At the UN, Pro-Freedom Donald Trump Stares Down the World’s Deep State

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks at the United Nations General Assembly at the UN headquarters, in New York, United States, September 25, 2018. Roman Makhmutov / Sputnik via AP

PJ MEDIA, BY ANDREW G. BOSTOM, SEPTEMBER 25, 2018:

In September 2017, speaking at the United Nations, President Donald Trump decried the abject failure of socialism as a form of governance, and more broadly, as an ideology:

The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented but that socialism has been faithfully implemented. From the Soviet Union to Cuba, Venezuela — wherever socialism or Communism has been adopted, it has delivered anguish, devastation, and failure. Those who preach the tenets of these discredited ideologies only contribute to the continued suffering of the people who live under these cruel systems. America stands with every person living under a brutal regime.

During his speech at the UN today, Trump returned to the subjects of socialism, communism, and Venezuela, where he noted that “more than 2 million people have fled the anguish inflicted by the Socialist Maduro regime, and its Cuban sponsors.” He added: “Not long ago Venezuela was one of the richest countries on earth.” Trump observed: “Today socialism has bankrupted the oil-rich nation and driven its people into abject poverty.” And he concluded with another denunciation of socialist/communist totalitarianism as a predatory, liberty-crushing ideology that produces despair:

Virtually everywhere socialism or communism has been tried it has produced suffering, corruption, and decay. Socialism’s thirst for power leads to expansion, incursion, and oppression. All nations of the world should resist socialism and the misery it brings to everyone.

Three years earlier, campaigning at the Iowa Family Leadership Summit in July 2015, Donald Trump gushed about Norman Vincent Peale (d. 1993), a staunch anti-Communist and his family’s pastor at the Marble Collegiate Church in Manhattan:

Norman Vincent Peale was my pastor — “ The Power of Positive Thinking” [Peale’s 1952 book]. Everybody has heard of Norman Vincent Peale? He was so great. He would give a sermon — you never wanted to leave. I’m telling you, I still remember his sermons.

Peale minced no words about where he stood on the totalitarian menace of Communism in his 1952 bestseller, penned at a critical juncture in the Cold War: “No one has more contempt for Communism than I have.” Indeed, a Nashville Banner, January 20, 1951, front-page story featured coverage of an enormous anti-Communist rally, where Peale was the keynote speaker: “Dr. Peale Tells Thousands Here — The Future Belongs to Christ Not Communism.”

David Brody’s 2018 biographical analysis, The Faith of Donald J. Trump: A Spiritual Biography, elaborates on Peale’s earlier opposition to collectivism more broadly, encompassing both Communism and fascism. Two weeks after Trump’s birth in 1946, Peale opined in a newspaper column:

There are small-minded people who have the idea that to be a Christian today, one must lean way over to the left or right: either to take Communism on the one hand or something else on the other. For the life of me, I have never been able to understand how a man who regards himself as a leader of the Christian Church can attempt to deprecate the teachings of Jesus as to try and get them into the thinking of Karl Marx or of some Fascist. Those puny little fellows compared to the colossal mind of Jesus Christ, pale into mere insignificance.

Brody avers that Peale was also an “ardent” opponent of what he viewed as Franklin Roosevelt’s coercive New Deal era statism and “demagoguery,” particularly when FDR sought a third presidential term.

A January 2016 Washington Post story (notwithstanding the negative, tangential headline) riveted upon the warm, enduring relationship between the “Trump and Peale clans”:

Norman Vincent Peale presided at Donald Trump’s wedding to Ivana Trump. He also officiated at the wedding of Trump’s sister Maryanne. The mogul co-hosted the minister’s 90th-birthday bash … “The great Norman Vincent Peale was my minister for years,” … Peale, for his part, described Trump as “kindly and courteous” with “a streak of honest humility,” and touted him as “one of America’s top positive thinkers and doers.” The minister also called Trump “ingenious” and predicted that he would be “the greatest builder of our time.” Trump’s parents, Fred and Mary Trump, formally joined Peale’s  Marble Collegiate Church in Manhattan — a venerable affiliate of the Reformed Church in America — during the 1970s.

