"Chrislam" - Europe Folds To The Islamization Of Christmas

Authored by Soeren Kern via The Gatestone Institute,

The re-theologizing of Christmas is based on the false premise that the Jesus of the Bible is the Jesus (Isa) of the Koran. This religious fusion, sometimes referred to as "Chrislam," is gaining ground in a West that has become biblically illiterate.

• A school in Lüneburg postponed a Christmas party after a Muslim student complained that the singing of Christmas carols during school was incompatible with Islam. Alexander Gauland, the leader of the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD), said the school"s action was "an unbearable, involuntary submission to Islam" and amounted to a "cowardly injustice" toward non-Muslim children.


• "The word "Christmas," a symbol of our faith and our culture, does not discriminate against anyone. Striking the emblems of Christmas does not guarantee anyone"s respect, does not produce a welcoming and inclusive school and society, but fosters intolerance towards our culture, our customs, our laws and our traditions. We firmly believe that our traditions must be respected." — Milan politician Samuele Piscina.

This year"s Christmas season has been marked by Islam-related controversies in nearly every European country. Most of the conflicts have been generated by Europe"s multicultural political and religious elites, who are bending over backwards to secularize Christmas, ostensibly to ensure that Muslims will not be offended by the Christian festival.

Many traditional Christmas markets have been renamed — Amsterdam Winter Parade, Brussels Winter Pleasures, Kreuzberger Wintermarkt, London Winterville, Munich Winter Festival — to project a multicultural veneer of secular tolerance.

More troubling are the growing efforts to Islamize Christmas. The re-theologizing of Christmas is based on the false premise that the Jesus of the Bible is the Jesus (Isa) of the Koran. This religious fusion, sometimes referred to as "Chrislam," is gaining ground in a West that has become biblically illiterate.

In Britain, for instance, the All Saints Church in Kingston upon Thames recently held a joint birthday celebration for Jesus and Mohammed. The "Milad, Advent and Christmas Celebration" on December 3 was aimed at "marking the birthday of Prophet Mohammed and looking forward to the birthday of Jesus." The hour-long service included time for Islamic prayer and was followed by the cutting of a birthday cake.

The prominent Christian blog "Archbishop Cranmer" rebuked the church for its lack of discernment:

"Note how this event is "Marking the birthday of Prophet Mohammed," but not looking forward to the birthday of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Mohammed gets his prophethood, while Jesus gets neither his prophethood nor his priesthood; neither his kingship nor his messiahship. It"s the exalted Prophet Mohammed along with plain old Jesus, because to have added any of his claims to divinity would, of course, have alienated many Muslims (if they hadn"t already been alienated by the haram [forbidden by Islam] celebration), which wouldn"t have been very interfaith or sensitively missional, would it?"

The blog added that exalting Mohammed in churches effectively proclaims that Mohammed is greater than Jesus:

"Every time a church accords Mohammed the epithet "Prophet," they are rejecting the crucifixion, denying the resurrection of Christ, and refuting that the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, for Mohammed denied all of these foundational tenets of the Christian faith."

Previously, a passage from the Koran denying that Jesus is the Son of God was read during a service at a Scottish Episcopal Church in Glasgow on Epiphany, a festival commemorating the incarnation of God in the person of Jesus Christ. One of the Queen"s chaplains, Gavin Ashenden, referred to the Koran reading as "blasphemy." He added that "there are other and considerably better ways to build "bridges of understanding"" with Muslims.

In London, the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims, a parliamentary group composed of members of both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, issued a report, "A Very Merry Muslim Christmas," aimed at drawing attention to the "humanity" of Muslims during Christmas. The report states:

"Too often, Muslim charities come to our attention because of negative media coverage... What we hear even less about is the "Muslim Merry Christmas." The soup kitchens, the food banks, the Christmas dinners, the New Year clean-up — work Muslim charities will be busy doing during the Christmas period."

In Scotland, the regional government was accused of "undermining" Britain"s Christian heritage by promoting "winter festivals" for ethnic minorities while ignoring Christmas. Scotland"s International Development Minister, Alasdair Allan, pledged nearly £400,000 ($535,000) to fund 23 events during the winter months. He described them as "key dates in our national calendar" and said the "exciting and diverse" program would help Scots "celebrate everything great about our wonderful country during the winter months." None of the events, however, has any connection to Christmas. A spokesman for the Catholic Church in Scotland said:

"It is deeply disappointing that the Scottish Government has chosen not to recognize the religious reality of Christmas in its Winter Festival events. Over half of the population stated their religion as Christian in the last census. Catholics, and other Christians, may quite rightly wonder why this publicly-funded Festival does not include any events designed to help Scots celebrate the birth of Christ which is undoubtedly the most significant celebration in the winter months."

Gordon Macdonald, of Christian charity CARE, added:

"It is part of the general secularization that has been taking place within the Scottish Government for a number of years where our Christian heritage and value system has been undermined as a direct result of government policy."

In Denmark, a primary school in Graested cancelled a traditional church service marking the beginning of Christmas in order not to offend Muslim pupils. Some parents accused the school of having double-standards: it recently held an event called "Syria Week" in which children immersed themselves in Middle Eastern culture. Ignoring parents, the school board sided with the school:

"The board backs the school"s decision to create new traditions [emphasis added] that involve children and young people."

Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen, who attended the school as a child, said the decision should be reversed. Health Minister Ellen Trane Norby added:

"Danish primary schools have a duty to spread education — and teaching the cultural values and knowledge connected to Christmas is an essential part of that."

In France, the annual Christmas market in the Croix-Rousse district of Lyon was cancelled because of exorbitant security costs associated with protecting the event from Islamic terror. The city"s annual festival of lights did go ahead this year. The military governor of Lyon, General Pierre Chavancy, said that, because of the "sensitivity" of the event, 1,500 soldiers and police, backed up by dogs, river brigades and mine-clearers, would be deployed to provide security.

In neighboring Belgium, the head of the Red Cross in Liège, André Rouffart, ordered all 28 offices in the city to remove crucifixes to affirm the organization"s secular identity. Critics said the decision was part of a broader effort to "modify certain terminologies" and to "break with our traditions and our roots" in order to appease Muslims. "We once said Christmas holidays, now we say winter holidays," said a local Red Cross volunteer. "The Christmas market in Brussels has been renamed "Winter Pleasures." Let things remain as they are."

In Germany, a school in Lüneburg postponed a Christmas party after a Muslim student complained that the singing of Christmas carols during school was incompatible with Islam. The school"s decision to reschedule the event as a non-compulsory after-school activity generated "a flood of hate mail and even threats against school management and school board," according to Focus. In an effort to appease angry parents, Headmaster Friedrich Suhr said that "non-Christian" Christmas songs such as "Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer" would not be banned. Alexander Gauland, the leader of the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD), said the school"s action was "an unbearable, involuntary submission to Islam" and amounted to a "cowardly injustice" toward non-Muslim children.

In Munich, ads for a multicultural "winter market" depicted a snowman covered in a burqa. The chairman of the AfD in Bavaria, Petr Bystron, noted the irony: "A burqa snowman as a tolerance symbol?" In Halle, the Christmas market was renamed "Wintermarket."

