Video: Trump Speaks to Hannity About Biden’s Afghanistan Disaster~”The most embarrassing thing that’s ever happened to our country.”

Former President Donald Trump spoke by phone with Sean Hannity recently about Joe Biden's catastrophic foreign policy debacle in Afghanistan, and why he says "it's the most embarrassing thing that's ever happened to our country." Check out the video below:

INVASION: Terrorists and Criminals Infiltrate Military Planes Departing from Afghanistan



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Instead of countries immediately deporting these high-risk terrorist-tied individuals, they have remained in the West while governments decide what to do with them.

Up to 100 Afghan evacuees flown out of Kabul are on intelligence agency watch lists, US official warns, as it’s revealed one passenger flown out to Qatar has potential ties to ISIS.

According to the Daily Mail,

  • The Afghans are potential candidates for Special Immigration Visas (SIV)
  • They were flagged as possible matches to intelligence agency watch lists by the Defense Department’s Automated Biometric Identification System
  • The Afghan who has potential ties to ISIS was detected by security screeners at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar after they were evacuated from Kabul Airport 
  • The Afghan evacuees are being screened against law enforcement databases using biometric data including facial recognition, iris scans and fingerprints 
  • The evacuees are being screened by agents with U.S. Customs and Border Patrol 


While an unknown number of citizens from Western nations are still stuck in Afghanistan, several thousand Afghan citizens have already been evacuated aboard planes landing in the West. Among the evacuated are criminals and terrorists who have already been expelled from European countries and/or are registered on anti-terrorism lists. Instead of countries immediately deporting these high-risk terrorist-tied individuals, they have remained in the West while governments decide what to do with them.

Unfortunately, due to chaos at the Kabul airport in Afghanistan, the operations of identification of the Afghans before embarking on flights to Europe have been obstructed. Dangerous Islamic terrorists capitalizing on the chaos infiltrated military planes flying to western countries. Once again, the lives of westerners who are already struggling with migrant crimes are placed at an even greater risk.

Below are several of the European countries that terror-tied Afghans have been caught infiltrating.


On Monday, August 23, the German Interior Ministry declared that some Afghans who were previously repatriated because they had committed serious crimes had returned to the country on military evacuation flights. However, a spokesman for the German Interior Ministry tried to downplay the dangerous situation by adding it was just a “low single-digit number” returning back to Germany.


France has unwittingly repatriated Afghan refugees close to the Taliban. A man in his thirties, who arrived in France a few days ago via a military plane, is suspected of links with the Taliban, which he does not deny. The man is just one of several recently evacuated Afghans under surveillance for their suspected links to the Taliban.


A 23-year-old dangerous Afghan criminal arrived on a military flight from Kabul to Denmark. The man was part of the infamous Loyal to Familia gang and had been expelled from the country last year after serving a five-year sentence for possession of a firearm. The Afghan was arrested at Copenhagen airport after disembarking from one of the evacuation flights from Kabul. In court, he said he had boarded the plane “to save himself” following the capture of the Afghan capital by the Taliban.

According to the Italian news site, the Loyal to Familia gang was founded in 2013 by Pakistani citizen Shuaib Khan in the suburbs of Copenhagen and is the largest gang in Denmark. According to the police, he was involved in at least 63 incidents of shootings, which resulted in the deaths of five people and many more injured.


Two Afghan nationals who were deported after being convicted of crimes are now back in Sweden after taking an evacuation flight from Kabul.

Stockholm police have refused to release the details of the crimes that the men committed. A police spokesperson even lectured the public that she would not go into details about the men’s crime’s and they had already served their sentences to Sweden.

United Kingdom

A senior UK Home Office official revealed that five people on the no-fly list (a list of suspected terrorists) attempted to leave Afghanistan on British military flights. Four of them were detained before boarding, while one managed to be airlifted to Birmingham, UK.

The same official also stated that another person was intercepted in Frankfurt and prevented from traveling to the UK. According to British officials, there is a real risk that Islamic State militiamen will attempt to use the program to evacuate former Afghan collaborators and enter the UK. In addition, British officials at Kabul Airport warned that there had been a spike in fake IDs shown by Afghans before boarding military flights.


Italy was initially scheduled to evacuate several hundred Afghans. However, as of August 23, around 2,250 had arrived in Italy, and 1,300 others were inside the Kabul airport waiting to leave. Were the last-minute massive increases of Afghanis who were flown into Italy properly vetted?


As reported by the Flemish newspaper Het Nieuwsblad, an email from the Belgian police revealed that the Afghan refugees arriving in Belgium would include traffickers, extremists, recruiters, and violent criminals. In addition, according to the Belgian police, “some young Afghans (who are already in the country’s reception centers) are behaving very violently. Furthermore, there are Afghan groups on Tiktok whose content incites violence. Many individuals are engaged in Islamic religious recruitment and claim to be adherents of a strict Islam. The police went on to explain that the Muslims stated goal is to bring Belgium under Islamic law.

Islamic Countries Build Walls To Protect Against the Afghans

While Islamic countries are building walls along their border to prevent a new influx of refugees, the West continues to flood their countries with unvetted and criminal Afghanis. These unvetted Islamic sharia-compliant migrants welcomed by the left have been proven to have values and ambitions in staunch opposition to Western values and laws.

As reported at RAIR Foundation USA, this is part of the United Nations (UN) and European Union’s (EU) “Great replacement” scheme. EU elites, along with the UN, are using mass migration to replace the Western population. The illegal migrants are helping the left in their fight to dilute host cultures, ensure more votes, and consolidate their power.

Check Out the Taliban’s New American Arsenal

Footage recently emerged of Taliban jihadis trying to figure out how to fly one of their new Black Hawk helicopters. Let's take a look at the Taliban's new arsenal, provided by the U.S. Military.

For the BBC article quoted in this video ("Afghanistan: Black Hawks and Humvees - military kit now with the Taliban"), click here:

Muslim Father Murders Son for Converting to Christianity

Tabiruka Tefiiro, a 20-year-old convert to Christianity in Uganda, was killed by his Muslim father on Sunday. Tefiiro's father said that he killed his son for disgracing Islam by converting to Christianity. David Wood discusses the case and the Islamic penalty for apostasy.

For the International Christian Concern article quoted in this video ("Father Kills Son for Converting to Christianity"), click here:

Taliban blocks rescue of 173 cats and dogs, allowing them to ‘bake to death in crates’



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Human life means nothing to jihadis. It would follow that their barbarity towards humans, which is constantly on display, would extend to animals. Farthing “warned the pets will bake to death in their travel crates if the eight-hour stand-off does not end soon.” With no word, chances are it is already too late.

It doesn’t help that dogs are regarded as unclean in Islam:

“Once Gabriel promised the Prophet (that he would visit him, but Gabriel did not come) and later on he said, ‘We, angels, do not enter a house which contains a picture or a dog.’” — Sahih Bukhari 4.54.50

“Abdullah (b. Umar) (Allah be pleased with them) reported: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) ordered the killing of dogs and we would send (men) in Medina and its corners and we did not spare any dog that we did not kill, so much so that we killed the dog that accompanied the wet she-camel belonging to the people of the desert.” — Sahih Muslim 3811

“RESCUE ARK BLOCKED Pen Farthing BLOCKED from leaving Kabul airport as Taliban reject ex-Marine’s pleas 173 cats and dogs will die in hours,” by Jerome Starkey and Alex Winter, The Sun, August 26, 2021:

TALIBAN guards have blocked a British mercy convoy from entering Kabul airport with 173 cats and dogs due to flee Afghanistan.

Former Royal Marine Pen Farthing, 57, warned the pets will bake to death in their travel crates if the eight hour stand off does not end soon.

And he’s appealed directly to the Taliban’s Doha spokesperson for help, The Sun’s reporter on the ground in Kabul says.