While Donald Trump (in a 2009 Psychology Today interview) credited Peale’s The Power of Positive Thinking for keeping his mindset optimistic after a series of setbacks, I believe Dr. Peale’s staunch anti-totalitarianism — especially his anti-Communism — influenced Trump’s own worldview. Trump’s 2000 The America We Deserve, is the best summary explication of the pro-freedom ideology which animates his foreign policy considerations. Referring to what he designated “oppressive communism,” Trump championed “western style democracy” as his desired replacement for communist totalitarianism in the collapsed former Soviet Union. Trump also denounced the “disgrace” Castro’s communism had wrought upon Cuba:

Terror reigns, the police are unrestrained; beatings and citizen disappearances are common, and all free expression outside the Communist Party is crushed.

More importantly, as has remained his wont, Trump was gimlet-eyed about the persistence — and danger — of entrenched Communism in a powerful China:

I break rank with many business colleagues and foreign policy gurus … in my unwillingness to shrug off the mistreatment of China’s citizens by their own government. My reason is simple: These oppressive policies make it clear that China’s current government has contempt for our way of life. It fears freedom because it knows its survival depends on oppression. It does not respect individual rights. It is still, at heart, a collectivist society. As such it is a destabilizing force in the world, and should be viewed that way.

Donald Trump’s muscular anti-socialist/communist pronouncements and observations highlight the seditious role reversal underlying the manufactured “Trump-Russia collusion” faux narrative. A simple juxtaposition of Trump’s written and spoken words versus the writings, utterances, and behaviors of key players orchestrating what was tantamount to a putsch (or coup d’etat, per former federal prosecutor DiGenova) against Trump — John BrennanNellie OhrChristopher Steele, and James Comey — should make this dichotomy plain to even the most blinkered and doctrinaire Never Trumpers of any persuasion.

Former CIA Director John Brennan has admitted casting his 1976 POTUS vote for Communist Party of the USA leader Gus Hall, who was then virulently anti-American and an overt champion of the “liberating” hegemonic Soviet Communist terror state under Communist dictator (and Hall’s “Comrade”) Brezhnev. Hall articulated these views in a 1975 “Report to the 21st Convention of the Communist Party” (p. 33):

Détente is not an agreement to accept, or to turn one’s head from oppression by [US] imperialism anywhere. Comrade Leonid Brezhnev made this clear in a public statement here when he stated: ‘The Soviet Union’s support for all national liberation struggles and movements is non-negotiable.’

Consistent with this 1976 vote for American Stalinist Hall as POTUS,  Brennan, in his 1980 University of Texas MS thesis, adopted the moral relativism one associates with the Communist movement. Brennan declared “absolute human rights do not exist,” rendering “[human rights] analysis subject to innumerable conditional criticisms,” rejecting free speech and Western liberty as universal values, and rationalizing Soviet Communist totalitarianism. He proffered this unsettling apologetic for the appalling human rights record of the Brezhnev-era Soviet Union (although Brennan refrained from labeling the Soviet dictator “Comrade Leonid Brezhnev”):

Can human rights violations in the Soviet Union be as easily justified in terms of the preservation of the communist ideology? Unfortunately (looking at events from a democratic perspective), yes. Since the absolute status of human rights has been denied, the justification for the violation of any of those rights has to be pursued from a particular ideological perspective. Leonid Brezhnev could justify human rights violations in the Soviet Union as a necessary part of the preservation of the communist ideological system.