In Berlin, the traditional Christmas market was protected by walls of concrete barriers to prevent a repeat of last year"s jihadist attack in which 12 people were killed and more than 50 injured. In Stuttgart, a 53-year-old man was arrested at the Christmas market after he claimed to carrying a bomb in his backpack. In Potsdam, the Christmas market was closed after a nearby pharmacy received a letter bomb. In Bonn, the Christmas market was evacuated due to a bomb threat.

In Italy, a school in Milan removed references to Christmas at a party and renamed the holiday as "The Great Festival of Happy Holidays." Writing on Facebook, local politician Samuele Piscina accused the school of implementing "a politically correct leftist policy" that deprives Italian children the joy of Christmas:

"After the nativity scenes and the crucifixes, now even Christmas parties are hindered in schools. The word "Christmas," a symbol of our faith and our culture, does not discriminate against anyone. Striking the emblems of Christmas does not guarantee anyone"s respect, does not produce a welcoming and inclusive school and society, but fosters intolerance towards our culture, our customs, our laws and our traditions. We firmly believe that our traditions must be respected."

In Bolzano, a cardboard Christmas tree was ordered to be removed from the town hall because "it could have offended the sensibilities" of Muslims. A local politician, Alessandro Urzì, expressed outrage at the decision: "The bureaucratic rigor with which the tree was removed to avoid the risk of annoying someone reflects the barbarization of the cultural climate."

In Norway, a primary school in Skien announced that its Christmas festivities this year would include not only the usual reading by pupils of verses from the Bible but also two verses from the Koran which refer to Jesus. The inimitable Bruce Bawer explained the implications:

"Stigeråsen School"s Christmas plans provide yet another example of dhimmitude: craven European submission to Islam. This year, there might be a couple of Koran verses in a Christmas show; next year, a yuletide event at which both religions are celebrated on an even footing; and not too many years after that, perhaps, a children"s celebration at which there is no cross and no Christmas tree, only prayer rugs, benedictions in Arabic, and hijabs for the girls."

In Spain, the Madrid City Council replaced Christmas festivities in the capital with a neo-Pagan "International Fair of the Cultures." According to Madrid Mayor Manuela Carmena, a former member of Spain"s Communist Party, the express purpose of the month-long event is to de-Christianize Christmas to make it more inclusive:

"We all know that Christmas is a festival of religious origin, but it is also a celebration of humanity, solidarity. Therefore, the Madrid City Council wants to do everything possible so that everyone who is in this city, from wherever they may be, can enjoy Christmas."

Breaking with tradition, the Madrid city hall also refused to place a nativity scene at the Puerta de Alcalá, one of the city"s most iconic monuments. Local politician José Luis Martínez-Almeida accused Carmena of "enthusiastically collaborating in the celebration of Ramadan" but "trying to hide all the Christian symbols of Christmas." He added: "We want to reclaim our cultural and religious roots."

 

These Are The Two Heroes Who Stopped Texas Church Shooter Devin Patrick Kelley

As details about yesterday’s shooting at First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas started trickling out, witnesses and police sources shared how one brave man with a rifle confronted and shot  suspected killer Devin Kelly, forcing him to flee.

A  high-speed pursuit ensued, which ended when Kelly’s car crashed into a ditch. Police said they found Kelly dead in his vehicle, but it isn’t clear how he died.

However, two men who reportedly helped stop the shooter are now being hailed as selfless heros - “good guys with guns” who potentially saved dozens of lives by stopping the killer before he could murder more innocent people.  As Sheriff Joe Tackitt pointed out in an interview with CNN, “there’s another church right down the road,” suggesting that the killer could’ve headed there next after murdering more than half of First Baptist’s congregation if he had not been stopped.

My San Antonio is now reporting that the man who confronted Kelly outside the church is Stephen Willeford, a sharp-shooting plumber with no military background who managed to shoot Kelly - who was reportedly dressed in tactical gear - prompting him to flee the scene. Earlier media reports identified Willeford as being a neighbor of the church.

Stephen Willeford

As Willeford exchanged gunfire with Kelly outside the church, a second man - identified as Johnny Langendorff - pulled over when he witnessed the carnage and saw Kelly speed off. Willeford saw Langendorff and quickly rushed to his car.

Here’s more from My San Antonio:

Johnny Langendorff was one of the men who chased after suspected killer Devin Kelley, a 26-year-old from Comal County, he told KSAT  in a television interview.

 

"I pulled up to the intersection where the shooting happened and I saw two men exchanging gunfire," Langendorff said, noting the shooter and another local were shooting at each other.

 

Once the gunman fled the church grounds in his vehicle, Langendorff said the other man came to his car.

 

"The other gentleman said we needed to pursue (the shooter) because he shot up the church," he said. "So that"s what I did. I just acted."

 

“So we were doing about 95 mph, going around traffic and everything,” he added.

 

The pair chased the man down FM 539 headed North before the shooter lost control and ran off the roadway. Langendorff said the other man with him jumped out of the car and drew his rifle on Kelley.

 

"He didn"t move after that," Langendorff said.

According to the New York Post, Texas Department of Public Safety chief Freeman Martin said Willeford “grabbed his rifle and engaged the suspect” after Kelley left the First Baptist Church. An area resident told the paper that Willeford, an avid biker who attends another church, learned about the shooting when his daughter called to say a man clad in body armor was shooting worshipers.

The local said that although Willeford has no military background, he didn’t hesitate when he came face to face with the suspect — and managed to squeeze off a round that struck the gunman, who had dropped his Ruger AR-15 variant.

Kelley had taken a hostage in his SUV’s passenger seat before fleeing, the local man told the paper.

Devin Patrick Kelley

According to Langendorff, it took cops about five to seven minutes to arrive. In the meantime, they kept a gun trained on Kelley.

“The police arrived and they pushed us back and they took care of the rest,” he said.

Langendorff’s girlfriend, Summer Caddel, said Kelley died a few feet away from Langendorff.

Johnny Langendorff

The local man, who knows both heroes, said Willeford made sure Kelley’s hostage was outside the vehicle when they approached the SUV.

Authorities are now reporting that between 12 and 14 children were among the 26 fatalities of the shooting. Another 20 people were injured. Police said not all of the victims were shot inside the church, but declined to elaborate.

Yesterday’s church shooting was the deadliest mass shooting in Texas history, and the deadliest shooting at a church in US history.
 

Here"s What We Know About Texas Church Shooter Devin Kelley

Update: Officials revealed Monday that Kelley had sent threatening text messages to his mother-in-law, who was a parishoner at First Baptist church.

Devin Patrick Kelley “made threatening text?s? to ?his ?mother in law who went to ?the ?church,” said Texas Department of Public Safety regional director Freeman Martin. The woman, who was not named, attends the church but was not there during the massacre Sunday, authorities said. Martin would not say whether the woman’s membership with the church motivated Kelley.

“We know that he expressed anger toward his mother-in-law.”

* * *

The deranged gunman who killed 26 churchgoers and wounded 20 more at a church in rural east Texas Sunday was an atheist who ranted on Facebook about “stupid” religious people, according to a now-deleted Facebook account that appears to be Kelley’s.

