NOTHING TO SEE HERE FOLKS! MOVE ALONG.



People from Maren Ueland’s hometown walk in a torch-lit march to honor Maren Ueland from Norway and Louisa Vesterager Jespersen from Denmark © Jan Kare Ness / NTB Scanpix / via Reuters
Louisa Vesterager Jespersen, 24, from Denmark, and Maren Ueland, 28, from Norway were killed while backpacking in Morocco’s High Atlas mountains. While both girls were stabbed multiple times, one of them was also beheaded on camera, shown in a video that has spread like wildfire around social media.
Previously recorded footage, which was authenticated by investigators, also shows the suspects in the brutal double murder pledging allegiance to the Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, further confirming that the murders were an act of terrorism.

Memorial to the slain backpackers at Danish embassy © Reuters / Youssef Boudlal
On Christmas Eve, the national public broadcaster in Sweden aired a report about the barbaric killings, but chose not to focus on the actual details of the crime or the now-established links to Islamic terrorism. The SVT report made no mention of the fact that one of the young women was beheaded, said nothing about the ISIS link and simply referred to “knife damage” on the woman’s neck.
Bizarrely, the report focused almost entirely on how it is a punishable offence to share the disturbing video. Written reports on SVT’s website did mention the fact that the murders have been linked to Islamic terrorism, but that fact was nowhere to be found in its strange Christmas Eve report.
The odd angle taken by SVT prompted suggestions from viewers that the broadcaster seemed to be more worried about the possibility of the video spreading further than the actual murders themselves – and annoyed viewers quickly took to social media to denounce what they said was a case of the media being overly concerned with political correctness.
One person noted that there was a significant difference between how SVT covered the 2015 Trollhättan school attack, in which the Swedish perpetrator had been motivated by racism and chose a school in an area with a high immigrant population to commit his murders. While in that case, SVT recounted “minute by minute” what the killer did, publishing graphics and detailed information, in the case of the Scandinavian girls, the coverage was far more vague.
One Twitter user wrote that at first he thought the use of the phrase “knife damage” instead of ‘beheaded’ or ‘decapitated’ was just some kind of unfortunate formulation of words until he realized the channel had repeated the phrase more than once.
“I myself would never watch such a film, let alone share it. But now we are more upset about the crime of proliferation than the crime of beheading,” another user wrote, denouncing overly “PC” people.

“Have these IS killers already been given jobs at SVT?” asked another angry tweeter, while another asked had the SVT reporters seen the footage of the woman dying and in pain as her neck is cut. “Knife damage is indeed a euphemism,” they wrote.
“225 years ago Marie Antoinette suffered ‘knife damage to her neck’ during the French Revolution,” another user sarcastically wrote.


By John Binder
Newman, California Corporal Ronil Singh, 33-years-old, was shot and killed by the illegal alien suspect, whose name has not been released by law enforcement officials.
According to law enforcement, Singh stopped the illegal alien during a routine traffic stop to check if the suspect was driving drunk in the city of Newman, about 100 miles out of San Francisco.
Over his police radio, Singh called out “shots fired” and as police arrived at the scene of the traffic stop, they found the officer on the ground with a gunshot wound. Singh was transported to a nearby hospital where he later died.
Stanislaus County Sheriff Adam Christianson called the killing a “senseless act of violence” during a Thursday press conference and confirmed the illegal alien status of the officer’s accused killer.
“Unlike Ron, who immigrated to this country lawfully and legally to pursue his lifelong career of public safety, public service in being a police officer, this suspect is in our country illegally,” Christianson said.
“He doesn’t belong here,” Christianson said. “He’s a criminal. We will find him. We will arrest him and we will bring him to justice.”
Law enforcement said the illegal alien is armed and dangerous. The suspect can be seen in surveillance footage wearing jeans and a navy blue hoodie sweatshirt and a chain necklace. He is heavyset and has dark hair. The illegal alien’s car was located by police on Wednesday.
The Stanislaus County Sheriff Department has set up a memorial fund for the Singh family where readers can donate here.
Singh leaves behind his wife, Anamika, and his five-month-old son.
Singh’s death is the latest high-profile killing by a suspect who is in the U.S. illegally. Last week, Breitbart News reported on the death of California resident Rocky Jones, who was shot and killed by an illegal alien. Similarly, an illegal alien has been charged with the murder of a 16-year-old New Jersey girl.

