The Controversial Putin-Trump “Summit”
Daily Mail wrote on July 16:
“[Putin] denied meddling in the 2016 presidential election but admitted he had hoped Trump would defeat Democratic rival Hillary Clinton… Trump backed up Putin’s denials, saying he thought Russia had no reason to interfere in the election and contradicting his country’s own FBI which believes Moscow was responsible for hacking during the campaign.
“He said that ‘we’ve all been foolish… we’ve both made mistakes’…
“Putin said Moscow and Washington could jointly conduct criminal investigations into Russian intelligence officials accused of hacking during the campaign. In what Trump described as an ‘incredible offer’ Putin said Washington could use a 1999 agreement to request that Russian authorities interrogate the 12 suspects, adding that U.S. officials could ask to be present in such interrogations.
[As Newsmax reported on July 15, “A U.S. grand jury issued an indictment against the agents on Friday, charging them with hacking into email accounts controlled by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign. The charges stem from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian meddling in the election and any involvement by Trump’s campaign, a probe the president has repeatedly derided as a ‘witch hunt.’…”]“Trump had said in a CBS interview that he had given no thought to asking Putin to extradite the dozen Russian military intelligence officers… Extradition is unlikely as the U.S. does not have an extradition treaty with Moscow and can’t force the Russians to hand over citizens. Russia’s constitution also prohibits turning over citizens to foreign governments…
“… at least in his public remarks at the outset, [Trump] mentioned none of the issues that have lately brought US-Russian relations to the lowest point since the Cold War: Moscow’s annexation of territory from Ukraine, its support for Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, as well as Western accusations that it poisoned a spy in England…”
Many additional important issues were not addressed during the news conference, including Russia’s abominable persecution of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Deutsche Welle wrote on July 16:
“… Putin spoke frankly on the topic of Crimea, saying that the US delegation had expressed its view that the invasion was illegal. The Russian president disagreed with Trump on the issue and concluded that ‘the Crimea question is closed for Russia…’”
Trump in League with Putin?
The Week wrote on July 16:
“… it is simply beyond question that Trump is really deferential to the Russian president… This is a terrible development for many reasons. First and most importantly is that it’s bad for the hugely powerful American executive branch to be even partially in league with a man like Putin…”
Trump Strongly Criticized by Republicans
The Huffington Post wrote on July 16:
“President Donald Trump’s performance during a press conference after a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki on Monday left critics of all stripes howling… Trump’s comments drew fierce criticism from Republicans and Democrats alike…
“On Fox News Business, several guests reacted by saying that Putin outmaneuvered Trump during the summit. On the channel, the network’s Neil Cavuto termed Trump’s performance ‘disgusting.’ George W. Bush’s press secretary Ari Fleischer… said he can understand why some Democrats believe Putin must have compromising information on Trump… Former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, a Republican, said Trump ‘failed America today’…
“Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell… said succinctly: ‘The Russians are not our friends. I’ve said that repeatedly, I say it again today. And I have complete confidence in our intelligence community and the findings that they have announced.’…”
The Guardian wrote on July 16:
“House speaker Paul Ryan, a Republican, said: ‘… There is no question that Russia interfered in our election and continues attempts to undermine democracy here and around the world. That is not just the finding of the American intelligence community but also the House Committee on Intelligence. The president must appreciate that Russia is not our ally. There is no moral equivalence between the United States and Russia, which remains hostile to our most basic values and ideals. The United States must be focused on holding Russia accountable and putting an end to its vile attacks on democracy.’
Deutsche Welle added on July 16:
“Top Republican Senator John McCain called Trump’s summit in Helsinki a ‘tragic mistake,’ lamenting that the US president was ‘unable’ to stand up to Putin. ‘Coming close on the heels of President Trump’s bombastic and erratic conduct towards our closest friends and allies in Brussels and Britain, today’s press conference marks a recent low point in the history of the American Presidency,’ McCain’s statement read. ‘No prior president has ever abased himself more abjectly before a tyrant,’ McCain said…”
Newt Gingrich and Bret Baier Strongly Criticize Trump
Newsmax wrote on July 16:
“President Donald Trump choosing not to endorse the U.S. intelligence community’s assessment Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election is ‘the most serious mistake of his presidency,’ former House Speaker Newt Gingrich tweeted Monday: ‘President Trump must clarify his statements in Helsinki on our intelligence system and Putin… [It] must be corrected—-immediately.’”
