader.”

Yet, when Iranians have protested the failures of Khomeinism and Absolute Wilayat al-Faqih the United States has done little or nothing concrete to use that popular discontent to undermine the regime, once again substituting holding worthless real estate in the Middle East and killing a few thousand ignorant jihadis for fighting and winning the real war – which is the defeat of Sharia-supremacism and Iranian Absolute Wilayat al-Faqih.

Done right, U.S. intervention in the Syrian civil war might have offered the possibility of a strategic defeat of Iran. If the United States acted to tip the balance of power in the civil war, Iran would have been weakened by the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, its single Arab ally and a vital link to their important clients – Lebanon’s Hezbollah militia.

Isolated, Iran would have become more vulnerable to international pressure to limit its nuclear program. As dean of the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, Vali Nasr observed for Bloomberg, if “Iran’s regional influence faded, those of its rivals — U.S. allies Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia — would expand.”

However, America through its generals and diplomats never fought that war, because they never engaged it on the most important battlefield – the battlefield of secularism versus Sharia-supremacism and Iranian Absolute Wilayat al-Faqih.

With Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi dead it is probably safe to leave others to mop-up the scattered remnants of ISIS and hold the territory once occupied by the Islamic State. So, let’s savor the victory, and praise our military, but let’s not fool ourselves into thinking that killing al-Baghdadi and a few thousand jihadis and retaking some desolate ground in the Near East ends the war political Islam, and Iran in particular, have declared on the West.

George Rasley is editor of Richard Viguerie’s ConservativeHQ.com and is a veteran of over 300 political campaigns. A member of American MENSA, he served on the staff of Vice President Dan Quayle, as Director of Policy and Communication for then-Congressman Adam Putnam (FL-12) then Vice Chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs, and as spokesman for Rep. Mac Thornberry former Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

 

The Assault on Trump

Monday, October 28th, 2019

 

Richard Viguerie/ ConservativeHQ.com

The following is a very interesting paper concerning the reasons for the gross hatred of Pres. Trump by the Democrats, the media, and others(WSF).

 

The Assaults On Trump Explained

George Rasley, CHQ Editor | 10/28/19

Americans outside the Beltway have been struggling for almost three years to figure out what’s been going on in Washington, what to call it and how to explain it.

Have there really been dozens of small and large Trump scandals? Or is it all “fake news” and lies? Or is it all true and Donald Trump really is a Russian “asset” or puppet of Vladimir Putin? Or is he, as former Vice President Joe Biden claimed recently, “the most corrupt president in modern history?”

But how can there be a “scandal” if Trump has done nothing wrong, and the Mueller Report demonstrated that the charges of being corrupt and a Russian “asset” are demonstrably false?

The answer is that what we have been witnessing is not American politics as usual, but a sophisticated intelligence operation to destabilize and overthrow the legitimate government of the United States.

Each step along the path to impeachment is exactly what the CIA or the intelligence agency of a foreign power would do to use non-military means to destabilize and eventually replace the leader of an unfriendly government.

Consider for a moment that the “Resistance” to the Trump presidency and the questioning of its legitimacy began as soon as it was verified Hillary Clinton had been defeated.

As Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes documented in their book Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign, within twenty-four hours of Hillary Clinton’s concession speech Robby Mook and John Podesta assembled her communications team to engineer the case that the election wasn’t entirely on the up-and-up. They met at Clinton’s Brooklyn campaign headquarters to go over the script they would pitch to the press and the public to make the case that Trump’s victory was not legitimate and that Putin had specifically targeted Hillary Clinton and worked to throw the election to Trump was at the center of their argument. (page 395)

And they’ve never stopped pitching that narrative to this day, just as our intelligence agencies develop narratives and promote them to raise questions about the legitimacy of foreign opposition politicians.

Note also that for the first time in modern American history the party in opposition to the President has completely refused to cooperate with him – even when he expressed a willingness to work with Democrats on their own agenda, as President Trump did on immigration and infrastructure.

Complete non-cooperation is precisely the same strategy Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky and the Bolshevik members of the Russian Parliament pursued with the Kerensky government in the lead-up to the Bolsheviks’ October 1917 Communist Revolution – and it worked.