Judging by his social media presence, 26-year-old Devin Patrick Kelley was a fan of guns; the cover photo from his Facebook profile showed an assault rifle. Meanwhile, the Sun reported that the page featured an Antifascist Action banner, which sparked speculation online about his ties to left-wing groups like Antifa.

However, since the screenshot was first circulated, a number of reports in fact-checking media have debunked it as a doctored image spread by right-wing activists. No official information about Kelley’s possible affiliation with any group or political movement has been made available.

Former classmates of the shooter described him as “creepy” and “weird.” Classmate Nina Rosa Nava write on Facebook that the mass murderer used to rant on the social network about his atheist beliefs. It has also been reported that Kelley’s in-laws attended First Baptist Church, but weren’t there at the time of the shooting.

“He was always talking about how people who believe in God were stupid and trying to preach his atheism,” Nava posted on her Facebook.

One former classmate, Christopher Leo Longoria, replied: “I removed him off FB for those same reasons! He was being super nagtive (sic) all the timd (sic)."

Another Facebook friend of the killer added: “He was weird but never that damn weird, always posting his atheist sh-- like Nina wrote, but damn he always posted pics of him and his baby - crazy."

Many of Kelley"s acquaintances said they never expected he would be capable of murder on such a destructive scale.

“There were people I knew who stayed away from this guy for many reasons, which all make sense now. He just requested me on Facebook recently," one friend said. 

Another said: “"He was the first atheist I met. He went Air Force after high school, got discharged but I don"t know why."

As it turns out, Kelley was court-martialed in 2012 for two counts of Article 128 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, assault on his spouse and assault on their child, according to CNN. He received a bad conduct discharge as a result, confinement for 12 months and a reduction in rank. The Air Force has not released a date of the discharge.

After his stint with the US military, Kelly reportedly taught at a summer Bible school. It is unknown if he was religious or not, as a screenshot of his Facebook groups list shows he was a member of at least four groups on atheism. Kelley worked as a security guard for a Texas waterpark this past summer, according to a resume under his name that appeared online.

Kelley was married, with CBS reporting his wife’s name as Danielle Lee Shields. Information about their shared child wasn’t immediately available. Kelley purchased the Ruger AR-556 rifle in April 2016 from an Academy Sports & Outdoors store in San Antonio, a law enforcement official told CNN.

When Kelley filled out the background check paperwork at the store, he checked the box to indicate he didn"t have disqualifying criminal history, the official said. He listed an address in Colorado Springs, Colorado when he bought the rifle, the official said.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on Monday said there was a connection between the "very deranged individual" and the church where the slayings took place.

"I don"t think the church was just randomly attacked," he said. "I think there was a reason why the shooter chose this church."

However, Abbott said Kelley was denied a Texas gun permit.

Another classmate told Fox News that Kelley had a history of mental illness, and had been on psychiatric medication for a period.

“His parents had him on high doses of ‘psych’ meds from 6th to 9th grade, the time I knew him,” said the student, who only wished to be identified as Reid. He added that Kelley’s aggressive posts about atheism caused many of his former classmates to stop talking to, or unfriend, him. Another classmate who spoke to Fox News and wished to remain anonymous described Kelley as a quiet student, though he had his share of friends.

“He recently added me on [Facebook]. I accepted hence we went to school together, and any time I saw him on my timeline he was sharing stuff about guns and being Atheist,” she said. “He was pretty negative. The last post I remember was of a rifle."

President Donald Trump said the Sunday church shooting “isn’t a gun situation” but rather a “mental health problem.”He called the attacker a “very deranged individual” with “a lot of problems over a long period of time."

“We could go into [gun control policy], but it’s a little bit too soon,” he said. The president cited reports about an unnamed man who confronted the shooter, saying the attack otherwise “would have been much worse."

Kelley was wielding an assault rifle when he went on a shooting rampage in the church, with Freeman Martin, the DPS Regional Director, saying that police discovered “multiple weapons” in his car. The shooter was reportedly wearing tactical gear, including a bulletproof vest and a black mask with a skull on it, an outfit that reportedly aroused suspicion at a gas station across the street from the Church where the shooter visited before starting his rampage.  It’s unclear how he obtained the weapons because the Gun Control Act of 1968 explicitly prohibits licensed sellers from selling firearms or ammunition to persons who have “been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions." But it appears he did in fact purchase them from a gun store despite these violations, as ABC pointed out. One CNN analyst said it"s likely the guns were fraudulently purchased. The local sheriff confirmed that Kelley shot and killed himself.

Kelley lived in nearby New Braunfels, Texas, where he had also gone to high school. Kelley fled First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs after being shot by a neighbor. In a panic, he called his father to say goodbye.

During a Monday morning press conference, a police spokesperson said investigators had discovered there was a "domestic situation" unfolding within Kelley"s family, but declined to elaborate. Police added that the deceased ranged in age from 18 months to 77 years, and that between 12 and 14 children were among the dead. Meanwhile, 10 people remain in critical condition. While they"re investigating, the shooter"s exact motive remains unclear, police said.

Both Bush Presidents Lash Out At Trump, GHW Confirms He Voted For Hillary

The fading Republican establishment remains unable to reconcile its ongoing collapse, and continues to scapegoat Donald Trump for all the GOP"s troubles instead of looking in the mirror.

Two weeks after an outraged George W. Bush lashed out at Trump, accusing him of emboldening "bigotry and white supremacy", on Saturday we learn just how deep the animosity toward Trump runs within the extended Bush household. In a new book to be released this month from historian Mark Updegrove, titled "The Last Republicans", and previewed on Saturday by the NYT and CNN, former President George H.W. Bush said he considers Trump a “blowhard,” only interested in feeding his own "ego." Meanwhile, his son, former President George W. Bush, thinks Trump fans public anger and came to office without any understanding of the job.

When asked about Donald Trump in May 2016, GHW Bush said: "I don"t like him ... I don"t know much about him, but I know he"s a blowhard. And I"m not too excited about him being a leader."

His son was just as vocal: “Wow, this guy doesn"t know what it means to be president,” the junior Bush said, indicating that a president should not “exploit the anger, incite it” but rather “come up with ideas to deal with it.”

Which, of course, is easy for the Bushes to say: after all they - together with the Clinton and Obama administrations - spent over two decades laying the groundwork and building up the "anger" which resulted from the greatest social and political polarization and wealth inequality the US has ever seen. Perhaps the reality - as the election one year ago showed - is that the status quo simply no longer works. Perhaps... the Republican party is broken precisely due to the work of the two Bush presidents.

In any case, both former Bush presidents are worried that Mr. Trump has blown up a Republican Party that they spent two lifetimes building; Dubya also told Updegrove: "I"m worried that I will be the last Republican president."

Ironically, author Updegrove told the NYT that "at the time, I think he was concerned that Hillary Clinton would win ... But if you look at his values and those shared by his father and Ronald Reagan, they are very much in contrast to the values of the Republican Party today, in particular the platform that Donald Trump ran on."

So what happened? Well, as CNN adds, "George H.W. Bush confirmed that he voted for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton." His son meanwhile voted for nobody:

"George W. Bush told Updegrove he left the top of the ballot blank. "I voted "None of the Above" for president, and Republican down ballot in 2016.""