Ex-commando Pen founded Nowzad, an animal rescue charity, after serving in Afghanistan in 2007.

He made a midnight dash with his 25 Afghan staff and their families after Defence Secretary Ben Wallace agreed to let him land a private charter flight to fly them all to Britain.

The mission to rescue 94 dogs and 79 cats is codenamed Operation Ark.

Pen bought two trucks in the space of 24 hours and loaded them up with food and supplies to last three days – in case they were delayed inside the airport.

But they nearly didn’t make it after they were stopped at a Taliban checkpoint as they raced across the city under cover of darkness last night.

“About 15 guys jumped out and levelled their guns at us,” he said.

“Then one of them had an ND [a negligent discharge]. Luckily he was a s*** shot and it went over our heads.

“I very rarely hear Afghans swear in English but I heard a few words then.”

They were held for an hour at the checkpoint before finally being allowed to drive across the city to the airport….

On 9/11 Anniversary, Virginia to Teach How 9/11 Hurt Muslims

OUTRAGEOUS: Virginia Public Schools to Focus on Muslims—As Victims—in Teaching About 9/11 On Attacks’ 20th Anniversary



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On Thursday, the Virginia Department of Education published a video entitled, “Culturally Responsive and Inclusive 9/11 Commemoration,” detailing how Virginia public school teachers should handle the upcoming twentieth anniversary of the September 11, 2001 jihad terror attacks that killed nearly 3,000 Americans. The emphasis on that day and thereafter must not be on the ideology of the attackers or the ongoing jihad terror threat; rather, the focus is entirely on acknowledging and eradicating what the video calls “anti-Muslim racism.”

The video is narrated by a hijab-wearing woman, Amaarah DeCuir, who describes herself as “Professorial Lecturer, School of Education, American University & Paragon Education Consulting, President.” One would think that with all her expertise, Ms. DeCuir would know the elementary fact that Islam is not a race and that there are Muslims, and Islamic jihadis, of all races. And of course, she does know that, but she is operating in this video on the basis of the Leftist contention that opposition to jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women really stems from an irrational animus against Muslims as a people, and hence is a “racialized” form of “hatred.”

Yes, it’s toxic nonsense, but that’s the Left for you. In any case, Virginia public schools that implement DeCuir’s recommendations (and since the Virginia Department of Education published her video, it would appear that the department wants that to be all of them) will give students a presentation on the twentieth anniversary of the worst attacks ever on American soil that will portray Muslims as the primary victims of those attacks, and make herculean efforts to deflect attention away from the extremely inconvenient fact that the attacks were perpetrated in the name of Islam and in accord with its teachings.

If you doubt that fact, note that in March 2009, five masterminds of the 9/11 plot, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi bin As-Shibh, Walid bin ‘Attash, Mustafa Ahmed AI-Hawsawi, and ‘Ali ‘Abd Al-’Aziz ‘Ali – styling themselves as the “9/11 Shura Council” – wrote a lengthy communiqué titled “The Islamic Response to the Government’s Nine Accusations.” In it, they called the 9/11 attacks an “act of Jihad,” and explained: “The Jihad in god’s [sic] cause is a great duty in our religion.” They quoted numerous Qur’an verses, including the notorious “Verse of the Sword”: “Then fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them, and seize them, and besiege them and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush” (9:5) and another enjoining Muslims to “strike terror into the heart of the enemies of Allah” (8:60).

Attorney and columnist Marina Medvin, who broke the story of this video, notes that the 9/11 Commission Report “mentions ‘Islam’ over 1,000 times and the word ‘Muslim’ over 1,000 times,” for obvious reasons. But Virginia students will learn nothing about any of that. Instead, they’ll be taught about “phobias stemming from 9/11,” “anti-Muslim racism spikes,” and the evils of the fictional “Muslim Ban.” DeCuir offers as an example of “harmful teaching” any “teaching about Islam and/or Muslims” in connection with 9/11, except, evidently, insofar as Muslims were victims of the American response to the attacks.

All of this is designed to help teachers “disrupt anti-Muslim racism by implementing existing district anti-bullying policies.” The video offers three examples of Muslim students who claim to have faced this bullying. One says: “9/11 every single year is so awkward…the administrators would be like, ‘On this fateful day, this happened’…then the Muslim jokes would come up, like ‘don’t blow us up. Don’t do this.’ When I was younger it bothered me, but now I’m desensitized to it.”

Well, that’s a shame. Certainly, schools should do what they can to avoid bullying of all kinds. They should also remember a truth that has been lost: Children are often cruel to one another on whatever pretext they can find, and if it isn’t based on one thing, it will be on another. No Muslim students should be bullied. Making all teaching on the twentieth anniversary of 9/11 about Muslims being victimized, not just personally but also politically by counter-terror measures in the U.S., however, is spectacularly wrongheaded. Students should be taught that no one is guilty of any criminal or terrorist act except those who plotted and perpetrated it. At the same time, students should be taught about the ideological wellsprings of the 9/11 attacks, just as they should be taught about the ideological wellsprings of Pearl Harbor and the Nazi invasion of Poland: so as to work toward ensuring that such acts of violence and hatred are never repeated.

To pretend that 9/11 didn’t spring from beliefs and assumptions that can be found in Islamic teaching is simply to deny reality, and denying reality never ends well. This doesn’t remotely mean that all Muslims are terrorists or that any innocent Muslim should be victimized. But Leftists frequently claim that enunciating truths they don’t wish to acknowledge will result in the victimization of innocent people; they never seem to notice this possibility when it comes to their own poisonous race-baiting and classist rhetoric.

On September 11, 2001, the United States of America was attacked by Islamic jihadis acting in the name of Islam and in the service of its 1,400-year cause. To claim anything else is to outrage the truth, history, and those who have given their lives to defend our beleaguered republic since then, including the 13 service members killed in Kabul on the same day the Virginia Department of Education posted this video.


Dan Crenshaw, Lara Logan Bring the Most Disturbing Reports Out of the Kabul Airport Yet



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Rep. Dan Crenshaw is a retired Navy SEAL who served and was wounded in Afghanistan’s Helmand province during his third deployment, in 2012. He lost his right eye and his left eye was badly damaged in an IED attack. Crenshaw is held in extremely high regard in the veteran and active-duty communities.

Lara Logan is a long-time award-winning journalist now working for Fox News who has spent much of her career covering war zones including Iraq and Afghanistan. Between the two of them, Logan and Crenshaw have spent years in and around Afghanistan. Due to their experience there, both are likely to have credible sources on the ground at the Kabul airport.

Both Logan and Crenshaw are independently reporting that Americans have been turned away from safety at that airport over the past couple of days.

Logan posted this tweet Saturday afternoon.

The “82nd soldiers” refers to the 82nd Airborne, which Joe Biden ordered into Kabul to defend the airport and facilitate the mass evacuation as the situation collapsed. Logan added in a subsequent tweet that “All that stands between these Americans & safety/home is the US govt & military.”

Sunday morning, Rep. Crenshaw posted this on Twitter and Facebook.

Tweet by Rep. Dan Crenshaw, Aug. 29, 2021.

The fog of war is undoubtedly thick in Taliban-controlled Kabul. American forces there are under an effective siege, surrounded by Taliban and other terrorist forces numbering in the thousands. The United States military is now depending on the Taliban, a bloodthirsty army of Islamic extremists who have been our battlefield enemy for 20 years, for security. One Green Beret soldier returned from Kabul this week and told Fox that the Taliban and ISIS-K, which the Biden administration is blaming for Thursday’s bombing that killed 13 Americans, are one and the same. The Taliban, he said, have been seen scouting Americans to target them inside the Kabul airport. The Biden administration has been putting a much less menacing face on the Taliban since it took Kabul two weeks ago.