The masses of Russian people were so fed up with a government that couldn’t get anything done that they were prepared to support, or at least acquiesce, to a government formed by a political party composed of a tiny fraction of the Russian people; no more than 200,000 out of a population of over 170 million.

Notice also the vast sums of dark money flowing to the Democrats and the Far-Left organizations opposing President Trump. George Soros alone accounts for tens of millions of dollars flowing to anti-Trump organizations to train agitators and political organizers to create opposition to the President.

This model was followed by the Communist International for many years, as hearings before the House Unamerican Activities Committee proved.

As Jack D. Meeks, Doctor of Philosophy, observed in his dissertation, FROM THE BELLY OF THE HUAC: THE HUAC INVESTIGATIONS OF HOLLYWOOD, 1947-1952, “communists were superb at identifying a worthy cause [to gain] the support of the American people, such as advocating for civil rights and unemployment insurance or resisting Nazism” and then building front organizations around them.

Examples of communist front organizations from the period studied by Meeks include such innocent sounding organizations as the American Slav Congress; the Win-the-Peace Congress; the Civil Rights Congress; the Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy; the Council of African Affairs; the Council for Pan American Democracy; the Political Action Committee; the Independent Citizens Committee of the Arts, Sciences and Professions; the Federation of Atomic Scientists; and the Southern Conference for Human Welfare.

Occasionally exposés of these organizations would hit the press, but most of the time, particularly after the House Unamerican Activities Committee was shut down, little of the Russian Communist interference in American politics came to public attention.

Are our opponents in today’s Russia, or China, or other members of the anti-American Axis using the same techniques today, particularly when presented with such a golden vehicle as the Clinton machine’s post-election narrative?

Most people, and certainly those in the establishment media, have forgotten or ignored Fox News reports that the Russians indicted for meddling in the 2016 presidential contest were also behind anti-Trump rallies after the election, revealing another aspect of Russia’s alleged interference as it worked to sow discord in the United States.

“After the election, the defendants allegedly staged rallies to support the president-elect while simultaneously staging rallies to protest his election,” Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said in a press conference.

“For example, the defendants organized one rally to support the president-elect and another rally to oppose him, both in New York on the same day,” said Rosenstein.

Facebook advertising Vice President Rob Goldman* said he was “very excited” to see the indictments outlining charges against 13 Russian nationals. However, Mr. Goldman’s excitement was largely ignored by the media and the public because, in a series of tweets, Goldman said that the “Russians stole the 2016 election away from Hillary Clinton” narrative is bogus.

As the late Bre Payton reported for The Federalist, Goldman tweeted that the social network shared with Congress the ads from Russian nationals to “help the public understand how the Russians abused our system.”

Tweeted Goldman:

The majority of the Russian ad spend happened AFTER the election.  We shared that fact, but very few outlets have covered it because it doesn’t align with the main media narrative of Trump and the election.

The main goal of the Russian propaganda and misinformation effort is to divide America by using our institutions, like free speech and social media, against us. It has stoked fear and hatred amongst Americans.  It is working incredibly well. We are quite divided as a nation.

Mr. Goldman was right, but you won’t see anything in the establishment media to help you identify and expose Russian intelligence activities we know have been going on for a century, or the intelligence operations of others interested in destabilizing our government, because, wittingly or unwittingly, the establishment media are part of the destabilization operation.

George Rasley is editor of Richard Viguerie’s ConservativeHQ.com and is a veteran of over 300 political campaigns. A member of American MENSA, he served on the staff of Vice President Dan Quayle, as Director of Policy and Communication for then-Congressman Adam Putnam (FL-12) then Vice Chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs, and as spokesman for Rep. Mac Thornberry former Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

*Mr. Goldman has just left Facebook (departure announced October 22, 2019), his comments posted after the Russian indictments were retweeted by President Trump, which caused outrage on the Left. For telling the truth, and thereby giving aid and comfort to President Trump, Goldman was apparently forced to apologize to his colleagues on Facebook’s internal social network.