DECEMBER 27, 2018
The frequent Trump critic and former contributing editor of the now defunct Never Trump publication the Weekly Standard seemed perturbed at the Dow’s huge surge yesterday.
“How many people’s hearts sank when they saw the Dow went up 1,000 points because they really hoped Trump had plunged us into a bear market that would cause GOP legislators to turn on him and support removal after impeachment?” tweeted Podhoretz.
The neo-con later tried to back pedal on tweet, commenting, “Some lunatics are claiming this tweet represents a celebration of the market drop. I’m actually getting hate mail about it. Everyone is insane.”

However, given Podhoretz’s anti-Trump history, it’s difficult to take the tweet any other way.
Podhoretz’s crass tweet once again underscores how leftists and Never Trumpers actively want America to fail and Americans to suffer just so they can satisfy their Trump Derangement Syndrome.
The former George W. Bush speech writer is not the only prominent figure to wish for an economic collapse this year.
Back in June, liberal comedian Bill Maher openly called for a “recession” even if it hurt people.
“I feel like the bottom has to fall out at some point,” said the Real Time host, adding, “By the way, I’m hoping for it because one way you get rid of Trump is a crashing economy. So please, bring on the recession.”
“Sorry if that hurts people but it’s either root for a recession or you lose your democracy,” Maher said.
After receiving criticism, Maher doubled down, remarking, “A recession is a survivable event,” Maher said. “What Trump is doing to this country is not.”
The Commander-in-Chief made a surprise visit to Iraq yesterday, and some service members enthusiastically showed their support.

One soldier told Trump he returned to the Army because of him.
“And I am here because of you,” the President responded, according to Sarah Sanders.
But the love was all too much for the media, and they sought to shame the Trump supporters.
Bloomberg’s Jennifer Epstein tweeted photos of red hats and a Trump flag in the room.
#maga hat contingent at Ramstein waiting for President Trump https://t.co/18wdP87vZK—
Jennifer Epstein (@jeneps) December 27, 2018

“She dropped it after she saw me taking a photo,” Epstein added in parentheses.
Meanwhile, CNN went so far as to accuse the Trump supporters of violating “a military rule.”

CNN White House reporter Jim Acosta used the moment to scrutinize the actions of the military personnel.
“It is in fact a campaign slogan, that is a campaign item, and it is completely inappropriate for the troops to do this,” Retired Rear Adm. John Kirby, a former Obama administration spokesman-turned CNN contributor, said.
“Every time he’s around military audiences,” Kirby said, referring to Trump, “he tends to politicize it, and he brings in complaints and grievances from outside the realm of military policy.”
CNN reported Army guidelines state “active duty personnel may not engage in partisan political activities and all military personnel should avoid the inference that their political activities imply or appear to imply DoD sponsorship, approval, or endorsement of a political candidate, campaign, or cause.”
But CNN didn’t report on this:

Will CNN report on Melania Trump’s visit to Iraq — a first for a First Lady?
By Chris Menahan


He linked to an article from the New York Times by neocon Bret Stephens which said “that the ultimate long-term threat to Israel is the resurgence of isolationism in the U.S.”
“What Israel most needs from the U.S. today is what it needed at its birth in 1948: an America committed to defending the liberal-international order against totalitarian enemies, as opposed to one that conducts a purely transactional foreign policy based on the needs of the moment or the whims of a president.”
Stephens said the idea “neoconservatives always put Israel first” is an “invidious myth”:
Contrary to the invidious myth that neoconservatives always put Israel first, the reasons for staying in Syria have everything to do with core U.S. interests. Among them: Keeping ISIS beaten, keeping faith with the Kurds, maintaining leverage in Syria and preventing Russia and Iran from consolidating their grip on the Levant.

President Trump said Wednesday that we give Israel billions of dollars every year and they can defend themselves.