In retrospect, Dubya may be correct: as Axios" Mike Allen writes, George W. Bush is probably right that he was "the last Republican president," as his family sees the party.

The "Republican Party" is now multiple ideological parties, awkwardly — and probably not sustainably — scrunched under one inadequate label.

Which, considering the previous "label" no longer meant anything to most Americans - except such figures as the Bushes, of course- is probably not a bad thing.

Syria's President Exposed A Flaw In US Foreign Policy That No One Wants To Talk About

Authored by Darius Shahtahmasebi via TheAntiMedia.org,

In an interview with RT in 2015, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad uttered perhaps one of his most intriguing statements since the Syrian conflict erupted in 2011. Assad stated:

“Western propaganda has, from the very beginning, been about the cause of the problem being the president. Why? Because they want to portray the whole problem in Syria lies in one individual; and consequently the natural reaction for many people is that, if the problem lies in one individual, that individual should not be more important than the entire homeland. So let that individual go and things will be alright. That’s how they oversimplify things in the West.”  [emphasis added]

He continued:

“Notice what happened in the Western media since the coup in Ukraine. What happened? President Putin was transformed from a friend of the West to a foe and, yet again, he was characterized as a tsar…This is Western propaganda. They say that if the president went things will get better.” [emphasis added]

Putting aside Assad’s vast and extensive list of war crimes and crimes against humanity, Assad highlighted one of the major flaws in Western thinking regarding America’s hostile policies toward a number of independent states.

Just look at the current to-and-fro-ing between North Korea and the United States to gather an accurate picture of what is being referred to here. The problem of North Korea is consistently portrayed in the media as caused by one person (current leader Kim Jong-un), a narrative that ultimately ignores the role America and its allies have played in this current crisis. As Anti-Media previously highlighted:

“…the problem [North Korean crisis] is constantly framed as one caused by North Korea alone, not the United States. ‘How to Deal With North Korea,’ the Atlantic explains. ‘What Can Trump Do About North Korea?’ the New York Times asks. ‘What Can Possibly Be Done About North Korea,’ the Huffington Post queries. Time provides 6 experts discussing ‘How We Can Solve the Problem’ (of North Korea). ‘North Korea – what can the outside world do?’ asks the BBC.”

What the media is really advancing here - particularly when one talks about a military option as a response to dealing with North Korea’s rogue actions - is the notion that if the U.S. could only take out Kim Jong-un, the problem of North Korea would disappear.

Would the death of one man rid every single North Korean of the hostility and hatred they harbor toward the United States when many know full well that in the early 1950s the U.S. bombed North Korea so relentlessly they eventually ran out of targets to hit — that the U.S. military killed off at least 20 percent of the civilian population?

If Kim Jong-un is removed, will North Koreans suddenly forget that nearly every North Korean alive today has a family relative that was killed by the United States in the 1950s?

In the simple corporate media narrative, yes they will. Killing that one person and removing them from office will not only save the country they brutalize but will also provide security and stability for the rest of the world.

Never mind that prior to the U.S.-NATO onslaught of Libya in 2011, Libya had the highest standard of living in the African continent. The Times once admitted that its healthcare system was the “envy of the region.” Now, the country has completely collapsed, with well over two million children out of school, countless migrants drowning in its waters, extremism running unchecked and unchallenged, and traders openly selling slaves like a commodity.

Let’s suppose every single accusation against Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was true (they weren’t); how can it be said that destroying a country’s infrastructure and assassinating its leader in flagrant disregard of international law is a realistic solution to any problem? If you oppose Donald Trump, would a Russian-led military intervention solve your problems with the country he rules over?

Forget what you think you know about Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Kim Jong-un, Bashar al-Assad, Vladimir Putin, and Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro – the narrative Western governments and their media mouthpieces have promulgated for the last few decades remains completely nonsensical. You can’t solve Syria’s or Venezuela’s problems by removing their current leaders, especially if you attempt to do it by force. Anyone who claims this is possible is lying to you and is also too naïve and indolent to bother researching the current situations in Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya, Iraq – to name a few.

The fact that the U.S. evidently doesn’t want to solve any problems at all – that it merely seeks to overthrow leaders that don’t succumb to its wishes – is a topic for a separate article but is certainly worth mentioning here as well.

The same can ultimately be said of Donald Trump. Since his election victory, many celebrities, media pundits, and members of the intelligence community have sought to unseat and discredit him. Yet Donald Trump is merely a horrifying symptom of America’s problems; to think he alone caused them and that by removing him from office the U.S. would suddenly become a safe-haven of freedom and liberty is nothing short of idiotic.

If you agree with the latter sentiment, you must also concede that the problems facing North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, and elsewhere could never be solved by the U.S. forcibly removing their leaders.

If Assad was removed from Syria, would extremism disappear or would it thrive in the political vacuum as it did in Iraq? Could Syria’s internal issues — which are much more extensive than the corporate media would have us believe — be solved by something as simple as removing its current leader? Can anyone name a country where this has been tried and tested as a true model for solving a sovereign nation’s internal crises? Anyone who truly believes a country’s problems can be solved in this facile way needs to do a bit more reading.

If you can recognize this dilemma, you can agree that it’s time for the media to completely undo the simplicity in its coverage of these issues and start reporting on the genuine diplomatic options that could be pursued, instead.

Milo To Bring "16-Man Navy SEAL Security Detail" To Berkeley

Authored by Nikita Vladimirov via CampusReform.org,

Conservative provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos pledged that “nothing will deter” the organizers from hosting the “Free Speech Week” at the University of California, Berkeley later this month.

In a statement posted to Facebook Wednesday, Yiannopoulos criticized UC Berkeley Assistant Vice Chancellor Dan Mogulof for “spreading rumors that Free Speech Week might be canceled.”

“Ignore him, it"s fake news,” Yiannopoulos wrote.

“Ironically, Berkeley is fighting Free Speech Week the same way they fought against Mario Savio"s Free Speech Movement in the 60"s - by spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt.”

Mogulof told Politico Tuesday that the student group Berkeley Patriot “still has not completed the critical steps” required for arranging the “Free Speech Week” on campus, putting the entire event in jeopardy.

“Mogulof has a long history of hostility, leaks, and lies when it comes to conservative speakers,” Yiannopoulos alleged.

“His efforts will not be successful, and Berkeley Free Speech Week will [be] a fabulous, and peaceful, celebration of free speech including more than 20 speakers from diverse viewpoints.”

In a statement to Campus Reform, Yiannopoulos further blasted the reports of possible cancellation, calling Mogulof’s comments “balderdash and piffle.”

Following his August pledge to spend “hundreds of thousands of dollars” on security at the event, Yiannopoulos also revealed that he is bringing a Navy SEAL team to assist with protecting the speakers.

“Our efforts are moving ahead at full speed to put together the best free speech event Berkeley has ever seen,” he said.

“I am sparing no expense, including a 16-man Navy SEAL security detail for me and our speakers.”

“UC Berkeley has claimed that this will be a year of free speech, but they"ve quickly gone back to their old tricks,” Yiannopoulos observed. “They seem committed to the course of excluding speakers who don"t share their progressive authoritarian mindset from campus. It won"t fly, there is too much at stake for America, and too many eyes on both the university administration and the city of Berkeley.”