ConservativeHQ.com Officers:
Richard A. Viguerie – Chairman

Editor:

George Rasley

Writers:

Mark Fitzgibbons

Ben Hart

George Rasley

Richard A. Viguerie

Jeffrey A Rendall

 

 

 

Trump Derangement Syndrome

Monday, September 23rd, 2019

 

As always, Victor Davis Hanson has produced a superb essay, which in this case helps explain much of why Trump is so violently hated.

The Daily Signal

The Real Reason for Trump Derangement Syndrome

Victor Davis Hanson

September 19, 2019

Donald Trump is waging a nonstop, all-encompassing war against progressive culture, in magnitude analogous to what 19th-century Germans once called a Kulturkampf.

As a result, not even former President George W. Bush has incurred the degree of hatred from the left that is now directed at Trump. For most of his time in office, Trump, his family, his friends, and his businesses have been investigated, probed, dissected, and constantly attacked.

In 2016 and early 2017, Barack Obama appointees in the FBI, CIA, and Department of Justice tried to subvert the Trump campaign, interfere with his transition, and, ultimately, abort his presidency. Now, congressional Democrats promise impeachment before the 2020 election.

The usual reason for such hatred is said to be Trump’s unorthodox and combative take-no-prisoners style. Critics detest his crude and unfettered assertions, his lack of prior military or political experience, his attacks on the so-called bipartisan administrative state, and his intent to roll back the entire Obama-era effort of “fundamentally transforming” the country leftward.

Certainly, Trump’s agenda of closing the border, using tariffs to overturn a half-century of Chinese mercantilism, and pulling back from optional overseas military interventions variously offends both Democrats and establishment Republicans.

Trump periodically and mercurially fires his top officials. He apparently does not care whether the departed write damning memoirs or join his opposition. He will soon appoint his fourth national security adviser within just three years.

To make things worse for his critics, Trump’s economy is booming as never before in the new 21st century: near record-low unemployment, a record number of Americans working, increases in workers’ wages and family incomes, low interest rates, low inflation, steady GDP growth, and a strong stock market.

Yet the real source of Trump derangement syndrome is his desire to wage a multifront pushback—politically, socially, economically, and culturally—against what might be called the elite postmodern progressive world.

Contemporary elites increasingly see nationalism and patriotism as passé. Borders are 19th-century holdovers.

The European Union, not the U.S. Constitution, is seen as the preferable model to run a nation. Transnational and global organizations are wiser on environmental and diplomatic matters than is the U.S. government.

The media can no longer afford to be nonpartisan and impartial in its effort to rid America of a reactionary such as Trump, given his danger to the progressive future.

America’s ancient sins can never really be forgiven. In a new spirit of iconoclasm, thousands of buildings, monuments, and statues dedicated to American sinners of the past must be destroyed, removed, or renamed.

A new America supposedly is marching forward under the banner of ending fossil fuels, curbing the Second Amendment, redistributing income, promoting identity politics and open borders, and providing free college, free health care, and abortion on demand.

An insomniac Trump fights all of the above nonstop and everywhere. In the past, Republican presidents sought to slow the progressive transformation of America but despaired of ever stopping it.

No slugfest is too off-topic or trivial for Trump. Sometimes that means calling out former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick for persuading NFL stars to kneel during the national anthem. Huge, monopolistic Silicon Valley companies are special Trump targets. Sometimes Trump enters cul-de-sac Twitter wars with Hollywood has-beens who have attacked him and his policies.

Trump variously goes after Antifa, political correctness on campus, the NATO hierarchy, the radical green movement, Planned Parenthood, American universities, and, above all, the media—especially CNN, The Washington Post, and The New York Times.

For all the acrimony and chaos—and prognostications of Trump’s certain failure—a bloodied Trump wins more than he loses. NATO members may hate Trump, but more are finally paying their promised defense contributions.

In retrospect, many Americans concede that the Iran deal was flawed and that the Paris climate accord mere virtue-signaling. China was long due for a reckoning.

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation proved fruitless and was further diminished by Mueller’s bizarrely incoherent congressional testimony.

Some of the most prominent Trump haters—Michael Avenatti, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Anthony Scaramucci, and Rep. Adam Schiff—either have been discredited or have become increasingly irrelevant.