From the Times of Israel:
Speaking with reporters, Trump was asked about criticism that the move could put Israel in jeopardy by allowing Iran to expand its foothold in Syria.
“Well, I don’t see it. I spoke with Bibi,” he said, referring to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “I told Bibi. And, you know, we give Israel $4.5 billion a year. And they’re doing very well defending themselves, if you take a look.”
“So that’s the way it is,” Trump said, according to a White House transcript.
“We’re going to take good care of Israel. Israel is going to be good. But we give Israel $4.5 billion a year. And we give them, frankly, a lot more money than that, if you look at the books — a lot more money than that. And they’ve been doing a very good job for themselves,” he added.
Stephens’ column made no mention of the billions in foreign aid America gives Israel every year.
By Mark Alan
Graham called the move an “Obama-like” mistake. Rubio, apparently trying to establish himself as the leading figure of the neoconservative movement, went as far as calling the president’s decision a “retreat.” Graham and Rubio have both expressed past support for using the US military to topple Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
The response from many in the media hasn’t been too different from that of the neocons. CNN’s Erin Burnett strongly condemned President Trump’s decision. She said the president was giving Vladimir Putin an early Christmas present by withdrawing US soldiers from Syria. However, she failed to articulate why she believes the lives of US soldiers are less valuable than the alleged disruption between the US and Russia.
Burnett wasn’t the only CNN personality to attack the president for his decision. CNN’s Fareed Zakaria also bashed the withdraw of US troops from Syria. He claimed President Trump was making an even bigger mistake than former president George W Bush’s “mission accomplished” fiasco during the Iraq War. It’s worth noting that Zakaria is one of many prominent members of the media who supported the decision to invade Iraq.
Anchors from other networks also condemned the president’s choice to withdraw troops from Syria. Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade called Trump’s decision “stunning and irresponsible.” He also suggested the president was “cutting and running.” MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough expressed similar sentiments on his show this morning.
The reaction of the neoconservatives and like minded members of the media shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. The two groups have united numerous times in the past, salivating at the idea of a ground war to overthrow Assad in Syria. Thankfully, peace has prevailed.
United States military forces have been in Syria for over four years. The first known instance of American troops fighting on the ground in Syria occurred in July of 2014, as part of a hostage rescue operation. The Global War on Terror has already cost US tax payers nearly 6 trillion dollars. To provide that number some context, the combined value of the entire US housing market is worth about 30 trillion dollars.
Elsewhere, President Trump’s decision has been met with praise. Senators Mike Lee and Rand Paul both applauded the president’s withdraw of troops from Syria. Senator Paul saidthe president’s decision is another example of Trump keeping his campaign promises. Paul further defended the move, saying the president’s decision in Syria illustrates why he won the 2016 election.

By Robert Bridge
This week, Der Spiegel, the German news weekly, was forced to admit that one of its former star reporters, the award-winning Claas Relotius, “falsified his articles on a grand scale.”
Indeed, it seems the disgraced journalist was motivated more by fiction writers John le Carre and Tom Clancy than by any media heavyweights, like Andrew Breitbart and Walter Cronkite.
Relotius, who just this month took home Germany’s Reporterpreis (‘Reporter of the Year’) for his enthralling tale of a Syrian teenager, “made up stories and invented protagonists,” Der Spiegel admitted.

There is a temptation to rationalize Relotius’s multiple indiscretions, not to mention the failure of his fastidious employer to unearth them for so long, as an unavoidable part of the dog-eat-dog media jungle. After all, journalists are not robots – at least not yet – and we are all humans prone to poor judgment and mistakes, perhaps even highly unethical ones.
That explanation, however, falls short of explaining the internal forces battering away at the foundation of Western media, an institution built on the shifting sand of lies, disinformation and outright propaganda. And what is readily apparent to those outside of the Western media fortress is certainly even more apparent to those inside.
A good example is Russiagate. This elaborate myth, which has been peddled repeatedly and without an ounce of 100-percent real beef since the US election of 2016, goes like this: A group of Russian hackers, buying a few hundred social media memes for just rubles to the dollar, were able to do what all the Republican campaign strategists, and all the special interests groups, with all of their billions of dollars in their massive war chest, simply could not: keep Democratic voters at home on the couch come Election Day – a tactic now known as “voter suppression operations” – thereby handing the White House to Donald Trump on a silver platter. Or shall we say ‘a Putin platter’?

