[Breitbart] Hillary Clinton once threw a Bible at the back of a Secret Service agent's head, part of a pattern of unhinged rage that the now-presumptive Democratic nominee exhibited, as exposed for the first time in former Secret Service agent Gary Byrne's grueling insider account of Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Byrne’s forthcoming book Crisis of Character--in which he details how the Clintons operated during his time in the U.S. Secret Service, where he protected the first couple for eight years in the White House in the 1990s. During three of those years, he was posted right outside the Oval Office. The book comes out next week.
"The First Lady had a different sort of liveliness," Byrne writes in an excerpt obtained exclusively by Breitbart News. "She once threw a Bible at an agent on her detail, hitting him in the back of the head. He bluntly let her know it wasn’t acceptable. He told me that story himself."
Byrne goes on to report that for Secret Service agents, being assigned to Hillary Clinton’s detail "was a form of punishment handed down by passive-aggressive middle management."
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
06/21/2016 9:36 Comments ||
Top||
#2
He bluntly let her know it wasn’t acceptable. He told me that story himself."
Should have said nothing, complained of severe head pain, caught a ride to Walter Reed, and pressed formal assault charges. He would now be a wealthy retired Secret Service Agent and budding author.
#8
"Not surprisingly, Champ's people do not appear to be going anywhere." Hattip Besoeker
I had not consider that the departure of staff at the backend of an administration is the norm, even if a same party win seems likely, like the pizza index at the Pentagon, this should be a metric of how things are going. That there have ben no high viz departures yet begins to be troubling....
[Michael Yon] Tim is a retired Marine infantry officer. I spent much time with Tim in various provinces in Afghanistan, such as Nangarhar, Kabul, Kandahar, Helmand, Nimoroz.
Good Lord almighty we went everywhere together, often alone or with just one other man, an ex-Aussie Soldier named Shem.
First time Tim picked me up in Kabul to take me to Jalalabad, Nangarhar, there was a bag beside me in the backseat filled with grenades. I said I'll just help myself to a couple of these.
We were going down roads sometimes passing burning and blown-up, shot up vehicles. IED holes, and people who obviously were Taliban and associates, yet somehow we got away with it. You had to be there to believe it.
I was not advertising this at the time due to the obvious peril, but we both learned a lot about the war which left both of us ahead of the curve when writing about it.
This morning I checked Tim's website and saw that he posted on the Orlando shooting. Our thoughts are parallel on this.
[VOX] The Daily Show's Trevor Noah thinks that banning suspected terrorists from buying guns may not be that good of an idea, even if it sounds like it is.
In the wake of the recent Orlando massacre, Sen. Chris Murphy and other Democratic lawmakers filibustered for 15 hours in order to force a vote on a new gun bill. If passed, the bill would give the government broad authority to block the sale of guns to individuals investigated for terrorist activity up to five years before the attempted purchase. The bill is widely backed by Senate Democrats, and the terrorist list ban has previously garnered support from President Obama.
But perhaps it isn't so cut and dried, Noah points out.
Last night, in a segment about the Senate filibuster, he explained why the idea is actually pretty troubling. "It sounds like something that shouldn't be up for discussion," he said. "But it's not as formal as it sounds. It' a secret list that anyone could be put on at any time."
Noah acknowledged that though the legislation might seem comforting now, we might want to think twice before consenting to such a large expansion of governmental discretionary power. His fears may be well-grounded. According to watch list guidelines published in the Intercept in 2014, adding a person's name to the list requires neither "concrete facts" nor "irrefutable evidence."
The celebrated ‘Daughter of the East’ took over the mantle of leadership of the country’s most populous political movement in her bare twenties when her father and Pakistan’s first democratically elected Prime Minister was put to gallows for a murder he did not commit, setting a precedent that continues to splotch legal narrations.