Fox News (Bret Baier) wrote on July 16:
“President Trump left many deeply disappointed in his approach to his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin… For a sitting U.S. president to say publicly that he believes a foreign leader over his own intelligence team is shocking and admonishable. At a time when our democracy faces grave threats, it is deeply troubling that the president would side with the very country who attacked us… Crucially, there were no concessions from Russia on any of the issues that needed to be addressed…
“Despite each nation backing different sides in the Syrian conflict, Trump suggested he and Putin would begin working in conjunction to bring humanitarian aid to the people of Syria, regardless of the fact that the need for humanitarian aid largely stems from Putin’s unabashed support for Syrian dictator Bashar al Assad. Additionally, Trump also failed to address the concerns of our NATO allies Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania in the Baltics regarding the territorial threats they persistently face. Trump, throughout the entire press conference, failed to condemn or even acknowledge the illegality of Putin’s actions in Crimea and Ukraine…”
When Trump supporter Newt Gingrich and moderators on Fox News disapprove of Mr. Trump’s conduct, then this is worthwhile contemplating.
BBC News wrote on July 16:
“Washington’s Nato allies and many seasoned observers on Capitol Hill must have been watching in horror…”
While many Russian papers approved the summit, most German papers overwhelmingly condemned Mr. Trump’s behavior.
Trump’s Attempted “Damage Control”
Huffington Post wrote on July 17:
“President Donald Trump on Tuesday responded to the widespread condemnation of his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, claiming that he believes the conclusion of U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. His words came a day after he sided with Putin in an extraordinary press conference. ‘I accept our intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election took place,’ he said Tuesday, appearing to read from prepared remarks, before suggesting that it ‘could be other people also. A lot of people out there.’
“During Monday’s press conference with Putin, he refused to condemn Russia’s interference, saying that he accepted the Russian president’s denial and took Putin’s word over the conclusion of U.S. intelligence agencies, which he has continually attacked during his presidency. ‘President Putin just said it’s not Russia,’ Trump said. ‘I don’t see any reason why it would be.’
“But on Tuesday, Trump claimed that he misspoke, explaining that he meant to say that he saw no reason why it would not be Russia. ‘I would like to clarify, in a key sentence in my remarks, I said the word “would” instead of “wouldn’t.” The sentence should have been: “I don’t see any reason why it wouldn’t be Russia,”’ he said.”
Fox News added:
“It’s unclear whether the clarification will calm the backlash in Washington, as Trump also said following his meeting with Putin that the Russian leader gave a ‘strong and powerful’ denial.”
Whether this “clarification” will satisfy most of the Republican critics will indeed have to be seen. After all, here is the exact quote: “They (the US intelligent agencies) said they think it’s Russia. President Putin just said it’s not Russia. I will say this: I don’t see any reason why it would be. I have great confidence in my intelligence people but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today.” (Compare The Daily Mail, July 17.)
No One Is Buying
nzherald.co.nz wrote on July 18:
“In a shocking revelation, no one is buying Donald Trump’s latest backflip… Trump said it was ‘sort of a double negative,’ adding, ‘I think that probably clarifies things pretty good by itself.’ That didn’t go down too well online.”
Deutsche Welle wrote on July 18:
“Maas criticized the US president once again on Wednesday… Asked to assess Trump’s reversal of remarks, Maas was quoted as saying: ‘This is apparently an attempt at damage limitation. It doesn’t appear particularly convincing.’
“Germany’s foreign minister went on to say he regretted that Trump didn’t backtrack on his most recent criticisms of the European Union — which he described as a foe — shortly before setting off for Helsinki…”
Another Viewpoint by Pat Buchanan
On July 17, Newsmax published the following commentary by Pat Buchanan who has been an adviser to three presidents and a two-time candidate for the Republican presidential nomination:
“Beginning his joint press conference with Vladimir Putin, President Trump declared that U.S. relations with Russia have ‘never been worse.’ He then added pointedly, that just changed ‘about four hours ago.’ It certainly did. With his remarks in Helsinki and at the NATO summit in Brussels, Trump has signaled a historic shift in U.S. foreign policy that may determine the future of this nation…
“He has rejected the fundamental premises of American foreign policy since the end of the Cold War and blamed our wretched relations with Russia, not on Vladimir Putin, but squarely on the U.S. establishment. Looking back over the week, from Brussels to Britain to Helsinki, Trump’s message has been clear, consistent and startling.
“NATO is obsolete. European allies have freeloaded off U.S. defense while rolling up huge trade surpluses at our expense. Those days are over. Europeans are going to stop stealing our markets and start paying for their own defense… We are not going to let Putin’s annexation of Crimea or aid to pro-Russian rebels in Ukraine prevent us from working on a rapprochement and a partnership with him, Trump is saying…
“America is coming home from foreign wars and will be shedding foreign commitments…
“When Trump spoke of the ‘foolishness and stupidity’ of the U.S. foreign policy establishment that contributed to this era of animosity in U.S.-Russia relations, what might he have had in mind?