Don’t believe me? Here’s the opening line of a recent Washington Post article that should be rated ‘R’ for racist: “One difference between Russian and Republican efforts to quash the black vote: The Russians are more sophisticated, insidious and slick,” wailed Joe Davidson, who apparently watched too many Hollywood films where the Russkies play all of the villains. “Unlike the Republican sledgehammers used to suppress votes and thwart electorates’ decisions in various states, the Russians are sneaky, using social media come-ons that ostensibly had little to do with the 2016 vote.”
Meanwhile, Der Spiegel, despite being forced to come clean over the transgressions of Claas Relotius, will most likely never own up to its own factual shortcomings with regards to their dismal reporting on Russia.
For example, in an article published last year entitled ‘Putin’s work, Clinton’s contribution,’ the German weekly lamented that “A superpower intervenes in the election campaign of another superpower: The Russian cyber-attack in the US is a scandal.” Just like their fallen star reporter, Der Spiegel regurgitated fiction masquerading as news.

However, there is no need to limit ourselves to just media-generated Russian fairytales. The Western media has contrived other sensational stories, with its own cast of dubious characters, and with far greater consequences.
Consider the reporting in the Western media prior to the 2003 Iraq War, when most journalists were behaving as cheerleaders for military invasion as opposed to conscientious objectors, or at least objective observers. In fact, two reporters with the New York Times, Michael Gordon and Judith Miller, arguably gave the Bush administration and a hardcore group of neocons inside Washington, which had been pushing for a war against Saddam Hussein for many years, the barest justification it required for military action.
Just six months before the bombs started dropping on Baghdad, Gordon and Miller penned a front-page article in the Times that opened with this stunning claim: “Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today.”
The article in America’s ‘paper of record’ then proceeded to build the case for military action against Iraq by quoting an assortment of anonymous senior administration officials, anonymous Iraqi defectors, and anonymous chemical weapons experts. In fact, much of the story was based on comments provided by one ‘Ahmed al-Shemri,’ a pseudonym for someone purported to have been connected to Hussein’s chemical-weapons program. The authors quoted the mystery man as saying: “All of Iraq is one large storage facility.”
Gordon and Miller also claimed their source had said that “he had been told that Iraq was still storing some 12,500 gallons of anthrax.” Several months later, just weeks before the US invasion of Iraq commenced, US Secretary of State Colin Powell invited the UN General Assembly to imagine what a “teaspoon of dry anthrax” could do if unleashed on the public.
Powell, who later said the testimony would be a permanent “blot” on his record, even shook a tiny faux sample of the deadly biological agent in the Assembly for maximum theatrical effect.
Shortly after the release of the Times piece, top Bush officials appeared on television and alluded to Miller’s story in support of military action. Meanwhile, UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq never found chemical weapons or the materials needed to build atomic weapons. In other words, the $1-trillion-dollar war against Iraq, which led to the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent civilians, was a completely senseless act of aggression against a sovereign state, which the US media helped perpetrate.
Aside from the question of whether readers really put much faith in these fantastic media stories, complete with pseudonymous characters and impossible to prove claims; there remains another question. Does the Western media itself believe its own stories? The answer seems to be no, at least not always.
With regards to the Russiagate story, for example, an investigative journalism outfit, Project Veritas, caught a few Western journalists off-guard about their true feelings in relation to the claims against Russia, and their feelings in general about the state of the media.
“I love the news business, but I’m very cynical about it – and at the same time so are most of my colleagues,” CNN Supervising Producer John Bonifield admitted, unaware he was being secretly filmed.
When pushed to explain why CNN was beating the anti-Russia drum on a daily basis, things became clearer: “Because it’s ratings,” Bonifield said. “Our ratings are incredible right now.”
In the same media sting operation, Van Jones, a prominent CNN political commentator who has pushed the anti-Russia position numerous times on-air, completely changed his tune when caught off-air and off-guard. “The Russia thing is just a big nothing burger,” he remarked.
This brings us back to the story of the fallen Der Spiegel journalist. It seems that a deep cynicism has taken hold in at least some parts of the Western media establishment. Journalists seem increasingly willing to produce extremely tenuous, fact-challenged stories, many of which are barely held together by a rickety composite of anonymous entities.
And why not? If their own media bosses are permitting gross fabrications on a number of major issues, not least of all related to Russia, and further afield in Syria, why should the journalists be forced to play by the rules?
Under such oppressive conditions, where the media appears to be merely the mouthpiece of the government’s position on a number of issues, those working inside this apparatus will eventually come around to the conclusion that truth is not the main priority. The main priority is hoodwinking the public into believing something even when the facts – or lack of them – point to other conclusions.
Thus, it is no surprise when we find Western reporters imitating the greatest fiction writers, because in reality that is what they have already become.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!