Captivity in blistering temperatures, corporal and psychosomatic torments by the death-dealing martial law regime could not fracture her resoluteness towards forming a government suggestive of the inclination of the masses.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
06/21/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10324 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[AlJazeera] Julian Huxley once wrote that "a nation is a society united by a common error as to its origins and a common aversion to its neighbours". If there is any truth to Huxley's remark, the recent bloody border clashes between the Afghan and Pakistani military forces illustrate the common aversion of the Afghans towards their antagonistic eastern neighbours, Pakistan.
The incident, which left three border guards and two children dead on the Afghan side of the Torkham crossing in eastern Afghanistan, stirred anger throughout the country. Transcending internal differences, Afghans poured into streets in protest and some began marching towards Torkham to render support to the Afghan National Army. A video clip has gone viral on the social media, showing a group of men, claiming to belong to the Taliban forces, declaring war on Pakistan and urging others to join in defending Afghanistan's honour and territorial integrity.
Yet others think that Pakistan was testing the waters and was trying to take advantage of what it perceived as a vulnerable moment in Afghanistan. A year that has been marked with the highest military and civilian casualty figures and increased political discord in Kabul would probably be an opportune time to settle the disputed border issue. In either case, Pakistan's calculus proved wrong. The seemingly disarrayed, multiethnic Afghan nation came together and showed a common aversion to their aggressive neighbour.
Beyond a show of unity in the face of foreign aggression, however, the phenomenon signals a wider shift of dynamics in the two neighbours' historically thorny relationship. The majority of Afghans believe that since the days of the Afghan resistance against the Soviet invasion in the 1980s, Pakistan has been playing a ruthless game of manipulation with both the Afghans and their largest benefactor, the US.
Some argue that Pakistan's interference in Afghan's internal affairs is driven by its insecurity about the Durand Line, the disputed border demarcation upon which the Torkham crossing sits. As soon as Kabul accepts it as the official dividing line, the argument goes, Pakistan will stop its meddling.
Pakistan's ambitions, however, are greater. Their doctrine of gaining "strategic depth" in Afghanistan, which is justified by their fear of an attack from India, is one of the reasons for Islamabad's relentless efforts to install a puppet government in Kabul. The ISI intelligence agency's grossly misguided Taliban project eventually gave birth to various groups of Pakistani Taliban, the survival of al-Qaeda and the harbouring of various Central Asian and Chinese radical groups.
But Pakistan could not have become a godfather of sorts to most of the world's terrorist organisations had it not been for the puzzling acquiescence, over the past 15 years, of the United States. Whether it was a case of prolonged underestimation, a strong and generous Pakistani lobby in Washington, or simply a chaotic AfPak strategy - or lack thereof - the US did not challenge Pakistan's behaviour in any serious and consistent manner. Since 2002, the average annual US aid to Pakistan has been roughly $2bn. In 2010 alone, Pakistan received about $4.5bn in military and development aid from the US. Yet, public opinion polls in Pakistan show that the majority of Pakistanis view the US as an enemy.
But, finally this spring, American policy-makers felt the fatigue from Islamabad's double games. In March, the US Congress began to voice doubts about the continuation of the flow of US aid to Pakistan. Congress passed a bill imposing strict conditions on a $450m aid package to Pakistan and opposed the financing of eight F-16 jet fighters that would be granted to Pakistan through the Foreign Military Financing scheme.
Other disconcerting events of late include the US shift of policy, indicating the end of favouritism to Pakistan, and the opening of Chabahar port, a collaboration of Iran, India and Afghanistan that could isolate Pakistan in regional trade activities.
The Afghans' reaction to the recent border incident represents the culmination of over three decades of frustration with Pakistani malfeasance. They have fought the British and Soviet empires against all odds. If pressured and humiliated further, the Afghans might take on Pakistan.
While the killing of the former Taliban leader, Mulla Mansour, the imposition of conditions on aid to Pakistan and the expansion of military role in Afghanistan are positive signals in the US policy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, staying the course will be the determining factor in changing Pakistan's behaviour.
Posted by: Pappy ||
06/21/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10325 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
Pakistan and their benefactor the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia have played us for fools since 9/11. Bush and Obama are both responsible. If Clinton wins...this will continue.