“Was it the U.S. provocatively moving NATO into Russia’s front yard after the collapse of the USSR? Was it the U.S. invasion of Iraq to strip Saddam Hussein of weapons of mass destruction he did not have that plunged us into endless wars of the Middle East? Was it U.S. support of Syrian rebels determined to oust Bashar Assad, leading to ISIS intervention and a seven-year civil war with half a million dead, a war which Putin eventually entered to save his Syrian ally?
“Was it George W. Bush’s abrogation of Richard Nixon’s ABM treaty and drive for a missile defense that caused Putin to break out of the Reagan INF treaty and start deploying cruise missiles to counter it? Was it U.S. complicity in the Kiev coup that ousted the elected pro-Russian regime that caused Putin to seize Crimea to hold onto Russia’s Black Sea naval base at Sevastopol?… Russia annexed Crimea bloodlessly. But did not the U.S. bomb Serbia for 78 days to force Belgrade to surrender her cradle province of Kosovo? How was that more moral than what Putin did in Crimea?”
May: “My Deal [Soft Brexit] Is the Only Brexit Deal”
Theresa May Prime wrote the following on July 14 for The Mail On Sunday:
“Our Brexit deal for Britain seizes the moment to deliver the democratic decision of the British people and secure a bright new future for our country outside the European Union… If we don’t [accept it], we risk ending up with no Brexit at all. This is a time to be practical and pragmatic – backing our plan to get Britain out of the European Union on March 29 next year and delivering for the British people…
“… we can get a good deal and that is what is best for Britain. But we should also prepare for no deal… Our Brexit deal is… a complete plan with a set of outcomes that are non-negotiable.
“People voted to end free movement. So free movement will end. People voted to end the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in our country; and we are going to deliver that too. We will leave the Single Market and customs union, and get out of the Common Agricultural Policy and the Common Fisheries Policy. We will have that independent trade policy and a new UK-EU free trade area with a common rulebook for industrial goods and agricultural products. And we will maintain close co-operation with the EU on security to keep our people safe while ensuring we have our own independent foreign and trade policy. None of these things is up for debate…”
May Compromises on Brexit Deal
Deutsche Welle reported on July 16:
“British Prime Minister Theresa May gave in to demands from her party’s hardliners on Monday, accepting four amendments that would limit the government’s ability to set up customs arrangements with the European Union after Britain leaves the bloc in March 2019… Monday’s vote once again exposed deep divisions within the Conservative Party over Brexit…”
May’s Soft Brexit Gives Germany What It Wants
Handelsblatt Global wrote on July 13:
“Theresa May’s long-awaited White Paper aims to keep manufacturing in Britain, and is willing to surrender London’s financial access to the EU in return… Berlin would surely prefer that Britain simply stay in the European Union. But as alternatives go, London’s latest proposal for the post-Brexit relationship suits Germany just fine…
“The paper aims to jump start the process of reaching an ‘association agreement’ with the European Union to govern relations after Brexit. With Britain formally leaving the European Union in March 2019, time for a deal between London and Brussels is quickly running out…
“That deal would effectively keep Britain’s rules and regulations aligned with those of the European Union, allowing trade in goods to flow freely and the Irish border with Northern Ireland to remain open. It’s almost like still being in the EU’s single market and customs union, which is what has Brexit supporters so outraged…”
It does not appear that this will be the deal to which all sides agree.
“EU Urges No-Deal Brexit Preparation”
The EUObserver wrote on July 19:
“Four million UK and EU citizens stuck in a legal limbo, border checks re-installed, transportation severely disrupted, trade and supply chains breaking down… This gloomy scenario would kick in the day after Brexit, if no divorce deal is agreed by the EU and the UK, the EU Commission warned on Thursday…
“The commission urged citizens, businesses and member states to take action on preparing for 30 March 2019 now, highlighting the rising concerns of a no-deal exit in European capitals…”
Trump Wants to Run Again; Reveals Details of Conversation with the Queen on Brexit
Newsmax republished the following article by Reuters on July 14:
“President Donald Trump said in an interview that he intends to run for re-election in the 2020 election, the Mail on Sunday newspaper reported. When asked by Piers Morgan in an interview given on Friday in Britain whether he was going to run, Trump said: ‘Well I fully intend to. It seems like everybody wants me to,’ the newspaper said. Trump said he did not see any Democrat who could beat him…
“In the interview with Morgan, Trump took the unusual step of disclosing details about his conversation with British Queen Elizabeth. When asked if he had discussed Brexit with the monarch, Trump said: ‘I did. She said it’s a very – and she’s right – it’s a very complex problem, I think nobody had any idea how complex that was going to be… Everyone thought it was going to be “Oh it’s simple, we join or don’t join, or let’s see what happens.”’…
“When asked about North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, Trump said: ‘… Sure he is, he’s ruthless, but so are others.’”
