[ASI] Why the Terrorists Hit Brussels

March 24th, 2016 at 12:10 pm EDT
Cliff Kincaid
President.
America's Survival, Inc.
www.usasurvival.org
www.noglobaltaxes.org
www.religiousleftexposed.com
www.sorosfiles.com
www.leninandsharia.com



Dear Friend of America’s Survival:

I have just returned from New York City where we once again visited the 9/11 Memorial. We also toured the 9/11 Memorial Museum. One disturbing part of the museum has footage of men and women jumping from the burning towers to their certain deaths.



The 9/11 Memorial features two waterfalls and reflecting pools, each about an acre in size, set within the footprints of the original Twin Towers.

I was driving in to Washington, D.C. that day. It was a beautiful September day. But as I approached Washington, D.C., I saw the black smoke rising from the Pentagon. I heard on the radio what had happened. I turned around in my car, heading back home, as people were being told to leave their D.C. offices. Nobody knew at that point how much more terrorism would hit the nation’s capital.

Meanwhile, as terrorists have now hit Europe, Barack Obama was going to a baseball game in Cuba and dancing in Argentina.

My friends, these are Russian-backed terrorists. They hit Brussels for a reason. It hosts the headquarters for NATO. Russia wants to destroy NATO.

Investor’s Business Daily notes:

With impeccable bad timing, Donald Trump called for shrinking the U.S. role in NATO just a day before the Brussels terrorist attacks. In fact, the attacks underscore how important NATO is.

In his meeting with the Washington Post, Trump had said:

NATO is costing us a fortune and yes, we’re protecting Europe but we’re spending a lot of money. Number 1, I think the distribution of costs has to be changed. I think NATO as a concept is good, but it is not as good as it was when it first evolved… When you look at the kind of money that our country is losing, we can’t afford to do this. Certainly we can’t afford to do it anymore.

This sound somewhat reasonable, except for the fact that the United States, too, benefits from NATO. It helps maintain the peace in Europe. What’s more, the issue goes beyond terrorism to the main power in the world, Russia, which is backing Islamic terrorism. Trump sounds tough on terrorism but is soft on Russia. He is the perfect dupe. Learn more about this plan by puchasing our book “Red Jihad”.

Inside the 9/11 Memorial Museum:
“No day shall erase you from the memory of time.”
The blue tiles are from artists' memories of the blue sky on 9/11.

In  the meeting, Charles Lane of the Post said toTrump: “As you know, the whole theory of NATO from the beginning  was to keep the United States involved in the long term in Europe to balance, to promote a balance of power in that region so we wouldn’t have a repeat of World War I and World War 2.”

In other words, NATO is designed to prevent a world war. Urging our allies to spend more on NATO and their national defense is fine. But Trump went further, questing whether the alliance is relevant.

If you are familiar with our many reports on Trump’s pro-Russian foreign policy views, his anti-NATO comments are no surprise. Trump wants to break America’s strategic alliance with Europe and establish a  strategic alliance with Moscow in the Middle East.

Even Hillary Clinton is running to the right of Donald Trump.

“Turning our back on our alliances, or turning our alliance into a protection racket, would reverse decades of bipartisan American leadership and send a dangerous signal to friend and foe alike,” Clinton said in a speech at Stanford University.  “[Vladimir] Putin already hopes to divide Europe. If Mr Trump gets his way, it’ll be like Christmas in the Kremlin. It will make America less safe and the world more dangerous.”

Clinton attacked Trump for his comments that the U.S. should limit its involvement with NATO -- warning such a move would play into Russia’s hands.

Senator Ted Cruz has also highlighted Trump’s pro-Kremlin views on NATO, calling Trump’s views “nuts.” Cruz said, “Donald Trump is wrong that America should retreat from Europe, retreat from NATO, hand Putin a major victory and while he’s at it, hand ISIS a major victory.”

Cruz commented, “It is striking the day after Donald Trump called for America weakening NATO, withdrawing from NATO, we see Brussels — where NATO is headquartered — the subject of a radical Islamic terrorist attack.”

My view is that ISIS attacked Brussels for that very reason. This attack shows how ISIS is serving the interests of the Kremlin. Tragically, Trump has joined the Russian campaign against NATO.

Cruz adviser Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy calls a Trump win in November “A Republican Third Term for Obama.” He writes, “President Obama has sought to make deals with America’s enemies. Donald Trump says he’d do the same, only better. President Obama has undermined our alliances. Donald Trump insists we can no longer afford the leadership role we have played in NATO and Asia.”

This is one reason why a new poll finds that 35 percent of Republicans want a third-party candidate if Trump is the nominee. That’s why columnist Jonah Goldberg writes that we are seeing the end of the Republican Party. He says:

Nominating Donald Trump will wreck the Republican Party as we know it. Not nominating Trump will wreck the Republican Party as we know it. The sooner everyone recognizes this fact, the better.

So who’s pulling the strings behind the Trump campaign? Who benefits? Please take some time to think about it.

Trump may succeed in making the U.S. into a one-party socialist state.



For America's Survival,


Cliff Kincaid, President




 

Share Forward Twitter Facebook LinkedIn MySpace Digg