Former CIA Director Endorses Hillary Clinton
…Supports Muslims in CIA and characterizes Trump as Putin’s agent
Donald Trump has become a pawn of Russian President Vladimir Putin, presenting “dangers” to American national security that would only grow if he obtains the White House, said a former CIA director who also explained that Muslims do not present dangers to America.
Michael Morell, a CIA officer under Republican President Bush and Democratic President Obama, said Friday in a New York Times op-ed that he is endorsing Hillary Clinton in the presidential race because she is “highly qualified” and Trump is not.
And if you ask why the U.S. has experienced remarkable failure in its war against terror, Morell unintentionally explains it in his praise of a Muslim serving as the director of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center. He said that the Center was directed by this Muslim for nearly a decade, during the presidency of Bush and Obama. Morell said that he cannot name the director of this CIA agency, but he highly praises him as the Muslim “most responsible for keeping America safe since the Sept. 11 attacks.”
If in the War against Terror (and this is Islamic terror) CIA has an Islamic director to fight Islamic terror, what had CIA in the Cold War? A Soviet Russian director in the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center? Sorry, but it is very hard not get a fit of laughter over CIA and its blunders. “Get Smart” is smarter than this.
“Mr. Trump has taken policy positions consistent with Russian, not American, interests — endorsing Russian espionage against the United States, supporting Russia’s annexation of Crimea and giving a green light to a possible Russian invasion of the Baltic States,” Morell writes.
Trump has responded in kind and called Putin a “great leader,” he said.
Trump is “damaging our national security,” he argues, and he’s fraternizing with Putin.
Morell warned in the op-ed that Putin, who has been accused by the Obama administration of killing and jailing journalists and political opponents, is manipulating Trump, who has not cared about what Putin has done in Russia, while Morell has not cared about what Muslims have done in America. Only in the 9/11 terrorist attack, approximately 3,000 Americans were killed. Even so, Muslims occupy high-ranking posts in CIA. What about if Russians had been responsible for the 9/11 attack? Would Morell warmly welcome a Soviet Russian as CIA director? Would he praise Soviet Russians in high-ranking posts in CIA? So why is he praising Muslims in CIA?
In spite of the fact that the greatest threat today is Islam, Trump has been heavily criticized by right-wing and left-wing Americans for wanting friendly relations with Putin and Russians and for not wanting such relations with Muslims.
U.S. nationalistic interests, supported by both right-wing and left-wing Americans, see Islam as an ally and Russia, which is the largest Orthodox Christian nation in the world, as eternal enemy.
It is a suicidal nationalism that embraces Muslims as allies. Allies against whom? Russia.
Right-wing and left-wing Americans are united in an anti-Russia nationalistic fanaticism that is willing to embrace Islam and its adherents.
How exactly, according to Morell, is Hillary “highly qualified” and Trump is not?
Morell’s support of Hillary is in harmony with CIA’s politics. Former CIA agent Osama bin Laden created al-Qaeda in the late 1970s to unite Muslims in Afghanistan against Soviet Union. Why does Morell think other Muslim agents in high-ranking posts in CIA could not imitate bin Laden?
In the WND report “Declassified docs: Hillary aided rise of ISIS,” Jerome R. Corsi said, “More than 100 pages of previously classified Department of Defense and Department of State documents implicate the Obama administration in a cover-up to obscure the role Hillary Clinton and the State Department played in the rise of ISIS.” The report mentions shipments of weapons to ISIS.
Another WND report says that CIA has directly been delivering weapons to Syrian Muslim rebels. Many of these rebels, who have connections to al-Qaeda and ISIS, have been raping, torturing and slaughtering multitudes of Orthodox Christians in Syria.
Certainly, Hillary is “highly qualified” to support Islamists against Christians. In contrast, Trump is highly qualified to support Orthodox Christian Russia against Islamists.
So why are right-wing and left-wing Americans willing to go along with Islam, not Russia?
Why are these Americans, including CIA directors, warmongers against Russia, but not warmongers against Islam? Why are they very comfortable with Islam and its adherents, but not comfortable with an Orthodox Christian Russia?
Because Trump is going along with Russia, not Islam, they are indignant.
So America had a Muslim as director of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center for ten years. Now she has Muslim John Brennan as CIA director. And she is besieged by Islamic terror. And what is the concern of right-wing and left-wing Americans? Russia!
Michael Morell wants a Trump against Russia, not against Islam. And because Trump does not fit his neocon mentality, Morell prefers endorsing Hillary, who has proven her high qualities by helping ISIS and supporting the Obama boycotts and sanctions against Russia over a Russian law banning homosexual propaganda to children and adolescents, even though the official excuse by the Obama administration is that Russia annexed Crimea, which for centuries belonged to Russia.
When he was asked on ABC whether he would support the Crimea annexation, Trump said: “I’m going to take a look at it. But, you know, the people of Crimea, from what I’ve heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were.”
In the time of Soviet Union, it made sense to fight this evil empire. This is why I fervently supported Ronald Reagan in that time. But Soviet Union is 25 years gone and the greatest threat today is Islam and it makes sense now to support an American candidate against Islam. Trump is such man. Trump challenges the nationalistic paradigms that favor Islam against Russia.
Americans who endorse Hillary do not care about Christians being raped, tortured and slaughtered by ISIS and other Islamic groups supported by her. Certainly, the Muslim director of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center did not care. And does current Muslim CIA director care?
Trump’s campaign dismissed Morell’s criticism, linking the ex-CIA director to the Obama administration’s public response defending Hillary after the September 2012 Islamic attacks in Benghazi, Libya. Obama administration officials tried to play down the role of Islamist militants in the attacks.
In his Twitter account, Trump responded to Morell’s op-ed by saying: “Wow, folks! Former CIA chief Michael Morell calls me Putin’s Agent. Endorses Clinton. A TOTAL & COMPLETE DISASTER!!”
Clinton’s campaign subsequently posted a video to her Twitter account drudging up Trump’s past statements about Putin, whom he invited last week to hack her emails.
Alongside the video was a statement that said: “We don’t know why Trump and Putin praise each other so much and share many foreign policies. We’ll let you guess.”
With his vast experience as a former CIA director, Morell is resolute and he promised, “On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure that she is elected as our 45th president.”
He is not alone. If Hillary intends to support Islam, keep the Obama sanctions against Russia and promote abortion and sodomy ideologies, she has already a major ally: The Communist Party USA, which officially nominated Hillary Rodham Clinton as their undisputed candidate for president of the United States.
Pro-Islam nationalism is a disaster.
With information from DailyMail, WND and Reuters.
Portuguese version of this article: Ex-diretor da CIA endossa Hillary Clinton, apoia muçulmanos na CIA e caracteriza Trump como agente de Putin
Top 6 on BarbWire.com
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.