Related: Two Reps, a Dem and a Republican, Went to Kabul Because They Don’t Trust Biden’s Afghanistan Spin

If there is anything to Logan’s and Crenshaw’s posts, the situation in Kabul is far worse and more disturbing than any American could have imagined over the past 24 to 48 hours. Some reports indicate that as many as 350 Americans remain stranded in Kabul. The true number could be far higher. The Biden administration has consistently touted its success in removing thousands of people from Kabul while downplaying the number of Americans who are among the rescued.

So many questions arise from the possibility that Americans are being turned back from the gates at Kabul airport, but the Democrat-controlled Congress was gaveled out of session and is not in Washington to convene any hearings.

Update: Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) says the State Department is not helping.

The State Department, headed by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, is in charge of the evacuation effort. The Pentagon is subordinate to State in Kabul and if soldiers are turning Americans away at the airport, it would be under State’s orders.

Vetting the Unvettable



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

As America is faced with the total collapse of Afghanistan and the U.S. government’s malfeasance in responding to it, the question of Afghan refugees coming to America is a real security issue for state and local governments as well as citizens across the nation.

2 questions:

  1. How can American citizens trust the government with properly vetting people from any nation when the U.S. government has a track record of abject failure specific to this task?
  2. How do you vet people who cannot be positively identified by true name and date of birth?

The U.S. Government’s Track Record in “Vetting”

Abdurahman Alamoudi was an Al Qaeda financier who, in 2004, was sentenced to 21 years in federal prison. Yet, Alamoudi served as the Islamic advisor to President Clinton and as a “Goodwill Ambassador” for the U.S. State Department, worked with the Department of Education, and created the Muslim Chaplain Program for the U.S. Department of Defense.

Alamoudi was an immigrant from Eritrea and was given the green light by the State Department, the Secret Service, and the FBI.

Perhaps the vetting process is broken.

Al Qaeda financier Abdurahman Alamoudi (center) with Vice President Al Gore (L) & President Clinton (R)

Between 2003 and 2014 Gulmurod Khalimov participated in 5 U.S. State Department-sponsored training programs, including weapons and tactics training. Why is this a problem? Khalimov was a senior ISIS commander upon whom the U.S. government put a $3 million bounty.

The State Department defended themselves by explaining, “All appropriate Leahy vetting was undertaken in advance of this training.”

Perhaps the vetting process is broken.

How Well Will the U.S. government Vet Refugees from Afghanistan?

Those who served honorably with U.S. troops and/or as a part of the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan who renounce sharia and adopt American principles for their lives should be given an opportunity to come to America.

Direct testimony is needed by those who served with the individual “refugees” because people from Afghanistan are rarely capable of passing a true background check. This is because there is often no way to confirm the individual's true name or simple identifiers like a date of birth.

For security reasons, the question of how the United States will vet people from certain countries must be answered before admitting anyone from those countries.

This is the reason that in 2016 Understanding the Threat recommended Mr. Trump suspend all immigration into the United States for 3-5 years until the U.S. could produce a viable vetting process for immigrants from many of the nations openly hostile to the U.S., limit the points of entry to one per coast, and standardize security, health, and skills screening.

State Level Vetting

If the federal government demonstrates – as it has – it is incapable of vetting people coming into America, refugees or otherwise, how will states vet them?

Russell Smith, the CEO of Refugee Services of Texas issued a press release on August 16, 2021, stating Texas is prepared to receive hundreds of refugees from Afghanistan.

The press release also states: “All Afghans who have applied for Special Immigrant Visas (SIV’s) will undergo security background checks and health screenings.”

How will Texas vet these people? UTT reached out to Mr. Smith, but as of the time of publishing this article, we have not received any feedback.

If the United States federal government is not capable of creating a vetting process to keep Al Qaeda and ISIS leaders out of America, how well do you think they are doing vetting refugees from Afghanistan?

Taliban cuts gay man into pieces to ‘show what they do with gay people’



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The Taliban has already sent clear messages on what it intends to do with uncovered women, and now it has sent another message on how it will treat gay men.

The penalty for homosexuality in Islam is death, so the Taliban is following Sharia, which is also implemented in several other Islamic countries. Under Islamic law:

“When a man mounts another man, the throne of God shakes,” and “Kill the one that is doing it and also kill the one that it is being done to.” (Abu Dawud 4462 and al-Tirmidhi 1456)

“If a man who is not married is seized committing sodomy, he will be stoned to death.” (Abu Dawud 4448)

“The Prophet cursed effeminate men (those men who are in the similitude (assume the manners of women) and those women who assume the manners of men, and he said, ‘Turn them out of your houses .’ The Prophet turned out such-and-such man, and ‘Umar turned out such-and-such woman.” (Sahih Bukhari 72:774)

“Taliban cut Afghan man’s body into pieces to ‘show what they do with gay people,’” by Lily Wakefield, Pink News, August 25, 2021:

A gay man in Afghanistan has described how the Taliban killed his boyfriend and “cut his body into pieces” to “show what they do with gay people”.

The 26-year-old, going by the pseudonym of “Gabir” to protect his identity, told the i that he and his boyfriend were sitting in a restaurant together in Afghanistan’s capital, Kabul, when the city was seized by the Taliban on 15 August.

They both rushed back to their respective homes, and soon Gabir was unable to get hold of his partner as his phone signal and internet connection began to fail.

He said: “At 5 or 6 o’clock, my brother told me something has happened, that ‘you should contact your friends’. When I call my friends, everyone’s phone is off.”

Tragically, Gabir finally discovered from a friend that his boyfriend, who was just 24 years old, had been tracked down by the Taliban and killed.

“Two cars came, with Taliban in it,” he said.

“They said, ‘Where is his home?’ and beat him so much. They took him away – nobody knows where – and then they kill him.

“Afterwards they said they brought the body [back] and cut his body into pieces to show the people that this is what we do with gay people.”

Gabir and his boyfriend had been together for eight months after meeting at university, and had been planning to leave Afghanistan to get married.

Following the young man’s horrific death, Gabir hasn’t even had time to grieve, as he is in hiding and fearing for his own life.

He recently received an anonymous call from someone who told him: “I know you are gay, before capturing Kabul we knew everything about you, you have three or four friends who are gay, you have a boyfriend.

“Once we settle here in Kabul we will not let you live. If we find you, we will kill you.”

Since then, Gabir has been on the run, but he said: “I’m 100 per cent sure I’m going to die. There is no hope for me.”…

Gay Afghan author Nemat Sadat recently told PinkNews that the Taliban will “weed out and exterminate” Afghanistan’s LGBT+ community: “They can either await a slow death or a quick one.”….

TOGETHER WITH THE UK, Biden Will Fund Taliban Through ‘Humanitarian Aid’



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On August 17, I asked, “How Long Until Biden Starts Funding the Taliban?”

Read between the lines and you understand that we’re going to be enabling the funding of terrorism. As Churchill once said, “it’s just a matter of the price.”

But we’ll be deep in it before long via the “humanitarian aid” channels.

Despite all the assurances, the money will end up in the hands of the Taliban and help shore up their rule.

Understand that this is not a question of ‘if’ this will happen, but when.

Aid groups will function under the Taliban, they will pay protection money to them (while swearing up and down on a stack of Das Kapitals that they’re not) and we’ll end up funding them.

On August 20, I elaborated how this would work.

Maintaining a humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan will lead to a flow of foreign aid to the Taliban.

Western nations, faced with the threat of millions of migrants showing up on their doorsteps, will be happy, after a few initial protests, to pay off the Taliban, overtly or covertly, to slow the flood. While the aid organizations swear up and down that none of the money is going to the Taliban, it is impossible to operate in a terror state without paying protection money to the terrorists.

Doing any kind of business in Afghanistan will mean doing business with the Taliban.