Diana West’s extensive, illuminating backgrounders contextualize the hard Left (even pro-Communist) proclivities of Nellie Ohr and Christopher Steele. Nellie Ohr, for example (summarized in this West interview), is a full-throated apologist for Stalin’s 1930s Ukrainian terror-famine, which according to great Sovietologist Robert Conquest’s “The Harvest of Sorrow” (p. 306), killed some 14.5 million souls. “Confirmed socialist” Christopher Steele worked for the subversive, Marxist-infiltrated Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. Even James Comey has acknowledged his dalliance with Communism, as reported in October 2003 by New York Magazine’s Chris Smith:

I’d moved from Communist to whatever I am now. I’m not even sure how to characterize myself politically. Maybe at some point, I’ll have to figure it out.

Having imbibed Norman Vincent Peale’s positive, pro-freedom, pro-capitalist, anti-totalitarian ideology, Donald Trump’s own muscular anti-totalitarianism stands in stark contrast to the hard left — even overtly Communist — sympathies of the cabal of anti-Trump pustchists aligned against him.

Also see:

Bolton: Withdrawing From U.N. Human Rights Council Was ‘Decades in the Making’

Washington Free Beacon, by David  Rutz, June 20, 2018:

White House National Security Adviser John Bolton said Wednesday the U.S. decision to withdraw from the United Nations Human Rights Council was “decades in the making” and “clearly the right decision.”

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley announced the decision to withdraw from the council on Tuesday. They cited the membership of known human rights abusers like China, Cuba, and Venezuela on the council, its fixation on condemning Israel and its inability or lack of desire to condemn true wrongdoers.

“This decision in many respects has been decades in the making,” Bolton said on “Fox and Friends,” calling the council a place where human rights were a priority. “It’s clearly the right decision to get off. It’s the right decision to defund the Human Rights Council.”

Bolton said the U.S. was self-governing and didn’t need advice from the U.N. or other international bodies on how to run itself. He noted he voted against creating the council when he served as U.N. Ambassador during the George W. Bush administration.

From 2006 to 2016, the Human Rights Council condemned Israel 68 times. In comparison, it condemned Syria 20 times and Iran six times.

“Israel is, as the saying goes, a canary in the mineshaft for the United States,” Bolton said. “Countries that attack Israel do it because they think it’s easier, but much of their criticism is really aimed at us.”

Speaking about the decision Tuesday night, Pompeo called the organization a “poor defender of human rights.”

“Worse than that, the Human Rights Council has become an exercise in shameless hypocrisy with many of the world’s worst human rights abuses going ignored and some of the world’s most serious offenders sitting on the Council itself,” he said.

Haley said the Human Rights Council “damages the cause of human rights.”

“For too long, the Human Rights Council has been a protector of human rights abusers and a cesspool of political bias … The Council ceases to be worthy of its name,” she said.

The Coming Caliphate

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, 2018:

The Organisation (sic) of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is the largest voting block in the United Nations and is comprised of every Islamic nation on earth – 57 states.

The OIC’s Charter states one of its goals is to “promote human rights.”  What does the OIC mean by “human rights?”

We need to look no further than the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, approved by the OIC in 1990 in an Extraordinary Session of Kings and Heads of State of every Islamic nation on earth, and submitted to the United Nations in 1993 as an official document from the entire muslim world at the leadership level.

Article 2 of the Cairo Declaration states:  “…it is prohibited to take away life except for a Shari’ah prescribed reason…it is the duty of the state to safeguard (life) and it is prohibited to breach it without a Shari’ah-prescribed reason.”

Article 19 of the Cairo Declaration states:  “There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Shari’ah.”

The last two articles in the Cairo Declaration read:  “All rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari’ah (Article 24)…The Islamic Shari’ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration (Article 25).”

This means the official legal definition of “human rights” for the entire Islamic world is “the imposition of Sharia.”

Therefore, the entire Islamic world at the Head of State and King level defines “human rights” as:  killing homosexuals; killing those who leave Islam; forcing non-muslims to convert to Islam or submit to Islam/sharia and pay the non-muslim poll tax (jizya) or be killed; allowing sex slaves to be taken by muslims; and everything else that comes with sharia.