Yiannopoulos concluded his statement by pledging that the upcoming event “will go on no matter what Berkeley says,” adding, “Nothing will deter us. We will not yield.”

A representative for the Berkeley Patriot likewise told Politico that the group still intends to go through with the event, saying, “we are working diligently to answer any requests that the university might have...we will work to get all of this clarified in a good faith and collaborative manner.”

Seymour Hersh: "RussiaGate Is A CIA-Planted Lie, Revenge Against Trump"

During the latter portion of a phone-call by investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh, Hersh has now presented “a narrative [from his investigation] of how that whole fucking thing began,” including who actually is behind the ‘RussiaGate’ lies, and why they are spreading these lies.

In a youtube video upload-dated August 1st, he reveals from his inside FBI and Washington DC Police Department sources — now, long before the Justice Department’s Special Counsel Robert Mueller will be presenting his official ‘findings’ to the nation — that the charges that Russia had anything to do with the leaks from the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign to Wikileaks, that those charges spread by the press, were a CIA-planted lie, and that what Wikileaks had gotten was only leaks (including at least from the murdered DNC-staffer Seth Rich), and were not from any outsider (including ’the Russians’), but that Rich didn’t get killed for that, but was instead shot in the back during a brutal robbery, which occurred in the high-crime DC neighborhood where he lived. Here is the video... 

... and here is the transcript :

About the kid, I’ll tell you what I know. What I know comes off an FBI report. Don’t ask me how. You can figure it out, I’ve been around a long time. The kid, just, I don’t think he was murdered, I, I don’t think he was murdered because of what he knew. The kids a nice boy, 27, he was not IT expert, but he learned stuff. He was a data programmer, but he learned stuff. And so he’s living on one street, someone, in my eyes,- he’s living in a ruff neighborhood and in the exact where he’d been living, as I’m sure you know, there have been about 8 or 9 or 10 violent, uh not robberies, most of them with somebody brandishing a gun and it’s the kids hands, I’m telling you look, I’m sure you know what, his hands are marked up, the cops concluded he fought off the people, tried to run they shot him twice in the back with a 22 small caliper. And then, they, the kids that did it ran, they got scared, they didn’t take his wallet.

Ok. So what the cops do is this: And this is where nobody knows, what I’m telling you, and maybe you know something about it. When you have a death like that DC cops, if you’re dead, you don’t just generally go yep I know (unintelligible) you have to get in to the kids apartment and see what you can find. If he’s dead you don’t need a warrant but most cops get a warrant because they don’t know if they’ve guys has, has a, a roommate. You need a warrant. So they get a warrant. I’m just telling you, there is such a thing. They go in the house and they can’t do much with this computer. It’s (unintelligible) the cops don’t know much about it. So the DC cops they have a cyber unit in DC and they’re more sophisticated. They come and look at it. The idea is maybe he’s a series of exchanges with somebody who says I’m going to kill you motherfucker over a girl or… and they can’t get in. The cyber guys do a little better but they can’t make sense of it so they call the, they call the FBI cyber unit, the DC unit.

The Washington field office is a hot shit unit. The guy running the Washington field office he’s like, he’s like, you know, he’s like a three star at an army base he’s already looking for four, you know what I mean? He’s gonna go in a top job. There’s a cyber unit there that’s excellent, given. What you get in a warrant is, the public information you get in a warrant doesn’t include, uh, it does not include the affidavit underlying what, why you are you going in, what the reasons are that.. That’s almost never available, um, I, I can tell you that the existence of a warrant is a public document 99% of the time. So, um, on the same warrant, they call in the feds. The feds get through, and this is what they find. This is according to the FBI report. What they find is he makes cont- first of all this is what you have to know, you have to know some basic facts, one of the basic factors, in that there’s no DNC or Podesta emails that exist beyond May 22nd. May 21st, May 22nd is the last email from either one of those groups. And so what the reports says is that sometime in late spring, we’re talking June you know summers in June 21st, late spring would be after, I presume, I don’t know, I’d just say late spring, early summer and he makes contact with Wikileaks. That’s in his computer and he makes contact.

Now, I have to be careful because I, I’ve know, I, met Julian 10 or 12 years (ago?) I stay the fuck away from people like that, you know. He’s invited me, and when I’m in London I always get a message “Come see me at the Ecuadorian” but I say fuck no I’m not going there I’ve got enough trouble without getting photographed. And he’s under total surveillance by everybody but anyways. So, they found what he’d done. He had submitted a series of documents, of emails. Some juicy emails from the DNC, and you know, by the way all this shit about the DNC, um, you know, whether it was hacked or wasn’t hacked, whatever happened, the democrats themselves wrote this shit, you know what I mean? All I know is that he (Seth) offered a sample, an extensive sample, you know I’m sure dozens of email and said “I want money”. Then later Wikileaks did get the password, he had a Dropbox, a protected Dropbox, which isn’t hard to do, I mean you don’t have to be a wizard IT, you know, he was certainly not a dumb kid. They got access to the Dropbox. He also, and this is also in the FBI report, he also let people know, with whom he was dealing, and I don’t know how he dealt, I’ll tell you about Wikileaks in a second. I don’t know how he dealt with the Wikileaks and the mechanism but he also, the word was passed according to the NSA report, “I’ve also shared this box with a couple of friends so if anything happens to me it’s not going to solve your problem”. Ok. I don’t know what that means.

I don’t know whether you- Anyways, Wikileaks got access, and before he was killed- I can tell you right now Brennan is an asshole. Uh, I’ve known all these people for years. Clapper is sort of a better guy but not rocket scientist, the NSA guy’s a fucking moron, and they don’t- you know the trouble with all of those guys is that the only way they’re going to make it to a board or two and get hired by (?) and get some fat cat contracts is if Hillary stayed in. With Trump they’re gone, they’re done, they’re going to live on their pension, they’re not going to make it. And I gotta tell you guys, they don’t want to live on their pension, they want to be on boards.

I have somebody on the inside, you know I’ve been around a long time, and I write a lot of stuff. I have somebody on the inside who will go and read a file for me. This person is unbelievably accurate and careful, he’s a very high-level guy and he’ll do a favor. You’re just going to have to trust me. I have what they call in my business a long-form journalism, I have a narrative of how that whole fucking thing began, it’s a Brennan operation, it was an American disinformation and fucking the fucking President, at one point when they, they even started telling the press, they were back briefing the press, the head of the NSA was going and telling the press, fucking cock-sucker Rogers, was telling the press that we even know who in the GRU, the Russian Military Intelligence Service, who leaked it. I mean all bullshit. They were telling the studp- I worked at the New York Times for fucking years, and the trouble with the fucking New York Times is they have smart guys, but they’re totally beholden on sources. If the president or the head of the (???) to actually believe it. I was actually hired at the time to write, to go after the war in Vietnam War in 72 because they were just locked in. So that’s what the Times did. These guys run the fucking Times, and Trump’s not wrong. But I mean I wish he would calm down and had a better a better press secretary, I mean you don’t have to be so. Trump’s not wrong to think they all fucking lie about him.