The Biden administration isn’t waiting anywhere near that long. It’s official, “humanitarian aid” will keep flowing to the Taliban.

The United States is taking steps to allow humanitarian work to continue in Afghanistan despite U.S. sanctions on the Taliban, which seized power 11 days ago.

A U.S. Treasury Department official said President Joe Biden’s administration has contacted humanitarian partners in Afghanistan in recent days about their continued ability to provide aid.

“We are taking steps to allow for humanitarian aid to continue in a way that benefits the Afghan people,” the official said, adding that Biden discussed the humanitarian assistance with fellow G7 leaders.

U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said on Thursday that all countries must ensure that any sanctions or counterterrorism measures comply with international humanitarian and rights law, and do not impede the impartial humanitarian activities.

The Taliban have said they will respect human rights and will not allow terrorists to operate from the country. The group has also encouraged aid organizations to continue their work, saying aid was welcome as long as it was not used as a means of political influence over Afghanistan.

Aid is also a means of putting money in the pockets of the Taliban.

Aid groups operating in areas controlled by terrorists pay them protection money, provide them with supplies for their fighters and supporters, or do business with them in various ways.

We know that the Taliban were already doing it.

The Taliban in Afghanistan are becoming what one think-tank calls a “government in waiting,” taxing individuals in the provinces and extending a kind of regulatory jurisdiction over medical clinics and other public institutions.

Now they are attempting to tax and control the activities of NGOs, including international aid agencies…

This past spring, Taliban representatives, not just in Kandahar but also around the country, began asking demining and other NGOs to register with their own NGO commission, and to share the details of the finances of their projects…

In November, the UN’s Office for Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs said in its weekly report that, “There is increasing evidence that in different parts of the country demands by NSAGs (non-state armed groups) for illegal taxation from humanitarian agencies are becoming more formalized. Such demands violate humanitarian principles and cause delays in responding to life-saving needs of the affected people.”

Affected NGOs did not want to speak on the record for fear of Taliban retaliation against their workers, but they paint a picture of the Taliban increasing their influence over health clinics and schools as well as attempting to “tax” NGOs.

The extent of Taliban taxation and monitoring of NGOs varies, says one worker. Their own organization isn’t hassled that much because one of their managers has longstanding ties with the Taliban leadership, the worker said. Other NGOs have reportedly purchased equipment for Taliban medical clinics, or hired workers suggested by the Taliban.

Some NGOs say they are struggling to come up with a strategy for working in Taliban-controlled areas. Most government funding comes with rules that should prevent money from going to the Taliban or other anti-government groups.

That’s not a problem though because the Taliban, like other Jihadist groups, including Hamas, have sophisticated strategies for milking NGOs.

You can track if payments are going directly to the Taliban, but tracking the vendors that provide medical equipment and then make payoffs to the Taliban, or how many of the workers are actually Taliban people, is a mostly hopeless task.

And now that the Taliban are in charge, that kind of tracking won’t happen.

Even though the media reported on this two years ago, it will suppress any such concerns now, and insist vocally that the need to stop famine and disease in Afghanistan is far more urgent than preventing the Taliban from taxing aid groups.

And the Biden administration will fund the Taliban.

Biden: ISIS-K Terror Threat So Great We Have To Leave Americans In Their Hands



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Biden, the politician who ran on nation-building and an Afghan surge in 2007, has been lying and claiming that he was opposed to them from the first.

The withdrawal began with Biden claiming credit for finally making the decision to end the war, only to pivot to blaming President Trump when his withdrawal went wrong.

Biden began his withdrawal by claiming that the Islamic terrorists in Afghanistan had been defeated and there was no further need for a military presence.

Now he has pivoted over to arguing that he has to abandon thousands of Americans behind Taliban lines because the threat from ISIS-K, a local ISIS affiliate is too great.

A threat so great that 6,000 American military personnel can’t stand up to it, and that requires abandoning unknown numbers of Americans.

Biden has spent the retreat talking out of both sides of his mouth. But his rationale for abandoning Americans is particularly egregious.

The same totalitarian who militarized Washington D.C. and kicked off an extended military occupation of the capital to deal with an imaginary threat to his own person refuses to protect the Americans he betrayed and left in harm’s way.

The ISIS-K threat is so great that Biden just has to leave Americans in their hands.

U.S. Officials Gave Taliban a “Kill List” of Americans and Afghan Allies

U.S. officials gave the Taliban a list of U.S. citizens and Afghan allies so that Taliban jihadis would be able to help these people reach Kabul Airport safely. This list is now being described as a "kill list." David Wood discusses the issue.

For the Politico article quoted in this video ("U.S. officials provided Taliban with names of Americans, Afghan allies to evacuate"), click here:

Trump blasts Biden over weakening America and leaving allies behind~Real America’s Dan Ball W/ Congressman for Ohio’s 8th District & Veteran, Rep. Warren Davidson

Trump blasts Biden over weakening America and leaving allies behind

Tipping Point - Sabrina DeSousa on the Chaos in Kabul

The Real Story - OAN Impeach Biden with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene

Ronald Yates: Beijing Has an Agenda in Afghanistan


Department of the Indefensible: Who Decided to Close Bagram Air Base and Why?



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Closing Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan is clearly one of the most consequential decisions the Biden administration has made in Afghanistan. Bagram was the main base of operations in Afghanistan for going on 20 years. How did the decision to close it happen, and who made the call?

Just over a week ago, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Gen. Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, delivered a briefing on the situation in Afghanistan. Kabul had already fallen to the Taliban and U.S. forces were already surrounded at the Kabul airport, from which they were and still are trying to evacuate the thousands of American and allied people stranded in the country.

Bagram Air Base had already been abandoned. That decision had been made weeks, if not months, before Afghanistan’s fall. It formally went dark in the dead of night, with no warning given to our allies, on July 5, 2021. Abandoning Bagram meant ending intelligence and air support for the Afghan military, which proved to be consequential as the Taliban routed the military that the United States had spent 20 years building up.

During the briefing on August 18, a reporter asked Austin about the loss of U.S. aircraft to the Taliban, and Milley about that decision to close Bagram. Austin appeared to be stumped by the question but then proceeded to answer. Milley interrupted and then after Austin finished, defended the decision to close Bagram.

This wasn’t the first time Milley had publicly advocated for closing the vast U.S. airbase. In testimony before the House on June 23, 2021, Milley was asked whether keeping Bagram operational was possible. Milley chose not to answer that question. Instead, he said he didn’t need it. Fast forward to 1:10:30.

Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) asks Gen. Milley “Is it not possible to keep Bagram…Air Force Base?”

Milley replies: “Can I make a comment? So, a couple of quick comments here. On Bagram, it’s not necessary tactically, operationally, for what we’re gonna try to do here with Afghanistan. Consolidate on Kabul, with, in support of their government.”

And then Milley backed up and discussed the “momentum of the Taliban,” which by then was already considerable. They were taking territory across Afghanistan with little to no effective resistance. Milley sought to minimize the Taliban’s control, claiming that about 81 district centers were under their control out of 419 district centers throughout the country, and “There’s no provincial capital that is underneath the Taliban control, and there’s 34 of those.”

Gen. Milley clearly sought to do two things with his comment: defend the decision to abandon Bagram, which had not been enacted yet; and minimize the Taliban’s advances across Afghanistan. As the top military commander in the United States, his words carried considerable weight.

Put it another way: If Gen. Milley had said in that moment that the Taliban really was a threat to take over Afghanistan and that closing Bagram was a bad idea, Bagram probably would not have been closed. Milley did not say any of that.

At this point, it’s worth pointing something out: Lamborn’s question was not actually addressed to Gen. Milley. It was addressed to SecDef Lloyd Austin. Lamborn and Austin had been discussing the U.S. intent to help protect women and girls in Afghanistan after the military’s exit, and how the embassy would continue to function and provide programs to that end. But when Lamborn asked whether it was possible to keep Bagram, Milley stepped in.