The Islamophobia campaign is married to the Islamic Law of Slander.  Islamophobia was created by the Muslim Brotherhood’s International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) to silence all honest discussion of Islam in the West.

In sharia, “Slander” is defined as saying anything about Islam a muslim would “dislike” and it is a capital crime.

In the OIC’s 10-year plan (2005-2010) it states:

“Call upon the Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers to consider the possibility of establishing an independent and permanent body to promote human rights in Member states, in accordance with the provisions of the Cairo Declaration.”

It goes on to say:

“Affirm the need to counter Islamophobia through the establishment of an observatory at the OIC General Secretariat to monitor all forms of Islamophobia…Endeavor to have the United Nations adopt an international resolution to counter Islamophobia, and call upon all States to enact laws to counter it, including deterrent punishments.”

So, the OIC wants to criminalize all offensive speech against Islam.

The entire leadership of the Islamic world is pursuing a line of operation that stands in direct conflict with U.S. founding principles and law.

The purpose of the Islamophobia campaign is to keep U.S. leaders from discussing sharia and its direct support for actions which are unlawful under U.S. law and to put police and investigators at the state and federal level on their heels when it comes to Islam.

One could argue this campaign has been wildly successful.

The overall objective of the OIC and its member nations is to establish an Islamic State (caliphate) under sharia (Islamic Law) – which also happens to be the same objective as Al Qaeda, ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, and every other main line Islamic organization on the planet.

Currently, Turkey is leading the effort to establish the caliphate under the banner of the OIC which, as some have said, is operating as the pseudo-caliphate.

Turkey’s Erdogan is positioning himself to be the Caliph with Turkey as the seat of the caliphate as it was when the last caliphate was dissolved in the 1920’s.

Why is it important for Americans to know all this?

The Global Islamic Movement is readying itself at all levels to re-establish the caliphate and, through the Islamophobia campaign, keeping the United States strategically heeled while they do it.

When the Islamic Movement establishes the caliphate, Europe will be it the crosshairs of the Caliph to be conquered and the United States will be the platform through which that goal is achieved.

The way to turn this around is to understand the threat at the local and state level so the Islamic/jihadi network inside the United States can be dismantled and defeated.

Also see:

As US relocates embassy to Jerusalem, al Qaeda leader condemns international system

Long War Journal, by Thomas Joscelyn, May 14, 2018:

On the eve of the opening of the US government’s embassy in Jerusalem today, al Qaeda released a new message from its leader Ayman al-Zawahiri. The al Qaeda emir noted at the outset of his speech that there has been a “big uproar” over the Trump administration’s decision to move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. President Trump has been “clear and frank,” revealing “the true face of the modern Crusade, which does not deal with retreat and reconciliation,” according to Zawahiri.

However, Zawahiri quickly pivoted away from the controversy over the embassy relocation, reiterating al Qaeda’s longstanding conspiracy theory: The entire international system is hostile to Muslims. Just being part of the United Nations makes one complicit in this alleged scheme, according to bin Laden’s successor.

Indeed, the title of Zawahiri’s speech, “Tel Aviv Is Also the Land of Muslims,” underscores his point. The embassy relocation is a small issue relative to the vast “Zionist-Crusader” conspiracy al Qaeda claims to oppose.

Zawahiri reminds his “Muslim and mujahidin brothers and the sincere scholars” that “all of the countries of the Islamic world which are members in the United Nations have recognized Israel by signing the United Nations Charter, which confirms the unity and territorial integrity of each of its states, including Israel.” From al Qaeda’s perspective, this is the original sin of the United Nations.

The al Qaeda leader claims that, by signing the UN charter, nations have agreed to leave “ruling by Sharia.” That is, they have agreed that they will not abide by the draconian laws Zawahiri and his ilk prefer. Instead, these nations are “satisfied” with governing and “ruling” according to the “decisions of the [UN] Security Council and the General Assembly,” including the decision in 1947 to partition the land.