As we have announced for a long time, in case of elections in 2020, Donald Trump will be re-elected.
Charles and William Refused to Meet with Trump
The Hill wrote on July 15:
“Prince Charles and Prince William refused to meet with President Trump during his visit to the United Kingdom, according to London newspaper The Sunday Times… It’s a very, very unusual thing for the queen to be there on her own. Usually she is accompanied by somebody. Prince Charles has been substituting for Philip a lot recently.’ Prince Philip, who, at 97, has officially retired from royal duties, ‘goes to what he wants to go to,’ the source said, adding that ‘if he had wanted to be there he could have been.’…
“Charles reportedly attended a board meeting for his company and an event with Gloucestershire police, while William participated in a charity polo match and Prince Harry attended other private engagements, according to the Times.”
NATO Dying or Dead?
Euractiv wrote on July 13:
“‘There is no longer confidence in NATO,’ a diplomat told EURACTIV. Fewer and fewer European countries trust that the US would defend them if they were invaded by Russia. Under Trump, NATO will soon be as dead as the proverbial dodo. The EU needs to overcome its internal divisions fast and make sure NATO is replaced by a real European defence alliance.”
And that is exactly what will happen.
The Washington Post wrote on July 12:
“Trump has been calling NATO a waste of money for decades. ‘America has no vital interest’ in Europe, he wrote in 2000: ‘Their conflicts are not worth American lives. Pulling back from Europe would save this country millions of dollars annually. The cost of stationing NATO troops in Europe is enormous. And these are clearly funds that can be put to better use.’ During his election campaign, he refused to reaffirm any commitment to NATO’s Article 5 security guarantee. During his first NATO summit last year, he again refused to reaffirm Article 5, though an administration official had promised he would…”
NATO–Defending Others?
The Huffington Post wrote on July 18:
“President Donald Trump on Tuesday once again threw cold water on NATO… Trump expressed skepticism over the decades-old defense pact, which obligates member countries to defend any other member country that comes under attack, during an interview with Fox News’ Tucker Carlson.
“When Carlson asked why the U.S. should protect a country like Montenegro, which joined NATO last year, Trump said he has asked himself the same question. ‘Montenegro is a tiny country with very strong people,’ Trump said. ‘They’re very aggressive people, and they may get aggressive, and congratulations, you’re in World War III. But that’s the way it was set up.’”
NATO Hits Back at Trump’s Montenegro World War III Remarks
Deutsche Welle wrote on July 18:
“NATO officials on Wednesday scrambled to reassert the alliance’s collective defense clause— commonly referred to as Article 5 — after US President Donald Trump appeared to suggest NATO’s newest member Montenegro could instigate World War III. A NATO official told Germany’s DPA news agency that Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty was ‘unconditional and iron-clad,’ reaffirming that ‘an attack on one is an attack on all.’…
“According to reports in Montenegro, Russia… attempted to organize a coup in a bid to derail Montenegrin accession. Fourteen people are on trial for attempting to assassinate then-Prime Minister Milo Djukanovicduring the 2016 election…”
Buchanan Coming to Trump’s Defense
On July 13, Newsmax published the following commentary by Patrick Buchanan:
“Of President Donald Trump’s explosion at Angela Merkel’s Germany during the NATO summit, it needs to be said: It is long past time we raised our voices. America pays more for NATO, an alliance created 69 years ago to defend Europe, than do the Europeans. And as Europe free-rides off our defense effort, the EU runs trade surpluses at our expense that exceed $100 billion a year. To Trump, and not only to him, we are being used, gouged, by rich nations we defend, while they skimp on their own defense.
“At Brussels, Trump had a new beef with the Germans, though similar problems date back to the Reagan era. Now we see the Germans, Trump raged, whom we are protecting from Russia, collaborating with Russia and deepening their dependence on Russian natural gas by jointly building the Nord Stream 2 pipeline under the Baltic Sea. When completed, this pipeline will leave Germany and Europe even more deeply reliant on Russia for their energy needs…
“Germany spends 1.2 percent of its gross domestic product on defense, while the U.S. spends 3.5 percent. Why? Why — nearly three decades after the end of the Cold War, the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, the crackup of the Soviet Union and the overthrow of the Communist dictatorship in Moscow — are we still defending European nations that collectively have 10 times the GDP of Vladimir Putin’s Russia?… Trump is not bluffing. He is visibly losing patience.