The media-coverage of this matter is focusing on allegations that Seth Rich was murdered in order to silence him. All such media-coverage ignores much of what Hersh said on the phone (where Hersh makes clear that Rich was, indeed, murdered in a regular robbery), and therefore should be viewed as an example of what the Washington Post and others in the mainstream press call ‘fake news’, but which actually applies to themselves, on both the left and right, above all. 

The purpose of those distorting ‘news’ stories might be a desire, on the part of both the Democratic Party aristocrats and the Republican Party aristocrats, to distract the public’s attention away from the far deeper understanding that drives the “narrative” that Hersh, in that clip, is describing: rot by the U.S. aristocracy, which controls both of America’s political Parties, to deceive the American public. The objective is to protect the aristocracy. That’s not publishable; it is American samizdat. Corruption rules America. The public do not. This fact is what Hersh is describing in his “narrative.”

Delaware Professor Says "Rich, White, Clueless, Male" Warmbier "Got Exactly What He Deserved"

Authored by Shannon Spada via CampusReform.org,

University of Delaware professor claimed Wednesday that Otto Warmbier was typical of “rich, white, clueless males” and “got exactly what he deserved” at the hands of the North Koreans.

Katherine Dettwyler, an anthropology professor at UDel, expressed her feelings on the death of Warmbier in the comments section of an article published by National Review, as well as on her personal Facebook page.

Dettwyler argues that while in North Korea, Warmbier had acted like a “spoiled, naive, arrogant U.S. college student who never had to face the consequences of his actions,” later describing him as having the “typical mindset of a lot of the young, white, rich, clueless males” she teaches.

She also expressed surprise at the footage of Warmbier crying during his sentencing hearing, saying he should have expected the consequences he faced, and then complaining that not enough thought is given to “all the other people in North Korea who are suffering under a repressive government.”

Dettwyler explains that she is “a 62 year old college professor” who has been teaching “folks just like Otto” her entire life, declaring that “these are the same kids who cry about their grades” after refusing to study, “or instead of crying, they bluster and threaten their female professors.”

Then another reader objected to “the hatred you spew at ordinary white college kids,” Dettwyler responded by allowing that not all of her students fall into the category she described, saying, “I love my hard-working, sincere, non-arrogant college students.”

She nonetheless reiterated her original assumption that Warmbier was the type of student she detests, clarifying that “I said Otto’s behavior is like the ‘white, rich, clueless males’...[who] think nothing of raping drunk girls at frat parties and snorting cocaine, cheating on exams, and threatening professors with physical violence.”

Dettwyler’s page on RateMyProfessors.com suggests that her outburst was not unusual, with former students describing her as “very opinionated” and “obnoxious,” and even claiming that she “hates America.”

“It’s her opinion or no opinion and she won’t be afraid to express it even if it may offend half the class,” one former student warned, while another declared that “My problem with her is that she says we are not ‘entitled to our own facts,’ but she clearly seems to think she is.”

In her original comment, Dettwyler ultimately blames Warmbier’s parents for allowing him to grow up with the impression that “he could get away with whatever he wanted,” concluding that they “will pay this price for the rest of their lives.”

Campus Reform reached out to Dettwyler for commentary but she did not reply in time for publication.

Otto Warmbier Has Died, Family Blames "North Korea"s Torturous Mistreatment", Trump Condemns "Brutal Regime... Will Handle It"

Just days after North Korea released Otto Warmbier after holding him hostage for 17 months, his family has just reported the sad news of his passing.

Warmbier was sentenced to 15 years in prison with hard labor in North Korea, convicted of subversion after he tearfully confessed he had tried to steal a propaganda banner.

The University of Virginia student was held for more than 17 months and medically evacuated from North Korea last week. Doctors said he returned with severe brain damage, but it wasn"t clear what caused it.

Family Statement:

It is our sad duty to report that our son, Otto Warmbier, has completed his journey home. Surrounded by his loving family, Otto died today at 2:20pm.

 

It would be easy at a moment like this to focus on all that we lost - future time that won"t be spent with a warm, engaging, brilliant young man whose curiosity and enthusiasm for life knew no bounds. But we choose to focus on the time we were given to be with this remarkable person. You can tell from the outpouring of emotion from the communities that he touched - Wyoming, Ohio and the University of Virginia to name just two - that the love for Otto went well beyond his immediate family. Otto went well beyond his immediate family.

 

We would like to thank the wonderful professionals at the University of Cincinnati Medical Center who did everything they could for Otto.

 

Unfortunately, the awful torturous mistreatment our son received at the hands of the North Koreans ensured that no other outcome was possible beyond the sad one we experienced today.

 

When Otto returned to Cincinnati late on June 13th he was unable to speak, unable to see and unable to react to verbal commands. He looked very uncomfortable - almost anguished. Although we would never hear his voice again, within a day the countenance of his face changed - he was at peace. He was home and we believe he could sense that.

 

We thank everyone around the world who has kept him and our family in their thoughts and prayers. We are at peace and at home too.

Fred & Cindy Warmbier and Family

Quoted by Bloomberg"s Jennifer Jacobs, on the death of Warmbier Trump said "at least he got home to his parents" and added: "It"s a brutal regime and we"ll be able to handle it." It"s unclear just how.

The White House"s full, just released statement is below;

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 19, 2017

 

Statement by President Donald J. Trump on the Passing of Otto Warmbier

 

Melania and I offer our deepest condolences to the family of Otto Warmbier on his untimely passing. There is nothing more tragic for a parent than to lose a child in the prime of life. Our thoughts and prayers are with Otto"s family and friends, and all who loved him.

 

Otto"s fate deepens my Administration"s determination to prevent such tragedies from befalling innocent people at the hands of regimes that do not respect the rule of law or basic human decency. The United States once again condemns the brutality of the North Korean regime as we mourn its latest victim.

And here John McCain who wants to “state the facts plainly: Otto Warmbier, an American citizen, was murdered by the Kim Jong-un regime.”

Watch Live: Paul Ryan Hosts Weekly Press Conference As Russia Rumors Swirl

Updates:

Captain Obvious answered the first question of the day:

• *RYAN SAYS IT"S ALWAYS NICE TO HAVE LESS DRAMA

Ryan refused to answer questions about Chaffetz"s alleged departure:

• *RYAN HASN"T SPOKEN TO CHAFFETZ ABOUT WHAT HE"S DOING


• *RYAN: OVERSIGHT CMTE HAS MADE DOCUMENT REQUESTS

On tax reform, Ryan said that the goal is still to get a bill passed in calendar year 2017.  Of course, equities are starting to doubt whether that"s actually possible.

• *RYAN: OUR GOAL IS CALENDAR 2017 FOR TAX REFORM


• *RYAN: I THINK BORDER ADJUSTMENT IS SMART WAY TO GO


• *RYAN: U.S. TAX SYSTEM ONE OF WORST IN INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD

* * *

For the first time since former FBI Director Mueller was appointed Special Counsel looking into Trump"s alleged collusion with Russia, House Speaker Paul Ryan will take questions from an eager press.  Tune in below for the fireworks.

Obama Reveals True Thoughts On Trump: "He's Nothing But A Bullshitter"

People Magazine decided to dedicate their cover story this month to their beloved "cool, even-keeled, no-drama Barack Obama."  And even though it will come as surprise to precisely no one, the story apparently includes the "bombshell" revelation that....wait for it...Obama can"t stand Trump...shocking, we know.