He did the exact same thing during the August 18 briefing. The question was addressed to Austin, who whiffed, Milley interrupted, Austin then spoke but did not answer that question, and then Milley stepped up to defend the decision to close Bagram.

Does this signify a break between Gen. Milley, JCS Chairman, and his boss, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, on the decision to close Bagram before the evacuations were complete? It’s impossible to say at this point but the pattern of behavior is interesting. Milley clearly has the rationale for closing Bagram baked into his thinking. He believes it was the right call. Austin may or may not agree, he has not specifically said one way or the other in public.

In any case, Gen. Milley has publicly defended this decision twice. He owns it. It’s clear now, and was a week ago, and was evidently clear to Rep. Lamborn back in June, that closing Bagram was a dangerous and debatable call. Gen. Milley clearly believes closing Bagram was the right call. During the August 18 briefing, he explained it in terms of operational capability based on requirements coming from above — the White House.

“Securing Bagram is a significant level of military operating forces,” Milley says. “It would also require external support from the Afghan security forces. Our task, given to us at that time, the task was to protect the embassy,” Milley said. Biden gave the military that task.

Does this priority — defend the embassy even if it means abandoning the largest base in the country — suggest that the State Department has more of Biden’s ear and support than the Department of Defense, in a war zone? That would seem to be the case.

“If we were to keep both Bagram and the embassy going, that would be a significant number of military forces…that may have exceeded what we had, or stayed the same as what we had,” Milley continued. (Biden, recall, had declared his purpose to withdraw all 2,500 U.S. forces out of Afghanistan.) “So you had to collapse one or the other. And the decision was made, the proposal was made, from CENTCOM commander and the commander on the ground, Scottie Miller, to go ahead and collapse Bagram. That was all briefed and approved and we estimated that the risk of going out of KIA, or the risk of going out of Bagram, were about the same, so going out of KIA was the better tactical solution…in accordance with getting the troops down to a 600, 700 number.”

The decision chain looks like this: Gen. Austin “Scottie” Miller was the commander at Bagram. Based on Biden’s requirement to pull all U.S. forces out of Afghanistan by date certain, and with just 2,500 troops to work with no room for any additional deployments, and with the embassy as the priority over Bagram, Gen. Miller faced the task of planning for it. The Biden administration’s priority was the embassy, so Miller drafted a proposal to close Bagram and concentrate defensive forces on the embassy. His boss, CENTCOM Gen. Frank McKenzie, greenlit that plan, then it went to Washington, where Gen. Milley, SecDef Austin, and the Biden White House all were briefed and bought in. Bagram would close. The die was cast.

It’s baffling how any experienced military commander could rate using Bagram or HKIA as operationally the same, as Milley says they all did. The State Department may have overruled DoD concerns if such concerns were ever voiced. Gen. Miller may have thought the priority was wrong, that he lacked sufficient resources, or something else, but we don’t know. He left Afghanistan on July 12 and has not been heard from since. Gen. Miller was not in the country to execute the plan that he drafted, a decision that should also be questioned. Bagram offered greater defensible standoff positioning, it offered more space to house evacuees, it had numerous combat ground and aircraft on-site, it was outside of downtown Kabul which was overrun by the Taliban and other terrorist forces, and it offered a second runway. One of those could have been used to continue the evacuations, while the other could have been used for that or for aerial military operations. Bagram was clearly the superior option from an operational point of view, though it posed its own travel hazards since it’s about 30 miles outside of Kabul. But if the priority was the embassy and that was non-negotiable with the White House, the military had little choice.

If, that is, the military was giving useful and candid assessments and advice to the White House.

Milley’s defense of closing Bagram on August 18 was different from how he justified the decision back in June, when he proactively said that “it’s not necessary tactically, operationally, for what we’re gonna try to do here with Afghanistan. Consolidate on Kabul, with, in support of their government.” Clearly, he was wrong about that. It was necessary from an operational point of view to keep Bagram functioning. Did he tell Austin, the White House, or the State Department the same?

All of this raises two questions. One, are Biden’s demands that he is placing on the military impossible to meet? Two, of what quality is the operational and tactical advice the military is giving to the Biden White House?

Milley seems to tactfully answer the first in the August 18 briefing when he discusses the requirements of the job the military was given. Essentially, we had to abandon Bagram because Biden would not authorize more force. But he undercuts that argument on June 23 when says that operationally he doesn’t even need Bagram.

Clearly, today, after 13 U.S. service members have been killed and Kabul airport remains surrounded by enemies, and the U.S. military openly says it’s now depending on the Taliban for security, abandoning Bagram was a colossal mistake. It’s going to rate with the Bay of Pigs as one of the most serious and consequential blunders in U.S. military history.

What the Biden White House and the military have created is an Alamo-style siege in a hostile country thousands of miles from home, but worse: It’s surrounded by multiple enemies who hate each other, who have no thought for civilian casualties, who can and probably are using each other as proxies against the United States, and who all know that images of dead Americans will go straight back to U.S. computers, phones, and TV where those images will impact Biden’s next moves. The enemies, who are not operating in concert, have the initiative and can decide whether to storm the airport or not. They are all making that calculation independently of each other and outside what most would consider rational decision-making. Some of those enemies are now armed with American weapons and uniforms.

Additionally, Biden himself is of questionable capacity, is an extremely weak and indecisive man, and has a track record going back decades for getting everything wrong.



The Mission

Americans and Afghans applying for Special Immigrant Visas, thousands of whom are stranded and facing almost certain death at the hands of the Taliban, will soon be able to escape through a privately run civilian airlift organized by the veterans' coalition Project Dynamo 2. 

The mission – part of the movement #DigitalDunkirk and named in reference to Allied forces’ evacuation of Dunkirk during World War II with the help of thousands of civilian watercraft -- will gather evacuees in four provinces outside Kabul and airlift them to safety, said Jen Wilson, chief operating officer of Army Week Association and a member of the coalition. The coalition, which is paid for entirely by the veterans and any donations they receive, has mobilized and plans to fly out its first evacuees within days, she said.

For anyone left behind when the United States and its allies pull out, she said, the future looks grim
without civilian rescue. 

"They go back to the 7th century, if they live," Wilson said. 

Evacuations will begin in several outlying provinces, away from Kabul, she said. For many people in the outer regions of Afghanistan, it's too dangerous to try to reach Kabul and its chaotic airport. Once there, dense crowds of people all trying to get into the airport through Taliban checkpoints have made it nearly impossible for most to pass.

Wilson said American passport-holders, green card-holders and their children, along with Afghans applying for the special visas, should contact Project Dynamo 2 through her email address at [email protected] until the coalition's website is operational. Someone from the group will then tell them where to go for processing and a route out of the country.

Many of the people trying to escape with their families worked as interpreters for the U.S. military during its 20-year war against the Taliban, and were promised protection in exchange for their service. 

And now, every second counts for them, she said. The Taliban plans to cut off all Internet and cell phone communication with the outside world when American and NATO troops leave Aug. 31, Wilson said. 

"Once they lose the ability to communicate, it's game over," she said."They lose the ability to get out if they
can't talk to the West."


Afghan interpreter trying to evacuate says 'I know I'm going to get killed'

Copulating with Corpses: The Taliban Exposed~The necrophilic inclinations of Afghanistan’s new masters.



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

According to an August 22 report, a female Afghan refugee to India just “revealed that the Taliban has sex with dead bodies.”  While discussing how the terrorist group thrives on raping women, she asserted that “They rape dead bodies too. They don’t care whether the person is dead or alive… Can you imagine this?”

The report continues:  “The practice of having sex with corpses is called necrophilia. She revealed that the Taliban either picked up [dead?] women or shot them. Muskan revealed that a woman was picked up by the Taliban only yesterday.”