Trump has so enraged his Democratic adversaries that the candidates to replace him have moved farther to the left than any primary field in memory. They loathe Trump, but in their abject hatred he has goaded the various Democratic candidates into revealing their support for the crazy Green New Deal, reparations for slavery, relaxed immigration policies, and trillions of dollars in new free stuff.

In a way, the left-wing Democratic presidential candidates understand Trump best. If he wins his one-man crusade to stop the progressive project, they are finished, and their own party will make the necessary adjustments and then sheepishly drift back toward the center.

(C) 2019 TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

Commentary By

Victor Davis Hanson @VDHanson

Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, and author of the book “The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won.” You can reach him by e-mailing authorvdh@gmail.com.

 

The Mueller Report to the House of Representatives

Saturday, July 27th, 2019

Finally, Mueller came to testify before the House of Representatives. The Democrats expected a gang buster destruction of Trump. Well, not so fast.

Godfather Politics

Robert Mueller’s House Testimony a Bust: Impeachment’s Over

Warren Todd Huston

July 24, 2019

Democrats had high hopes that former special council Robert Mueller’s testimony would ring the bell for impeachment, but instead it has fizzled and led some in the media to pronounce the hopes of impeachment to be dead.

Mueller’s testimony broadcast all across the country was very bad for Democrats. Mueller looked confused and ill-informed throughout the event. He stumbled over answers, repeatedly asked for questions to be asked a second time, and often seemed unaware of what was going on. And, according to CNN’s Jake Tapper, he refused to even answer a question over 155 times.

The appearance before the House Judiciary Committee was so bad that NBC’s liberal newsman Chuck Todd said that the hearing had created a series of “narrative nightmares for Democrats.”

During a break in the testimony, NBC shot over to Todd who said that the whole thing was not working well for Democrats.

As Breitbart News reported, when asked if the testimony is bringing the report to life like a movie Todd said, “In no movie would the best actor, the lead person here has the fewest words spoken. And the problem here is you — basically the narrative that Democrats were hoping that Bob Mueller would be telling is essentially they are telling him and he is saying, ‘that’s true. yes, that’s correct.’ I wrote it down two narrative nightmares for the Democrats, one was ‘I stick with the language I have in front of you,’ or ‘whatever was said will appear in the report.’ He has no interest in helping to providing color, context and that does, I think take away some drama.

Meanwhile over at ABC, the network’s Senior National Correspondent, Terry Moran, was also seen lamenting the loss of the Democrat narrative by insisting that Mueller’s latest testimony finally put an end to their hopes of impeaching Trump.

Moran said, “Impeachment’s over. I don’t think Nancy Pelosi is going to stand for her members bringing forth something that is going to obviously lose in the Senate, lose with the American public. And the problem with Mueller’s testimony on this issue is that he had to carry the ball for them some way, whether he wanted to or not, at least by being a vigorous, strong, rock-solid prosecutor. And he looked like somebody who’d slowed a step or two, and perhaps, as the Republicans are starting to put out there, maybe he wasn’t in control of all those angry Democrats, maybe he’s a figurehead, somebody from the past that they put there so they could do their dirty work. That’s the theory they’re coming out with. It’s not going to be bought by Democrats, but they needed more fuel for any kind of impeachment effort.”

Even the left’s favorite lawyer, Laurence Tribe, said that Mueller’s testimony was a “disaster” for the left.

Much as I hate to say it, this morning’s hearing was a disaster. Far from breathing life into his damning report, the tired Robert Mueller sucked the life out of it. The effort to save democracy and the rule of law from this lawless president has been set back, not advanced.

— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) July 24, 2019

Indeed, Politico is saying that there is relief and even “euphoria” at the White House over how bad Mueller’s testimony was for the Democrats.

“The Democrats built up these two Mueller hearings as their Super Bowl, and at half time, it is not looking good for their side,” said Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh. White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham, who has kept a low profile since she was tapped for the job late last month, said in a statement, “The last three hours have been an epic embarrassment for the Democrats. Expect more of the same in the second half.”

“So far, so good,” a senior White House official said in a text message when lawmakers took a brief break about 90 minutes into the Judiciary Committee hearing. Another Trump ally described the mood in the White House simply as “euphoria.”