The Pakistani ISI trained, directed and funded the Taliban that fought us in Afghanistan - acts of war. They rape our supply lines with impunity - and we intentionally turn a blind eye - an act of stupidity on our part. They consider us fools.
#3
The Chinese have been backing the Paks for decades. It doesn't get any play because they've been a) circumspect about it and b) investing in Afghanistan.
[DAWN] On a live TV talk show some nights ago, applauded campaigner and journalist Marvi Sirmed was verbally accosted and threatened with force by a bearded bulwark of what has become Islam in this country.
Marvi had the gall, the complete and appreciable bravado, to simply agree with another speaker Barrister Masroor on the show. Masroor had commented that when it came to honour killings in Pakistain, the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) seemed slumbering in an inebriated stupor.
For agreeing with his words, Jamaat-e-Ulema-e-Islam Fazl's (JUI-F) Hafiz Hamdullah called Marvi a "whore", vowed to "strip her" if she didn’t quieten down and tried to physically assault her.
While the questionable language was omitted from the transmission, it circulated widely on social media after Marvi posted about her experience.
Her claims were backed by the other panelists on the show.
I don’t know about you but if someone airs an incitement to rape on national television -- in a country where religious celebrities provoke murderers and hate-mongerers -- I consider such threats to be a clarion call for rolling out the legal books and restraining orders, and doing some rigorous rethinking of why these men represent our social and political system.
The ’holy man’ in question here, Senator -- yes, Senator -- Hafiz Hamdullah, went on to say that he would not "allow" Marvi to speak.
Errrr, who died and decided to make you king of the oafs?
Marvi is a strong, opinionated woman; she is not the kind to take this type of abuse lying down. Unfortunately, that is how most men here like to give anything to a woman. But Marvi rebuffed Hamdullah (I refuse to use any sort of scholarly title for such a man) in full.
The audacity of a woman in Pakistain, a woman I say, to dish out some sweet scorn? -- of course, she ought to be pillaged and shown a knuckle or two. Such was Hamdullah’s reaction and aggression, that he had to be tackled and led out of the recording.
Meanwhile, ...back at the palazzo, Count Guido had escaped from his bonds and overwhelmed his guard using the bludgeon the faithful Filomena had smuggled to him in the loaf of bread... the show continued airing, stacking up ratings in a world where sensationalism is our favourite kind of televised past-time.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/21/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10327 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[Ynet] The Saudis have come to Israel with a non-negotiable peace plan; Gilad Sharon asks type of country would concede to demands which put access to Jewish places of worship at risk, and which turns the clock back to 1947.
The Saudi Peace initiative is a trap. The initiative calls for an Israeli withdrawal to the borders of June 4, 1967 and for a solution to the problem of Paleostinian refugees in accordance with UN resolution 194.
In return, there will be peace and normalization between Israel and the nations of the Arab League
Continued on Page 49
#1
Show me the money. Who is paying who and how much to bring in millions of Muslims into non-Muslim nations. Are they paying the Clinton Foundation? Soros? Is the payee the Saudies? Or is it just pure evil eminating from the oval office?
Posted by: Unelet Protector of the Sith2424 ||
06/21/2016 0:25 Comments ||
Top||
[Business Insider] On June 20, Gen. Mark Milley, the US Army chief of staff, ranked four nations as the most dangerous to US national security: Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea.
Meanwhile, BOEING just penned massive contract with Iran, one of the largest supporters of state sponsored terrorism in the world.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Breitbart] Hillary Clinton once threw a Bible at the back of a Secret Service agent's head, part of a pattern of unhinged rage that the now-presumptive Democratic nominee exhibited, as exposed for the first time in former Secret Service agent Gary Byrne's grueling insider account of Hillary Rodham Clinton.
[Business Insider] On June 20, Gen. Mark Milley, the US Army chief of staff, ranked four nations as the most dangerous to US national security: Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea.