What to make of this macabre revelation?  No doubt, many will point to it as “proof” that the Taliban’s Islam was, as the apologists of Islam had long claimed, always skin deep—a veneer to legitimize their otherwise illegitimate and corrupt rule.  After all, if they were “students [of Islam]”—the very definition of Taliban—they more than the average Afghan would know that Islam forbids such a disgusting practice.  Right?

Alas, the opposite is true.  Just as pedophilia with boys (Afghanistan’s bacha bazi or “dancing boys”) has Islamic backing, so too does necrophilia, by way of Muslim scriptures, commentaries, and fatwas (Islamic decrees).

It begins, as usual, with the prophet of Islam: Muhammad.  According to a bizarre hadith (a recorded tradition concerning his sayings and doings) that exists in six of Islam’s classical reference texts (including the important Kanz al-‘Umal  and al-Hujja fi Biyan al-Mahujja), Muhammad once took off his shirt, placed it on a dead woman, and then descended into her grave to “lay with her.”

As they hurled dirt atop the corpse and Muhammad, the grave diggers exclaimed, “O Prophet, we see you doing a thing you never did with anyone else,” to which he responded: “I dressed her in my shirt so that she may be dressed in heavenly robes, and I lay with her in her grave so that the pressures of the grave [also known as Islam’s torments of the grave] may be alleviated from her.”

One can interpret this, and there certainly is no reason to insist that Muhammad was actually copulating with the corpse.  There are, however, some hurdles:

First, the two Arabic words (ataja‘ ma‘ha اضطجع معها) which I translate above as “lay with her,” are also used in Arabic to mean “intercourse.” This is similar to the English idiom, “to lay with her,” which can literally mean nothing more than laying down with a woman, but often is an indirect reference to sex.  More than a few Muslim clerics have made this linguistic observation.

Second, Sunni Islam’s four orthodox schools of jurisprudence (or madhahib al- fiqh)—namely, al-Hanafi, al-Hanbali, al-Maliki, and al-Shafi‘i—implicitly permit necrophilia.  None of them actually addresses it on its own; rather, they give it a nod whenever it comes up in the context of other topics.  Thus, in the section on adultery, the Maliki teaching is that “If a husband enters his dead wife—any which way, from front or behind—there is no penalty for him” (Sharh Mukhtasar al-Khalil fi al-fiqh al-Maliki).

Similarly, Shafi‘i rulings on ablution point out that it is unnecessary to rewash the body of the dead—male or female adds the Hanbali madhhab—after penetrating it, though the penis of the penetrator does require washing.

Regardless of all the above, it is not for the non-Muslim—certainly not for me—to tell Muslims what their texts are really saying and teaching.  That is the job of their ulema: scholars and clerics devoted to learning the deep truths of Islam.  Thus, the real question remains: do modern-day ulema permit necrophilia?

The lamentable answer is yes.  For instance, in 2011 a leading Moroccan cleric and founding member of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, Sheikh Abdul Bari Zamzami, issued a fatwa permitting the Muslim husband to copulate with his dead wife.  He prefaced his decree by saying that, although he does not necessarily approve of this act, it is not for him to ban what Islam permits.  As proof, he cited the aforementioned rulings of Islam’s schools of jurisprudence.

Soon thereafter, in April 2012, when the Muslim Brotherhood held the presidency of Egypt, news that Islamist Egyptian parliamentarians were trying to pass a law legalizing necrophilia appeared.  Although Al Ahram, Egypt’s most reputable paper reported the story, it was quickly dismissed as a hoax in Western media (which often happens whenever Islam makes the news in ways that do not comport with Western sensibilities).  As one journalist argued, “This ugly rumor and hoax, thought to originate in a fatwa by [the aforementioned] sheik Zamzami, a noted Moroccan cleric, should be doubted for the simple reason that no Egyptian Islamist sheik, or any other Imam, has ever been reported to approve of necrophilia.”

If that was true in 2012, it wasn’t in 2017, when necrophilia was yet again mentioned and legitimized, this time by Sheikh Sabri Abdul Raeuf, a professor at Egypt’s Al Azhar—the Islamic world’s most prestigious university (which Pope Francis considers an ally). During a televised show in Egypt, the Sheikh/professor was asked if it is permissible for a husband to penetrate his wife after death.  He replied, “It is not favorable in Islam; however Islamic law considers it as halal”—that is, permissible, not a crime or sin deserving of punishment in the here or hereafter (unlike, for example, the heinous crime of apostasy, leaving Islam).

A subsequent Youm7 Arabic report titled (in translation) “The Books of al-Shafi‘i, al-Hanbali, and al-Hanafi Reveal that Sex with a Dead Wife is Not Adultery,” verified the Al Azhar professor’s claims.

Nor, it should be noted, is necrophilia limited to crazy terrorists lurking halfway around the world.  In the UK, late one night in 2019, a Muslim man, Kasim Khuram, broke into a funeral home, opened several coffins, and, having made his “selections,” proceeded to yank out and “rape” two female corpses.  When police arrested him, Khuram explained his actions by laughingly saying, “Every hole is a goal.”

At any rate, after the expenditure of two decades’ worth of American blood and treasure, here is yet another, especially disgusting, reminder of who the Biden administration has left in charge of Afghanistan.

Biden Tried to Send Pallets of Cash to the Taliban as Kabul Fell Creating a hostage situation is a great pretext for funding Islamic terrorists.



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

On August 14, Secretary of State Blinken spoke with Afghanistan’s former president and promised that the Biden administration would provide a bulk shipment of dollars.

The next day Kabul fell.

On that same call, Afghanistan’s former leader had agreed to surrender power to the Taliban. 

The Biden administration had effectively agreed to provide a massive infusion of cash to the Taliban. But the final deal fell through, the Afghan government fled, and the Taliban took Kabul.

The bulk shipment of dollars never did arrive. 

Biden’s diplomats scrambled to evacuate from Kabul. Ajmal Ahmady, the governor of DAB, Afghanistan's central bank, already had a ticket and headed to the airport. He managed to get on a military plane.

Since then he's tweeted that he was warned that the Taliban had come looking for him.

The Taliban were hoping to get their hands on Afghanistan’s money, but much of it is in the United States. The most tangible part of Afghanistan’s assets, $1.3 billion in gold, is sitting in downtown Manhattan, a little bit south of Ground Zero, in the vaults of the Federal Reserve.

If there were any justice, that money would be used to compensate the police officers, firefighters, and workers who died on that day or later on from ailments related to 9/11.

Meanwhile, all the Taliban have to do is fly into JFK, take an Uber to 33 Liberty Street, and ask to be taken down to the basement to see all the bars of gold. And even in Biden’s America and De Blasio’s New York City, they might have trouble walking away with over a billion in gold bars. 

Not unless they trade their camos and kameezes for Black Lives Matter t-shirts.

The United States did plenty of dumb things in Afghanistan, but it kept the gold locked up in the basement vaults and $3.1 billion of DAB’s assets went into U.S. Treasury bills and bonds.

Ahmady estimates that $7 billion of DAB's assets are being held by the Federal Reserve which includes the gold, the bills and bonds, $300 million in cash, and another $2.4 billion in World Bank funds for aiding developing countries. There’s also $700 million at the Bank for International Settlements and another $1.3 billion in international accounts.

Those are likely being held in Turkey which is an Islamist dictatorship friendly to the Taliban.

The Taliban would like some or all of that money. 

The problem is that while the Taliban expected to find vaults full of gold and cash, Afghanistan had been plugged into the international financial system in which access to cash depends on either great internal wealth or good international relations. The Taliban have neither.

To the extent that the Taliban have been behaving themselves, at least in Kabul, it’s because they want to lay claim to the stream of international wealth that used to flow into Afghanistan.