“… it could be the beginning of the end for NATO. And not only NATO. South Korea, with an economy 40 times that of North Korea, spends 2.6 percent of its GDP on defense, while, by one estimate, North Korea spends 22 percent, the highest share on earth. Japan, with the world’s third-largest economy, spends an even smaller share of its GDP on defense than Germany, 0.9 percent. Thus, though Seoul and Tokyo are far more menaced by a nuclear-armed North Korea and a rising China, like the Europeans, both continue to rely upon us as they continue to run large trade surpluses with us.
“… We are giving the world a lesson in how great powers decline. America’s situation is unsustainable economically and politically, and it’s transparently intolerable to Trump…”
And so, the final break between America and Europe will occur very soon.
EU Bad for USA and America’s Foe?
The Sun wrote on July 15:
“Theresa May has finally revealed the explosive Brexit advice Donald Trump gave to her… The Prime Minister said the US President told her not to even enter into a negotiation with Brussels at all, and just to start a legal war instead. She made the startling revelation while speaking to the BBC this morning, but said she did not take Mr Trump’s ‘brutal’ suggestion on board.”
The Sun wrote on July 13:
“[Mr. Trump] suggested Mrs May’s plans for a soft Brexit was a hostile move towards the US because ‘the European Union is very bad to the United States on trade’…”
CBS News reported on July 15:
“In an interview with ‘CBS Evening News’ anchor Jeff Glor in Scotland on Saturday, President Trump named the European Union… when asked to identify his ‘biggest foe globally right now.’ ‘Well, I think we have a lot of foes. I think the European Union is a foe, what they do to us in trade. Now, you wouldn’t think of the European Union, but they’re a foe. Russia is [a] foe in certain respects. China is a foe economically, certainly they are a foe…
“I respect the leaders of those countries. But, in a trade sense, they’ve really taken advantage of us and many of those countries are in NATO and they weren’t paying their bills… EU is very difficult… Maybe the thing that is most difficult — don’t forget both my parents were born in EU sectors okay? I mean my mother was Scotland, my father was Germany. And — you know I love those countries. I respect the leaders of those countries. But — in a trade sense, they’ve really taken advantage of us and many of those countries are in NATO and they weren’t paying their bills and, you know, as an example a big problem with Germany…”
The EUObserver wrote on July 16:
“Trump… designated the EU as an enemy while talking about a trade war with Europe… To add insult to injury, the state department said that it would impose sanctions on EU firms doing business with Iran, the NBC network also reported… The refusal to exempt EU firms comes despite the fact Russia is to invest $50bn in Iran’s energy sector. Russia also sold Iran high-tech anti-aircraft systems, with no Trump objections. That US messaging turned the world upside down for the European Union.”
Wars begin with words. To call an ally one’s foe is a further step. So are Germany’s responses. Note the next article.
Germany on the Attack Against Trump
The Local wrote on July 13:
“Berlin was still reeling on Friday from US President Donald Trump’s attacks on the NATO military alliance, with German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas warning that the US President was willfully damaging western security. ‘Europe can’t accept that which has been built up over many decades being damaged willfully out of a desire to provoke,’ Minister Maas wrote in a Tweet on Friday…
“Meanwhile, Minister Maas’ predecessor had stronger words for the US President. Former German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said Europe should stand up to Trump, warning that the US President is pushing for ‘regime change’ in Germany… ‘We must no longer have any illusions,’ added the Social Democrat (SPD) politician. ‘Donald Trump only understands strength. So we have to show him that we are strong. If he demands billions back from us for the USA’s military spending, then we should demand billions back from him for the refugees produced by failed US military interventions, for example, in Iraq.’”
Bloomberg wrote on July 16:
“Germany’s foreign minister urged the European Union to ‘readjust’ its relationship with the U.S. and said the bloc can no longer fully rely on the White House after President Donald Trump identified America’s long-term ally as a ‘foe.’… ‘If the American president identifies the European Union as a “foe,” this unfortunately shows once more how wide the Atlantic has become in political terms since Donald Trump has been in office,’ German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas told the Funke newspaper group in an interview.
“The comments reflect those of Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has reinforced her statement from May 2017 that Europe’s full reliance on relations with the U.S. since World War II is ‘to some extent over’ — and that the bloc must take its destiny more into its own hands…
“Maas, a member of Germany’s Social Democrats, the junior partner in Merkel’s ruling coalition, said that nations must stand together ‘in a self-confident and sovereign Europe.’ EU member states mustn’t allow themselves to be divided, ‘no matter how harsh the verbal attacks and how absurd the tweets may be.’”
Due to current developments, Europe feels that it must unite militarily… and it will.