Perhaps one of the best Republican moments during Mueller’s testimony came when Texas Republican John Ratcliffe proved that Mueller’s entire second book of his report was essentially an illegal document because Mueller’s legal job was not to convict or exonerate anyone but was only to present the evidence so that a decision over prosecution could be made.

Ratcliffe’s time at the mic was devastating to Mueller’s credibility: “Can you give me an example other than @realDonaldTrump where the Justice Department determined that an investigated person was not exonerated because their innocence was not conclusively determined?”

Mueller: “I cannot.”

So why was Mueller such a dud? Was it because he did not want to be the reason for a political catastrophe? Or was it because he really did not compose the report and that it was actually done by his staff of attorneys, all of whom hated Trump? Or was it that he is ill and just too tired to to be able to go through all these questions? Or is the supposedly innocence on collusion with the Russians and that he did not obstruct justice actually the case? I suppose we’ll never know.

In all, whatever, Mueller’s testimony was a huge bust for the Democrats.

In the end, we are still left with the facts being that there was no proof that Trump “colluded” with anyone, nor that he worked with Russians to change our elections. There was also no obstruction. the Democrats are now left with nothing on which to hang an impeachment trial.

 

Trump Visits Troops

Wednesday, December 26th, 2018

 

WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Trump makes surprise trip to Iraq to visit with troops

by Steven Nelson& Melissa Quinn

| December 26, 2018 02:20 PM

President Trump made an unannounced visit to troops stationed in Iraq on Wednesday, landing after hours of speculation in Washington on his whereabouts.

Trump addressed U.S. soldiers and posed for selfies at Al Asad Air Base near Baghdad a day after Christmas. First lady Melania Trump joined him on the trip.

The visit was a closely guarded secret until after Air Force One landed, but the mysterious departure of a plane from Joint Base Andrews in Maryland triggered theories that Trump was traveling abroad.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders confirmed the trip on Twitter.

“President Trump and the First Lady traveled to Iraq late on Christmas night to visit with our troops and Senior Military leadership to thank them for their service, their success, and their sacrifice and to wish them a Merry Christmas,” Sanders wrote.

Speaking in Iraq, Trump said he does not have plans to remove U.S. troops from the war-torn country. Instead, he said Iraq could be used as a base to help combat the Islamic State, according to Bloomberg.

“If we see something happening with ISIS that we don’t like, we can hit them so fast and so hard they really won’t know what the hell happened,” Trump said. “We’ve knocked them silly.”

Last week, Trump ordered the withdrawal of about 2,000 U.S. troops from neighboring Syria, where noncovert operations began with airstrikes in 2014, and a drawdown of troops in Afghanistan, where U.S. troops have been based since 2001. He described the actions as making good on a campaign pledge to avoid open-ended military engagements.

Trump’s decision to withdraw U.S. service members from Syria has earned him criticism from both sides of the aisle, but the president defended the move during his overseas visit. “It’s time for us to start using our head,” he told reporters, “We don’t want to be taken advantage of anymore by countries that use us.”

The president’s trip to the Middle East comes after Trump had received criticism for being the first president since 2002 not to visit service members during the holiday season. Trump visited military personnel at Walter Reed Military Medical Center in Bethesda, Md., days before Christmas last year and invited members of the Coast Guard to play golf with him during a holiday trip to Mar-a-Lago, his sprawling Florida property, in the days after Christmas.

President Barack Obama, meanwhile, met with service members at Marine Corps Base Hawaii from 2009 to 2016 while celebrating the holidays in Hawaii.

Trump hinted in recent weeks that a trip to visit U.S. troops in a combat zone would be in his future. While speaking with troops in Afghanistan during Thanksgiving, Trump told Brig. Gen. David Lyons of the U.S. Air Force, “Maybe I’ll even see you over there . . . You never know what’s going to happen.”

Trump then suggested in an interview with Fox News last month that a visit to troops deployed overseas was in the works. “I think you will see that happen,” he said during the interview. “There are things that are being planned. We don’t want to talk about it because of security reasons and everything else.”

 


William S. Frankl, MD, All Rights Reserved