A week after Kabul fell, the International Monetary Fund was supposed to disburse $460 million in Special Drawing Rights to Afghanistan, but that, like all the other international funding mechanisms that the Taliban wanted to lay claim to, was blocked. While the Biden administration’s diplomats and national security people had made a complete hash of the withdrawal, the treasury people proved to be surprisingly on top of cutting off Taliban cash.

The Taliban still control border crossings and they’ll be able to take advantage of Chinese money, but that’s a long way from the cash they need to run any kind of functional country.

Paradoxically, we were the single biggest revenue source for the Taliban’s money machine.

One expert estimated that at the peak of Obama and Biden's Afghanistan surge, "the Taliban’s ‘taxes’ on truckers supplying NATO likely even surpassed the Taliban’s income from drugs, being tens of millions of dollars at least, maybe up to $100 million annually." 

Like a lot of failed states, remittances from Afghans living overseas made up 4% of their GDP. Last year that amounted to $788 million. Some of that money is being blocked. For now.

Without an ongoing war, the money from both NATO and the international financiers of the Jihad will stop flowing. Chinese state businesses won’t allow the Taliban to rob them the way that they looted NATO and while drugs are big money, they’re no substitute for an economy. 

Just ask Venezuela and Iran. Or Detroit.

The Taliban’s options are limited. They've appointed Mohammad Idris, a previously unknown Taliban official, to head the central bank. Afghanistan’s currency is imploding and dollarization without dollars doesn’t work so well. Much of Afghanistan’s economy, which was propped up by foreign aid, will collapse leaving behind subsistence farming, opium, and smuggling rackets.

The arms and vehicles looted from the United States will be sold off to fellow Jihadists for a one-time cash infusion because there’ll be no more armored vehicles and drones handed out.

Before 9/11, Afghanistan was facing drought and famine under the Taliban. The United States campaign not only toppled the Taliban but saved parts of the country from starvation.

But the Taliban do have two key assets: people and trouble.

Those are the same assets held by Jihadists around the world from Hamas in Gaza to the Houthis in Yemen. The Taliban don’t care if portions of the population, especially non-Pashtuns and non-Sunni Muslims suffer, but they know that we do.

Even now there’s talk about how to continue providing humanitarian aid to Afghanistan. And the flow of humanitarian aid to a population in a terrorist area means funding terrorists. 

Beyond inflicting misery on Afghans, the Taliban have a variety of options for causing trouble for their enemies. They can speed the flow of migrants and refugees to Europe and also boost the opium business and demand money to “fight drug trafficking” in order to shut it down. (This scam is common in both South America and Southeast Asia, and helps fund the drug trade in the name of fighting it as corrupt politicians cash in on both the drug and anti-drug businesses.)

And their biggest short-term asset is the Afghans and Americans trapped in Afghanistan.

Whatever agreements the Biden administration reached with the Taliban to allow it to operate and to coordinate on security arrangements were almost certainly financial. Once the United States leaves, the Taliban will be able to extract money for every single Afghan who leaves.

But what the Taliban really want is all that money sitting in the Federal Reserve. 

There have been precedents for terror states toppling legitimate governments and leaving their wealth in the hands of the United States. From the Bolsheviks of the Soviet Union to the Shiite Islamists of Iran, Democrats eventually turned over the money to the red-green terrorists.

There’s little doubt that the Taliban will get their hands on much of the money.

China, Russia, Pakistan, Turkey, and Qatar will likely push to legitimize the Taliban in international forums. The Biden administration will make a token show of resistance. As the international governing bodies topple and humanitarian groups cry about famine, the money pipeline will reopen. And even though there won’t be a single American soldier in Afghanistan, Biden will go on funding the Taliban long after the withdrawal is wholly complete.

The $7 billion will end up being another down payment in the funding of Islamic terrorism.

The day before Kabul fell, Biden nearly allowed a massive bundle of pallets of dollars to be shipped to Afghanistan. He did so knowing that the money was destined for a Taliban regime. 

His cash shipment to the Taliban only fell apart because the Afghan government did.

How long will it be until Biden is shipping money to the Taliban? He may already be doing it.

"Seems to me this would be a good time to send, no strings attached, a check for $200 million to Iran," Biden proposed after September 11. His previous administration illegally shipped $1.7 billion in pallets of cash to Iran. The question isn’t whether Biden will fund the Taliban, but when.

Creating a hostage situation is, as Obama already discovered, a convenient pretext for funding Islamic terrorists. Biden has created a massive hostage crisis in Afghanistan. What better way could there be to force the United States to fund our worst enemies once again? 

Video: ANNI CYRUS, Sharia Survivor’s Message to Canadian MP Maryam Monsef, Who Says Sharia ‘Fascinates’ Her

Rumble — Anni Cyrus calls out the Canadian Islamic operative who named the Taliban her "brothers." Human society should not allow minds like hers that are "fascinated" by a cult that is killing, raping, torturing, innocent people.


UK to double aid to Afghanistan to boost a ‘moderate’ and ‘inclusive’ Taliban

Brighteon: Afghanistan Is Facing Certain Genocide After Troops Are Out, Thanks To An Utterly Incompetent Nincompoop!!!



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The Boris Johnson government is neck-and-neck with the Biden Administration in the race to make the most disastrous decisions regarding Afghanistan. The UK intends to double the aid it gives to Afghanistan. “Raab asserted — despite the billions of dollars of Western-made and funded military equipment falling into the lap of the Taliban in recent days now they control Afghanistan — that British taxpayers’ money continuing to flow to Afghanistan definitely wouldn’t end up with the Taliban.” This is ridiculous. Of course, it will end up in the hands of the Taliban. And what the money used for is based on the UK’s trust in the Taliban: “Foreign secretary and de facto deputy prime minister Dominic Raab spoke of the government’s plan to use ‘leverage’ to ‘moderate’ the Taliban regime now it has rolled up Afghanistan.”

There is nothing “moderate” about the Taliban, and infidels have never achieved any success by “leveraging” with jihadists. Appeasing jihadists will inevitably result in catastrophic losses to the West, emboldening jihadists and facilitating their goal of subversion of the West. The Johnson government thinks so highly of itself that it is either delusional or suicidal. Perhaps both.

Britain will also be letting Afghans into the country without a passport, amid news that jihadis on the UK’s no-fly list “have already tried” to board planes out of Kabul, and one succeeded.

Not only has the Taliban come into a windfall of Western military equipment, but UK taxpayer dollars will be funding their reign of terror for years to come.

“UK Will Leverage for ‘Moderate’ and ‘Inclusive’ Taliban, Will Boost Afghanistan Aid Spending,” by Oliver JJ Lane, Breitbart, August 17, 2021:

The United Kingdom will boost aid spending on Afghanistan, and despite the massive failure to keep billions of dollars’ worth of military equipment out of the hands of the Taliban as they conquered the nation, the government has vowed this money won’t find its way into the hands of the warlords.

British taxpayers will underwrite even more Afghanistan spending in the coming years, the British foreign secretary has said, and the new de facto government of Afghanistan won’t even face the same basic governance and human rights tests the outgoing western-backed regime did in return for this cash.

Touring broadcast studios in London on Tuesday morning, foreign secretary and de facto deputy prime minister Dominic Raab spoke of the government’s plan to use “leverage” to “moderate” the Taliban regime now it has rolled up Afghanistan. Part of that plan, he said, was to increase the UK aid spend by around ten per cent, and to work with international powers to use sanctions.

Speaking to the BBC, Raab said Britain wanted to try and hold the Taliban to the commitments they made in the 2020 Trump-brokered Doha agreement. While he conceded “I can’t say I trust them to follow through on them”, the foreign secretary nevertheless continued: “I think it’s important through direct and indirect means to be able to engage.