Europeans Seeking Their Own Interest
Handelsblatt Global wrote on July 17:
“We saw a new world order loom like an iceberg at the meeting of Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. The Russian leader emerged victorious at a press conference which was historic for all the wrong reasons…
“Trump also ignored Europe… Mystifyingly, Trump elevated Russia, an enemy, to an equal, despite the major disparity in their economies and powers. That insistent support will have done lasting damage to trans-Atlantic relations… eastern European countries close to Russia… have to wonder whether they [can] count on support from Washington in the future…
“Meanwhile European leaders are busy defending their countries’ interests. Today they sign JEFTA, the trade pact between the EU and Japan… It’s the biggest deal negotiated by the bloc so far and creates the world’s largest open area for trade.
“And in Beijing, Jean-Claude Juncker and Donald Tusk found a new rapport as both blocs fend off US tariff disputes. The two sides said they are seeking to uphold a ‘free trade and multilateral order.’ That embrace is all the more surprising given that, at last year’s summit, the EU and China had so little in common they didn’t even issue a joint statement. How much has changed in a year.”
Soon, America will become totally irrelevant on the world scene in just about every respect.
Trump Defends Google Against EU
The Telegraph reported on July 19:
“Donald Trump hinted that he may block trade routes with Europe after its lawmakers hit Google with a record £3.9bn fine over its smartphone business.
“The US president took to Twitter to lash out at the European Union, which handed the penalty to the search giant over its Android operating system. ‘I told you so! The European Union just slapped a Five Billion Dollar fine on one of our great companies, Google. They truly have taken advantage of the US, but not for long!,’ he wrote on the social network.”
The Week published an article on July 19, with the headline: “Europe’s Idiotic War on Google.”
Most Germans Fear Trump More than Putin, but Don’t Trust Either…
Deutsche Welle wrote on July 15:
“… two-thirds of Germans think that the US president is more dangerous than his Russian counterpart… When asked which world leader was the greater threat to world security, 64 percent of respondents chose US President Donald Trump over his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin… And the German antipathy for Trump doesn’t end there: 56 percent of respondents thought that Putin was more competent than Trump, with only 5 percent preferring the latter on that score. Thirty-six percent of Germans find Putin more likable than Trump, while 6 percent say the opposite — although most respondents refused to indicate a preference on that question.
“And, perhaps most surprisingly, 44 percent said Putin was more powerful than Trump, compared with only 29 percent who thought the US president has more power… German… conservative voters were slightly more likely (66 percent) to class Trump as the bigger threat than people overall in the poll…
“‘The world’s two most powerful men have one thing in common,’ Bild’s lead story on Sunday reads. ‘They want to weaken Europe.’ That’s a widespread view around Germany, where many people fear that Trump’s occasional hostility to NATO, for instance, plays into Putin’s strategic aim of dividing the West and increasing Russia’s influence in the world…
“The distrust of Trump’s motivations and leadership capabilities is apparent in how Germans see the United States as a whole. In a YouGov poll published earlier in July, Germans were asked whether they had a generally positive or negative view of the United States. Fifty-nine percent of respondents said they viewed the US negatively, compared with only 29 percent who chose positively…”
Deutsche Welle wrote on July 13:
“Germans are under no doubts that Putin, for his part, is pursuing… a long-term aggressive, anti-European policy… and is trying to drive a wedge between the US and its European allies… [Moscow] has an interest in America withdrawing from Europe…”
The Bible indicates that this is exactly what America will do.
FBI Trustworthy?
CBN wrote on July 12:
“Thursday’s House Judiciary Committee hearing featuring testimony from embattled FBI agent Peter Strzok erupted into absolute chaos shortly after opening statements. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) was the first to question the agent, asking Strzok how many people had been interviewed in the Russia probe from July 31-Aug. 8. Strzok declined to answer, saying that FBI counsel instructed him not to answer questions about an ongoing investigation. This set off pandemonium, as lawmakers exchanged heated barbs and bickered over hearing rules…
“Strzok’s anti-Trump text messages took center stage and caused congressional leaders to question Strzok on his partisan bias over the course of the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election and Hillary Clinton’s use of her email server. Strzok exchanged troubling text messages with FBI attorney, Lisa Page. Page and Strzok both worked on the FBI investigation into Clinton’s emails and, later, on special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation…
“Strzok said that while the texts reflected his personal beliefs at the time, they did not ‘ever enter into the realm of any action I took.’ Strzok noted that there are numerous procedures and guidelines in place at the FBI to stop such instances of agents who are acting in any way other than an official capacity…
“Strzok says a text message suggesting that he would stop then-candidate Trump from being president was written late at night, and ‘in no way suggested that I or the FBI would take any action’ to intervene in Trump’s election…”
However, there can be no doubt that such bias may very well influence decisions being made in the course of official business.