According to two anonymous sources friendly with the Obamas, People Magazine revealed that Obama frequently describes Trump as "nothing but a bullshitter"...

“He’s nothing but a bullsh–ter,” Obama told two friends early last November, describing an election night phone call with Trump, in which the businessman suddenly professed his “respect” and “admiration” for Obama—after years of hectoring.

Speaking to PEOPLE for its new cover story on Obama and his wife Michelle adjusting to life outside the White House, the two friends quoted Obama’s blunt assessment of President-elect Trump. And how has Obama’s opinion changed since Trump been in office? “Well,” said one of the sources, “it hasn’t gotten any better.”

...all of which is odd because they seemed so friendly and comfortable in this pic of their first Oval Office meeting.

Meanwhile, after hinting that he would lead the opposition movement against Trump, Obama"s friends now say he plans to be "very respectful of the appropriate role of a former president."  Which we assume can be loosely translated to mean that he"s not interested in playing petty political games when he can focus on making millions of dollars selling 1-hour speeches to Wall Street for $400k a pop.

A third source close to Obama tells PEOPLE: “He’s deeply concerned with what he’s seen. But he’s also optimistic and heartened that citizens aren’t just watching it happen but engaging with neighbors and elected representatives at town halls.”

“He’s very respectful of the appropriate role of a former president and that ex-presidents should not be looking over the shoulder of their successors and commenting on every decision,” says Obama’s long-time friend and political strategist David Axelrod, now director of the University of Chicago’s Institute of Politics.

“President Obama’s predecessor didn’t do that. Obviously, this now is a unique set of circumstances, but my sense is that he’s going to try and respect that tradition while reserving the right to speak out in given moments when things rise to that level.”

Meanwhile, the always classy Michelle Obama apparently takes humor in telling her pals that she"s "going all black for the next couple of years" to mourn the Trump presidency. 

Belgian Press: Macron Has Between 63% And 64% Of The Vote

While French pollsters and poli-pundits are prohibited from providing "hot-takes" or preliminary exit-polls ahead of the closing of polls at 8pm local time, the Belgian press is not similarly constrained, and according to L"Echo, citing early exit polls, Macron would win the vote with between 63% and 64% of the vote, while empty ballots would represents about 10%.

Entre 63% et 64% pour #Macron et 10% de blancs et nuls #sondage sortie des urnes https://t.co/U1u9E7l263 #Presidentielle2017 pic.twitter.com/8y3MA9pXOS

— L"Echo (@lecho) May 7, 2017

The Belgian newspaper adds that, as noted earlier, according to figures from the Ministry of the Interior, the participation rate in metropolitan France at 5pm amounted to 65.30%, the lowest participation rate in decades. It also adds that the abstention rate in today"s vote is expected to reach 25% to 27% on the day.

Still, as the Telegraph cautions, while it was thought that Mr Macron could build a larger voting base than Ms Le Pen - as he was expected to mop up votes in the second round from those who support mainstream Right and Left candidates in the first - it appeared last night that a large number of supporters for the conservative, Francois Fillon, and the far-Left Jean-Luc Melenchon stayed home on election day.  And a vast number chose to spoil their ballots or abstain at the polls - as many as 29% of voters, according to one estimate.

Furthermore, take such early forecasts with a grain of salt. As Bloomberg"s European analyst Maxime Sbaihi writes, "French authorities" warning: no "reliable" estimate can be made before 7.45pm. Don"t trust what you see before that."

French authorities" warning: no "reliable" estimate can be made before 7.45pm. Don"t trust what you see before that. https://t.co/MzchgBOqdj pic.twitter.com/XmGpkH6VNE

— Maxime Sbaihi (@MxSba) May 7, 2017

He also provides the following breakdown of how to read the final score:

How to interpret #Macron"s score tonight?

• bad < 55% < weak < 60% < fair enough < 63% < landslide < 65% < plebiscite

How to interpret #LePen"s score tonight?

• 45% > success > 40% > passable > 37% > meager > 35% > FN mutiny

* * *

Some other highlights: a timelapse clip showing a Paris polling station:

The Telegraph also reports that Libération newspaper says it is boycotting the electoral events of Marine Le Pen this evening - whether she wins or loses - in solidarity with other French and foreign media outlets who have been refused access to them.

The left-wing daily says it will not carry any coverage of the events, during which Ms Le Pen is due to make a speech after the election results are announced, because the Front National has refused access to the gathering in a park in the east of Paris tonight to about a dozen media organisations. "These anti-democratic measures, which are also contrary to the right to keep the public informed, must stop, as must the intimidation of journalists in (Le Pen) political rallies," wrote senior Libération editor Johan Hufnagel.

Hillary Clinton Explains Our &#039;North Korea, South Korea, China&#039; Policy

Authored by Gaius Publius via Down With Tyranny blog,

"We don"t want a unified Korean peninsula ... We [also] don"t want the North Koreans to cause more trouble than the system can absorb."

—Hillary Clinton, 2013, speech to Goldman Sachs

Our policy toward North Korea is not what most people think it is. We don"t want the North Koreans to go away. In fact, we like them doing what they"re doing; we just want less of it than they"ve been doing lately. If this sounds confusing, it"s because this policy is unlike what the public has been led to assume. Thanks to something uncovered by WikiLeaks, the American public has a chance to be unconfused about what"s really going on with respect to our policies in Korea.

This piece isn"t intended to criticize that policy; it may be an excellent one. I just want to help us understand it better.

Our source for the U.S. government"s actual Korean policy — going back decades really — is former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. She resigned that position in February 2013, and on June 4, 2013 she gave a speech at Goldman Sachs with Lloyd Blankfein present (perhaps on stage with her) in which she discussed in what sounds like a very frank manner, among many other things, the U.S. policy toward the two Korea and the relationship of that policy to China.

That speech and two others were sent by Tony Carrk of the Clinton campaign to a number of others in the campaign, including John Podesta. WikiLeaks subsequently released that email as part of its release of other Podesta emails (source email with attachments here). In that speech, Clinton spoke confidentially and, I believe, honestly. What she said in that speech, I take her as meaning truthfully. There"s certainly no reason for her to lie to her peers, and in some cases her betters, at Goldman Sachs. The entire speech reads like elites talking with elites in a space reserved just for them.

I"m not trying to impugn Clinton or WikiLeaks by writing this — that"s not my intention at all. I just want to learn from what she has to say — from a position of knowledge — about the real U.S. policy toward North Korea. After all, if Goldman Sachs executives can be told this, it can"t be that big a secret. We should be able to know it as well.

What Clinton"s Speech Tells Us about U.S. Korea Policy

The WikiLeaks tweet is above. The entire speech, contained in the attachment to the email, is here. I"ve reprinted some of the relevant portions below, first quoting Ms. Clinton with some interspersed comments from me. Then, adding some thoughts about what this seems to imply about our approach to and relations with South Korea.