Tel Aviv and Jerusalem are both “Islamic land,” in Zawahiri’s telling. True believers need “to liberate Palestine” and “all the other abodes of Muslims” after declaring the entire “criminal international tyrannical system” to be illegitimate. Zawahiri again calls for Muslim unity, a frequent al Qaeda motif, such that the ummah (worldwide community of Muslims) engages in “battle…on multiple fronts, not as separate groups that retreat before the imperatives of the greatest criminals.”

Zawahiri reminds listeners that Osama bin Laden identified America as the leader of this supposedly corrupt international system and, therefore, as the “first enemy of the Muslims.” Bin Laden first declared that Americans “would not dream of security until we actually live it in Palestine, and until all the disbelieving armies depart from the land of Muhammad.”

The goal is establish “the caliphate,” Zawahiri says, after uniting “around the word of tawhid.” This will require both dawa (proselytization) and jihad. And Muslims must not confuse their enemies for their friends, fighting “the battle of consciousness before the battle of weapons,” remaining “free of illusions.”

In the past, al Qaeda leaders have called on Muslims to use Syrian soil to “liberate” Jerusalem. The group uses this theme as a rallying cry for jihadists in Syria.

Zawahiri’s message is the 9th episode in his “Brief Messages To A Victorious Ummah” series, during which he has covered a variety of topics. Although Zawahiri can be long-winded, the lectures in this program are mercifully short.

Although the lecture series has been running since Aug. 2016, Zawahiri and his propagandists in As Sahab clearly timed the release of this episode to coincide with the US embassy relocation to Jerusalem. It demonstrates that, at times, al Qaeda is still able to time its media to current events. Zawahiri also remains a somewhat prolific commentator, regularly releasing messages from his hideout.

An English translation of the message was distributed via Telegram by Al-Tamkin Media, a propaganda outfit that regularly translates messages from al Qaeda’s senior leadership. The quotes in this article were adapted from Al-Tamkin’s rough translation.

Frank Gaffney: President Trump May Be ‘Undermined by His Own Subordinates’ After Strong UN Speech

Breitbart, by John Hayward, Sept. 20, 2017:

Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney joined SiriusXM host Raheem Kassam on Wednesday’s Breitbart News Daily to review President Trump’s address to the UN General Assembly.

Kassam asked if Trump’s strong words against Iran during the speech presaged the end of the Iran nuclear deal.

“This is the question,” Gaffney replied. “Action is not so much what one needs to wonder about. I think there will be action. The question is, is it action consistent with what the president said yesterday?”

“This has been what’s so frustrating, I know, to all of us listening to this program and part of the Make America Great Again movement, is the president is being repeatedly and in fact serially undermined by his own subordinates,” he explained.

“He makes these speeches, or he makes these pronouncements, or he tweets the sorts of things that are redolent of the campaign, and what he stood for, and what he promised – only to have H.R. McMaster, or Jim Mattis, or particularly Rex Tillerson, the Secretary of State, almost immediately sallying forth and saying, ‘Well, what the president really meant to say was exactly the opposite,’” Gaffney lamented.

“In this case, of course, we have Rex Tillerson sitting down with the so-called ‘Perm 5 Plus One,’ which is U.N.-speak for the gang that put together this Iran deal – I call it the ‘Obama bomb deal’ – plus the Iranian foreign minister. Obviously, the pressure is going to be intense, not just from the Iranians but from the Europeans, to walk back from what the president said,” he warned.

“I pray that Rex Tillerson won’t do it because I think the president got it exactly right. This is a defective deal. It is an embarrassment to the United States that Barack Obama perpetrated it – and, by the way, that Republicans in Congress enabled him to get away with imposing it upon the rest of us. We need to get out from that thing right away. I think John Bolton had that exactly right, and I commend everyone his alternative approach. I hope that’s what Rex Tillerson will be promoting, but I don’t hold my breath on it,” said Gaffney.