China’s Challenge to US Naval Supremacy
The Sydney Morning Herald wrote on July 14:
“China’s biggest challenge to the supremacy of the US Navy will come within the year, a well regarded Australian strategic analyst predicted in Washington this week. It will come in the form of the announcement that China’s armed forces will hold exercises in the international waters of the South China Sea and that, to protect public safety, it will close the air and sea space in the area, he said. Even though this would be presented as a temporary measure – a few days, perhaps a week – it would be the end of freedom of navigation and overflight if it went unchallenged.
“Seventy years of American dominance would be over. The US Navy effectively would have been pushed back from China’s coastline by more than 1000 kilometres, right out to the limit of China’s nine-dash line marking its disputed claim to the South China Sea. Beijing would have asserted de facto control of the world’s most valuable commercial artery and 3.6 million square kilometres of ocean. The other six countries with claims to parts of the South China Sea would have been sidelined. Other countries would be permitted to use it only with China’s consent. ‘The question is, what are we going to do about it?’ posed the director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Peter Jennings, a former head of strategy for the Defence Department…
“The question was an uncomfortable one for many in the audience, which included senior officials, politicians and others from both countries… Australian and American representatives… agreed that the Jennings scenario was plausible; some said it was likely. None thought it implausible.
“What would Donald Trump do? Would Trump’s America be steadfast in a crisis? Or would the administration be too distracted, too confused, or too compromised by its other negotiations with China to stand its ground?… While the US has dithered, China’s President Xi Jinping has been clear and purposeful. ‘Like clockwork,’ says Jennings, ‘every three to four months they take another step to consolidate their gains in the South China Sea’, where Beijing has constructed man-made islands in contested waters and equipped them with runways, reinforced hangars, and batteries of anti-ship and anti-air missiles. A Chinese heavy bomber recently touched down on one of the islands for the first time…
“If China presses its case and the US fails to act, does the Royal Australian Navy have the option of trying to crash through any new Chinese exclusion zone? Australian and American experts were unanimous on this, best summed up by a former US official: ‘Try that without us, you’re screwed.’… Australia needs to be more active, more robust and more assertive than it has ever been. It has the advantage that its main political parties are so far united in confronting the dawning reality of frontline responsibility. If Jennings is right, there’s no time to waste.”
Watch China’s Desire of World Dominion
Project-Syndicate wrote on July 13:
“The contrast between the disarray in the West, on open display at the NATO summit and at last month’s G7 meeting in Canada, and China’s mounting international self-confidence is growing clearer by the day…
“Since 2014, China has expanded and consolidated its military position in the South China Sea. It took the idea of the New Silk Road and turned it into a multi-trillion-dollar trade, investment, infrastructure, and wider geopolitical/geo-economic initiative, engaging 73 different countries across much of Eurasia, Africa and beyond. And China signed up most of the developed world to the first large-scale non-Bretton Woods multilateral development bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.
“China has also launched diplomatic initiatives beyond its immediate sphere of strategic interest in East Asia, as well as actively participating in initiatives such as the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. It has developed naval bases in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Djibouti, and participates in naval exercises with Russia as far away as the Mediterranean and the Baltic…”
Israel Strikes Hamas During Gaza Ceasefire
The Times of Israel, July 15:
“The strike came hours after a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hamas went into effect, following the most severe exchange of fire between Israel and Hamas since the 2014 war. Over the weekend, Palestinian terrorists fired some 200 rockets and missiles at Israeli communities near the Gaza border…
“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday reiterated that Israel would not tolerate the continued kite and balloon arson attacks that have burned thousands of dunams of forests and agricultural land adjacent to the Gaza border in recent months, including fresh fires started on Sunday… Netanyahu denied reports that said the ceasefire brokered by Egypt did not include the cessation of the arson attacks… Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman also warned Hamas they would ‘pay a heavy price’ if it did not cease hostilities…
“Domestic pressure on the military to halt the burning flying objects has intensified, leading to Israel carrying out warning airstrikes and increasing the possibility that violence could escalate.”
JTA wrote on July 16:
“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Sderot, where at least two rockets from Gaza caused serious damage and injured a family of four… [He said:] ‘There is an exchange of blows here. It is not over in one go… and I cannot comfort those who have taken the most difficult losses. This is very hard to take, but we know that we are in a prolonged Zionist struggle.’
“In a warning to the terrorist organization that runs Gaza, Netanyahu said: ‘It is important that Hamas understand that it faces an iron wall and this wall is comprised, first of all, of a determined government, of strong local leadership and Zionist settlement, and that we will continue to strengthen it… I do not want to tell anybody that it is over.’”