The Korea section of the Goldman Sachs speech starts with a discussion of China, and then Blankfein pivots to Korea. Blankfein"s whole question that leads to the Clinton quote tweeted by WikiLeaks above (my emphasis throughout):

MR. BLANKFEIN: The Japanese -- I was more surprised that it wasn"t like that when you think of -- all these different things. It"s such a part of who they are, their response to Japan. If you bump into the Filipino fishing boats, then I think you really -- while we"re in the neighborhood [i.e., discussing Asia], the Chinese is going to help us or help themselves -- what is helping themselves? North Korea? On the one hand they [the Chinese] wouldn"t want -- they don"t want to unify Korea, but they can"t really like a nutty nuclear power on their border. What is their interests and what are they going to help us do?

Clinton"s whole answer is reprinted in the WikiLeaks tweet attachment (click through to the tweet and expand the embedded image to read it all). The relevant portions, for my purposes, are printed below. From the rest of her remarks, the context of Blankfein"s question and Clinton"s answer is the threat posed by a North Korean ICBM, not unlike the situation our government faces today.

MS. CLINTON: Well, I think [Chinese] traditional policy has been close to what you"ve described. We don"t want a unified Korean peninsula, because if there were one South Korea would be dominant for the obvious economic and political reasons.

We [also] don"t want the North Koreans to cause more trouble than the system can absorb. So we"ve got a pretty good thing going with the previous North Korean leaders [Kim Il-sung and Kim Jung-il]. And then along comes the new young leader [Kim Jung-un], and he proceeds to insult the Chinese. He refuses to accept delegations coming from them. He engages in all kinds of both public and private rhetoric, which seems to suggest that he is preparing himself to stand against not only the South Koreans and the Japanese and the Americans, but also the Chinese.

Translation — three points:

• The U.S. prefers that Korea stay divided. If Korea were to unite, South Korea would be in charge, and we don"t want South Korea to become any more powerful than it already is.


• We also don"t want the trouble North Korea causes South Korea to extend beyond the region. We want it to stay within previously defined bounds.


• Our arrangement with the two previous North Korean leaders met both of those objectives. North Korea"s new leader, Kim Jung-un, is threatening that arrangement.

It appears that China has the same interest in keeping this situation as-is that we do. That is, they want South Korea (and us) to have a Korean adversary, but they don"t want the adversary acting out of acceptable bounds — coloring outside the lines laid down by the Chinese (and the U.S.), as it were. Clinton:

So the new [Chinese] leadership basically calls him [Kim Jung-un] on the carpet. And a high ranking North Korean military official has just finished a visit in Beijing and basically told [him, as a message from the Chinese]: Cut it out. Just stop it. Who do you think you are? And you are dependent on us [the Chinese], and you know it. And we expect you to demonstrate the respect that your father and your grandfather [Kim Jung-il, Kim Il-sung] showed toward us, and there will be a price to pay if you do not.

Now, that looks back to an important connection of what I said before. The biggest supporters of a provocative North Korea has been the PLA [the Chinese People"s Liberation Army]. The deep connections between the military leadership in China and in North Korea has really been the mainstay of the relationship. So now all of a sudden new leadership with Xi and his team, and they"re saying to the North Koreans -- and by extension to the PLA -- no. It is not acceptable. We don"t need this [trouble] right now. We"ve got other things going on. So you"re going to have to pull back from your provocative actions, start talking to South Koreans again about the free trade zones, the business zones on the border, and get back to regular order and do it quickly.

Now, we don"t care if you occasionally shoot off a missile. That"s good. That upsets the Americans and causes them heartburn, but you can"t keep going down a path that is unpredictable. We don"t like that. That is not acceptable to us.

So I think they"re trying to reign Kim Jong in. I think they"re trying to send a clear message to the North Korean military. They also have a very significant trade relationship with Seoul and they"re trying to reassure Seoul that, you know, we"re now on the case.

Clinton ends with a fourth point:

• From the U.S. standpoint, the current problem is now on the Chinese to fix.

Clinton:

So they want to keep North Korea within their orbit. They want to keep it predictable in their view. They have made some rather significant statements recently that they would very much like to see the North Koreans pull back from their nuclear program. Because I and everybody else -- and I know you had Leon Panetta here this morning. You know, we all have told the Chinese if they continue to develop this missile program and they get an ICBM that has the capacity to carry a small nuclear weapon on it, which is what they"re aiming to do, we cannot abide that. Because they could not only do damage to our treaty allies, namely Japan and South Korea, but they could actually reach Hawaii and the west coast theoretically, and we"re going to ring China with missile defense. We"re going to put more of our fleet in the area.

So China, come on. You either control them or we"re going to have to defend against them.

The four bullets above (three, and then one) give a very clear definition of longstanding U.S. policy toward the two Koreas. I think the only surprise in this, for us civilians, is that the U.S. doesn"t want the Korean peninsula unified. So two questions: Why not? And, do the South Koreans know this? I"ll offer brief answers below.

The "Great Game" In East Asia — Keeping the Korean "Tiger" in Check

South Korea is one of the great emerging nations in East Asia, one of the "Asian tigers," a manufacturing and economic powerhouse that"s lately been turning into a technological and innovative powerhouse as well.

For example, one of just many, from Forbes:

Why South Korea Will Be The Next Global Hub For Tech Startups

American business has long led the way in high tech density or the proportion of businesses that engage in activities such as Internet software and services, hardware and semiconductors. The US is fertile ground for tech start-ups with access to capital and a culture that celebrates risk taking. Other countries have made their mark on the world stage, competing to be prominent tech and innovation hubs. Israel has been lauded as a start-up nation with several hundred companies getting funded by venture capital each year. A number of these companies are now being acquired by the likes of Apple, Facebook and Google. Finland and Sweden have attracted notice by bringing us Angry Birds and Spotify among others. But a new start-up powerhouse is on the horizon – South Korea. [...]

In other words, South Korea has leaped beyond being a country that keeps U.S. tech CEOs wealthy — it"s now taking steps that threaten that wealth itself. And not just in electronics; the biological research field — think cloning — is an area the South Koreans are trying to take a lead in as well.

It"s easy to understand Ms. Clinton"s — and the business-captured American government"s — interest in making sure that the U.S. CEO class isn"t further threatened by a potential doubling of the capacity of the South Korean government and economy. Let them (the Koreans) manufacture to their heart"s content, our policy seems to say; but to threaten our lead in billionaire-producing entrepreneurship ... that"s a bridge too far.

Again, this is Clinton speaking, I"m absolutely certain, on behalf of U.S. government policy makers and the elites they serve: We don"t want a unified Korean peninsula, because if there were one, an already-strong South Korea would be dominant for obvious economic reasons.

As to whether the South Koreans know that this is our policy, I"d have to say, very likely yes. After all, if Clinton is saying this to meetings of Goldman Sachs executives, it can"t be that big a secret. It"s just that the South Korea leadership knows better than the North Korean leader how to handle it.

[Update: It"s been suggested in comments (initially here) that Clinton"s "we" in her answer to Blankfein"s question was a reference to China"s policy, not our own. I"m doubtful that"s true, but it"s an interpretation worth considering. Even so, the U.S. and Chinese policies toward the two Koreas are certainly aligned, and, as Clinton says, "for the obvious economic and political reasons." (That argument was also expressed in comments here.)  I therefore think the thrust of the piece below is valid under either interpretation of Clinton"s use of "we." –GP]