• 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 ‘Terrorism’ 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/Bolton/Big Mistake

Sunday, September 15th, 2019

Trump is making an enormous mistake. Bolton is correct. How can you reduce the economic pressures on Iran when they strike Saudi Arabia as they did yesterday? Please read on.

NEWSMAX

September 15, 2019

Axios: Bolton Resigned Over Talk of Easing Iran Sanctions

Former National Security Adviser John Bolton’s resignation came this week after President Donald Trump spoke about the possibility of easing Iranian sanctions,  a source told Axios.

Bolton, famously a hardliner against foreign adversaries, reportedly believed strongly the maximum pressure campaign against Iran was working and easing sanctions would have been capitulating, according to the anonymous source.

The news came just as a series of brazen attacks on a massive Saudi Aramco oil facility this weekend knocked off half of Saudi Arabia’s oil production and threatened to send world oil markets skyrocketing.

Houthi rebels claimed the attacks that were carried out by roughly a dozen drones that originated in Yemen. But on Saturday, Secretary of State Michael Pompeo blamed Iran, an ally of the Houthis, for the attack.

Pompeo tweeted after the White House confirmed that President Donald Trump offered support for Saudi Arabia’s self-defense in a call on Saturday with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman.

Iran launched an “unprecedented attack on the world’s energy supply,” Pompeo said on Twitter after at least one Republican lawmaker urged the U.S. to respond in kind with a strike on Iranian oil facilities. He gave no evidence to back up that allegation.

Iran denied responsibility but said it is ready for war. Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif tweeted, “Having failed at ‘max pressure,’ @SecPompeo’s turning to ‘max deceit.’”

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a confidant of Trump, earlier urged a decisive U.S. response against Iranian targets.

“It is now time for the U.S. to put on the table an attack on Iranian oil refineries if they continue their provocations or increase nuclear enrichment,” Graham of South Carolina said on Twitter. “Iran will not stop their misbehavior until the consequences become more real, like attacking their refineries.”

The Trump administration has been imposing economic sanctions on Iran after decertifying and pulling out of the Obama-era nuclear agreement (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action – JCPOA). The deal restricted levels of uraninum enrichment, which Iran had ceased to adhere to, despite wanting to maintain the agreements with European countries.

Iran has expressed an interest in renegotiating with the U.S. if sanctions are lifted, according to the report, and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani “signaled approval” of Bolton’s ouster, according to an AP report.

President Trump has frequently negotiated with U.S. adversaries and has been oft-criticized for it, particularly in the interactions with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un and Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

 

 

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.”

 

The Hoover Institution/Victor Davis Hanson

Sunday, May 13th, 2018

Victor Davis Hanson was one of the top conservative thinkers of the 20th century and remains so, as well, in our early 21st century. He has just received a highly coveted award from the Hoover Instite at Stanford University.

Victor Davis Hanson Wins Edmund Burke Award
Wednesday, May 2, 2018
Hoover Institution, Stanford University

This week Victor Davis Hanson won the 2018 Edmund Burke Award, which honors people who have made major contributions to the defense of Western civilization.

The honor is given annually by The New Criterion, a monthly journal of the arts and intellectual life. Edmund Burke was an 18th century Irish political philosopher who is credited with laying the foundations of modern conservatism.

Hanson, the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, studies and writes about the classics and military history. He received the sixth Edmund Burke Award for Service to Culture and Society at an April 26 dinner in New York City.

“I was honored to receive the award because Edmund Burke is often identified as both a defender of republican values and traditions and a foe of both autocracy and the radical mob rule of the French Revolution. I grew up on a farm and still live there most of the week. I’ve learned over a lifetime from rural neighbors and friends that agrarianism can inculcate a natural conservatism that I think Burke and others saw as an essential check on radicalism and an independence necessary to resist authoritarianism,” Hanson wrote in an email afterwards.

He noted that “candor, truth, and defiance in the face of historical and unfounded attacks on the West are essential.”

Western civilization has always been the only nexus where freedom, tolerance, constitutional government, human rights, economic prosperity, and security can be found together in their entirety, Hanson added.

“We can see that in the one-way nature of migrations from non-West to the West and in the alternatives on the world scene today. The great dangers to the West, ancient and modern, have always been its own successes, or rather the combination of the affluence that results from free-market capitalism and the entitlement accruing from consensual government. The result is that Westerners can become complacent, hypercritical of their own institutions, and convinced that they are not good if not perfect, or that the sins of mankind are the unique sins of the West,” he said.

This complacence, he said, and the idea that “utopia is attainable often results in amnesia” about the past and a sort of ignorance about the often brutal way the world works outside the West.

“Obviously if we do not defend our unique past and culture, who else will?” he said.

In his remarks on April 26, Roger Kimball, the editor and publisher of The New Criterion, said “Victor cuts across the chattering static of the ephemeral, bringing us back to a wisdom that is as clear-eyed and disabused as it is generous and serene.”

Hanson is also the chairman of the Role of Military History in Contemporary Conflict Working Group at the Hoover Institution.


William S. Frankl, MD, All Rights Reserved