“We will hold the Taliban to the commitments they made in the Doha agreement, commitments never to use their territory as a base for terrorism, to have a more inclusive regime going forwards. They made a range of commitments.”

As for how to hold the Taliban to account, Raab namechecked partners like China and India as potential allies on the UN Sanctions Committee and the UN Security Council, but also paradoxically explained the UK would boost funding to Afghanistan while not simultaneously making access to the money for the Afghan people contingent on the Afghan government behaving itself. He continued: “We will reconfigure our aid budget, we will of course not give the security capacity building money that we previously gave to the government to the Taliban… clearly we wouldn’t want to continue that funding.

“The other thing that we will do is we make sure that we increase our aid budget for development and humanitarian purposes, probably by ten per cent is what I have on mind, on last year. We want to try and make sure it won’t go through the Taliban but we want to alleviate humanitarian suffering.”

Underlining his point in a separate interview on Sky News on Tuesday morning, Raab asserted — despite the billions of dollars of Western-made and funded military equipment falling into the lap of the Taliban in recent days now they control Afghanistan — that British taxpayers’ money continuing to flow to Afghanistan definitely wouldn’t end up with the Taliban……



Treason: US officials gave Taliban a list of names of Americans and Afghan allies

Biden's Afghanistan press conference disaster



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Treason is defined as providing aid and comfort to the enemy. Obama committed it when he showered billions upon the Islamic Republic of Iran. And now we have another treasonous administration.

“U.S. officials provided Taliban with names of Americans, Afghan allies to evacuate,” by Lara Seligman, Alexander Ward and Andrew Desiderio, Politico, August 26, 2021:

U.S. officials in Kabul gave the Taliban a list of names of American citizens, green card holders and Afghan allies to grant entry into the militant-controlled outer perimeter of the city’s airport, a choice that’s prompted outrage behind the scenes from lawmakers and military officials.

The move, detailed to POLITICO by three U.S. and congressional officials, was designed to expedite the evacuation of tens of thousands of people from Afghanistan as chaos erupted in Afghanistan’s capital city last week after the Taliban seized control of the country. It also came as the Biden administration has been relying on the Taliban for security outside the airport.

But the decision to provide specific names to the Taliban, which has a history of brutally murdering Afghans who collaborated with the U.S. and other coalition forces during the conflict, has angered lawmakers and military officials.

“Basically, they just put all those Afghans on a kill list,” said one defense official, who like others spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive topic. “It’s just appalling and shocking and makes you feel unclean.”

A spokesperson for U.S. Central Command declined to comment.

The issue came up during a classified briefing on Capitol Hill earlier this week, which turned contentious after top Biden administration officials defended their close coordination with the Taliban. Biden officials contended that it was the best way to keep Americans and Afghans safe and prevent a shooting war between Taliban fighters and the thousands of U.S. troops stationed at the airport.

After the fall of Kabul, in the earliest days of the evacuation, the joint U.S. military and diplomatic coordination team at the airport provided the Taliban with a list of people the U.S. aimed to evacuate. Those names included Afghans who served alongside the U.S. during the 20-year war and sought special immigrant visas to America. U.S. citizens, dual nationals and lawful permanent residents were also listed.

“They had to do that because of the security situation the White House created by allowing the Taliban to control everything outside the airport,” one U.S. official said.

But after thousands of visa applicants arrived at the airport, overwhelming the capacity of the U.S. to process them, the State Department changed course — asking the applicants not to come to the airport and instead requesting they wait until they were cleared for entry. From then on, the list fed to the Taliban didn’t include those Afghan names.

As of Aug. 25, only U.S. passport and green card holders were being accepted as eligible for evacuation, the defense official said.

Still, that U.S. officials handed over a list of Afghan allies and American citizens and residents shows the extent to which they outsourced security of the airport’s outer perimeter to the Taliban. The Taliban has gone door-to-door in search of Afghan interpreters and others who helped U.S. and Western forces.

In written and verbal communications, Gen. Frank McKenzie, commander of U.S. Central Command, and Rear Adm. Peter Vasely, head of U.S. forces on the ground in Afghanistan, have referred to the Taliban as “our Afghan partners,” according to two defense officials.

The Biden administration has been coordinating the evacuation effort and airport security with the Taliban, which is running the checkpoints outside the airport’s outer perimeter. Officials have been “in daily communication” with Taliban commanders about who to let in, Pentagon spokesperson John Kirby told reporters this week.

The news comes just hours after two Islamic State terrorist attacks rocked the area just outside the airport, killing at least four U.S. Marines and wounding dozens more. A number of Afghans were also killed in the bombings….

Taliban Executes Woman for Being Too Poor to Feed Jihadis

Taliban jihadis are taking women and girls captive and forcing them to become wives or sex slaves. Women who aren't taken as wives or sex slaves are expected to prepare meals for jihadis. Recently, a woman who was too poor to cook for the Taliban was beaten to death. David Wood discusses the issue.

For the CNN article quoted in this video ("The Taliban knocked on her door 3 times. The fourth time, they killed her"), click here:

Bloodbath in Kabul: 12 U.S. Troops, Dozens of Afghans Killed in ISIS Suicide Attack

Today, at least 12 U.S. troops and dozens of Afghan civilians were killed in a suicide attack by ISIS-Khorosan in Kabul. Taliban leaders have condemned the attack. Since people are still being evacuated from the Kabul airport, the violence may continue for several days. David Wood discusses the issue.

For the Reuters article quoted in this video ("Dozens of civilians, 12 U.S. troops killed in bloodbath at Kabul airport"), click here:

AFGHANISTAN: BIDEN Delivers Remarks on the Terror Attack on Hamid Karzai International Airport~AS USUAL, PSAKI ATTEMPTS TO SUPPRESS WHAT’S GOING ON

President Biden Delivers Remarks on the Terror Attack on Hamid Karzai International Airport, and the 12 U.S. Service Members and 60 Afghan Victims Killed and Wounded




A feeble and crumbling presidency, that my friends, is the overwhelming assessment of Biden’s speech last night! In this video, we’re going to look at the disastrous attempt by Biden to address the death of over a dozen US military personnel, we’re going to see how pundits both here in the States and across the pond in Britain assessed it, and we’re going to see how more and more Democrats are recognizing that this indeed is a turning point and that both Biden and Kamala are dragging the entire party down with them; you are not going to want to miss this!



Ingraham: Biden said Afghanistan was going well, now we know the truth

Navy SEAL who killed Osama bin Laden talks Kabul attack: 'Worst day in history' | Wake Up America

BREAKING: Ten Marines Are the First American Military to Die in Afghanistan Since February 2020 [UPDATED]




republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

UPDATE 2:05 p.m.: Fox News is reporting that at least ten U.S. servicemembers have been killed today.

Today marks the first time since February 2020 that American military forces were killed in action in Afghanistan.

Two suicide bombings killed at least 40 people today, and wounded another 120, outside of the Hamid Karzai International Airport. One attack occurred at the airport’s Abbey Gate and the other was very near the Baron Hotel, where U.S. and UK military and journalists are staying.

The attacks today killed four U.S. Marines and injured another three, marking the first American military deaths in Afghanistan since February 8, 2020, when two American soldiers were killed in a suicide bombing.

The soldiers killed on February 8, 2020, were Sgt. 1st Class Javier Jaguar Gutierrez, 28, of San Antonio, Texas; and Sgt. 1st Class Antonio Rey Rodriguez, 28, of Las Cruces, New Mexico.

Both soldiers were assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 7th Special Forces Group (Airborne), Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.

The names of the U.S. Marines killed today have not yet been released.

The situation in Afghanistan remains fluid and information is rapidly coming in.

GRAPHIC. Video from Afghanistan shows dozens of people killed and injured in today’s attacks.



1 2 3 4 5 22