New Legislation: Israel the Nation-State of the Jewish People
JTA wrote on July 19:
“The Knesset passed controversial legislation making Israel the ‘nation-state of the Jewish people’ … It passed early Thursday morning after hours of contentious debate by a vote of 62-55, with two abstentions.
“Much of the bill, sponsored by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party, deals with obvious signs that Israel is a Jewish state, such as affirming the symbols on the flag and shield, setting the Hebrew calendar as the country’s official calendar, recognizing Jewish holidays and days of remembrance, the national anthem and naming Jerusalem as the capital.
“Other parts of the law, however, have raised the hackles of segments of Israeli society and the Jewish Diaspora. These include clauses relegating Arabic to a ‘special’ status instead of an official language [declaring Hebrew as Israel’s only official language], promoting the establishment of Jewish communities throughout Israel and addressing the state’s relationship with Diaspora Jewry.
“Netanyahu called the passing of the law ‘a defining moment… This is our state — the Jewish state’…
“The chairman of the Arab Joint List party, Ayman Odeh, said in a statement that Israel has ‘declared it does not want us here,’ meaning its Arab citizens, and that ‘we will always be second-class citizens.’”
Canada’s Troubling Journey Towards Ungodliness
LifeSitenews.com wrote on July 13:
“Last month the Supreme Court of Canada decided in the Trinity Western University case that the right to freedom of religion, entrenched in Section 2 of the Charter, can be infringed by the rights of the LGBTQ community… This was the most recent example of a troubling situation that has developed since the Charter came into effect in 1982.
“The Court in the Trinity case concluded that the Law Societies of British Columbia and Ontario had the right to decide on the admission policies of a private religious university in British Columbia that wanted to obtain accreditation for a law school. The law societies objected because of the university’s Covenant that, among other matters, upheld that sexual relationships be only within marriage between a man and woman. The Court concluded that the law societies were permitted to raise objections based on vague and undefined concepts of ‘public interest’ and Charter ‘values’.
“This decision confirms that judges are making decisions… based on their own policy preferences. Examples of other such decisions include the legalizing of prostitution; the striking down of the abortion law; the prohibitions against physician-assisted suicide; the right to strike granted to essential services such as firemen, policemen, ambulance workers (which puts public safety at risk); legalization of drug injection sites; the redefinition, and narrowing of the interpretation of pornography; and that sex clubs for couples and single individuals meeting each other for group sex are not illegal nor indecent. There have been many other decisions as well that have profoundly changed Canadian society.
“Whether one agrees with any or all of these decisions is not the point. There is a much deeper and more profound aspect to these decisions. It is whether nine appointed, unaccountable judges should be making such decisions isolated from the public – the latter having no input into the formation of such public policy decisions… There is no longer any doubt that the Supreme Court of Canada decisions are not impartial and objective, but are based not on law or precedent, but rather on the personal policy preferences of the judges.”
Shroud of Turin NOT Burial Cloth of Jesus
Express wrote on July 16:
“For centuries, Christians had believed the Shroud of Turin was used to wrap Jesus Christ’s deceased body in after he had died. Many even thought you could still see the imprint of his face. However, new evidence has emerged which would suggest the Shroud of Turin is fraudulent.
“Forensic evidence revealed the blood stains on the cloth came from a vertical position as if someone were standing over it. This would mean the stains are not consistent with someone who had just been crucified.
“John Moores University, Liverpool, forensic expert Matteo Borrini and his team had been hoping to see if the blood stains were consistent with someone who had been executed on a T-shaped or Y-shaped cross. Instead, the research found the blood splatter came from neither.
“The study says: ‘The two short rivulets on the back of the left hand of the Shroud are only consistent with a standing subject with arms at a ca 45 degree angle… The BPA of blood visible on the frontal side of the chest (the lance wound) shows that the Shroud represents the bleeding in a realistic manner for a standing position while the stains at the back — of a supposed post-mortem bleeding from the same wound for a supine corpse — are totally unrealistic.’
“… Previous research also suggests the Turin Shroud is a fake. If it were the real burial cloth of Jesus, it would date back to around 2,000 years ago. However, carbon dating shows that the Turin Shroud also only goes back to the Middle Ages…”
Please read chapter 8 of our free booklet, “Do you know the Jesus of the Bible?”
Acknowledgement and Disclaimer
These Current Events are compiled and commented on by Norbert Link. We gratefully acknowledge the many contributions of news articles from our readership. The publication of articles in this section is not to be viewed as an endorsement or approval as to contents or accuracy of the selected articles, but they are published for the purpose of pointing at worldwide developments in the light of biblical end-time prophecy and godly instruction. Our own comments are provided in italics.