Kassam mentioned the argument advanced by French President Emmanuel Macron that the North Korean crisis makes the case for keeping the Iran deal alive because Iran’s nuclear ambitions are now held in check by the kind of oversight North Korea has never received.

“Rubbish,” Gaffney snorted. “This is forgetting the actual lessons of all of this, of course, which are that indeed we made a deal with the North Koreans that was supposed to prevent them from getting the bomb, not unlike we’ve done with the Iranians, and it did not work out.”

“To the contrary, we’ve now got them with not only atomic weapons and missiles with which to deliver them, but now it appears a hydrogen bomb,” he argued. “The so-called ‘strategic patience’ of the Obama administration, unfortunately, followed on the heels of incompetence and malfeasance under both the Clinton administration that made that deal with the North Koreans, and the George W. Bush administration, so there’s a bipartisan fault here. This is not a model to be extolled or held up as the way to deal with Iran.”

Kassam found President Trump’s strong condemnation of socialism to be the most remarkable and encouraging moment of his speech, especially given that a majority of the nations in the UN General Assembly consider themselves socialist to some degree.

“It was tough love, without probably the love,” Gaffney quipped. “The president was laying out the hard truth, and it was incredibly important that he did so – and that he did so to the socialists in that place.”

“Not only are there large numbers of socialists, or communists for that matter, in the UN I mean, it basically is a socialist enterprise. It’s all about redistribution of wealth and power under the auspices of successive socialists, including the guy who is currently running it – the Secretary-General is an old socialist from Portugal. These are people who, I believe, actually think this is the way of the future, so it was very important,” he said.

“But again, it has to be backed up. Let me just say, I think in addition to not having his subordinates undermine him – which they do again, and again, and again, without any consequences – we also have to take actions, Raheem,” he told Kassam.

“I mean, it’s one thing to be telling the North Koreans and ‘Rocket Man’ that you’re toast if you think about pursuing with those hydrogen bombs threats to us. It’s another to actually put into place the capabilities to assure that everybody understands that that’s not an empty threat,” he stressed.

“The rhetoric has been more or less good,” Gaffney judged. “I think you’re absolutely right that the MAGA movement was heard, and brought back ‘radical Islamic terrorism.’ That’s a twofer. One, it’s important in its own right to be calling the enemy what it is, and also that it demonstrates how important the base is. We need to make sure the president is hearing us all the time. I know that he does through your channel, but we need it more elsewhere. In this case in particular, we have got to make sure that we are backing up with credible military capabilities the rhetoric that the president is using.”

Kassam turned to Gaffney’s recent blog post, “Freedom’s Friends Must Denounce, Not Dignify, the SPLC and CAIR.”

“We’ve been talking a lot, and rightly so, about what’s being done to freedom of speech – arguably sort of the foundational freedom in our Constitution and for our republic,” Gaffney said.

“The Southern Poverty Law Center and Islamist Muslim Brotherhood sharia supremacist groups like the Council on American Islamic Relations, or CAIR, have been making – I’m sorry to say even under this administration, under a Republican-controlled Congress – great strides to try to impose the kind of restrictions you’re very familiar with, of course, on your side of the pond,” he said, referring to speech codes in the United Kingdom, where Kassam resides.

Gaffney said these speech restrictions “are designed to basically promote sharia blasphemy restrictions: you must not give offense, particularly to Muslims.”

“The Southern Poverty Law Center has been central to that agenda. They have been working assiduously to defame people who speak the truth about these sorts of issues,” he charged.

“Rod Rosenstein, amazingly, went to what was billed as a civil rights conference in Birmingham last week and gave a speech,” Gaffney said, referring to the Deputy Attorney General. “It was mostly about civil rights, but by his presence, he dignified an event that was holding up both the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Council on American Islamic Relations. They had speakers, they were participants in this program, they were considered to be just great champions of civil rights – when, in fact, they are trying to take away that key civil right of freedom of expression. It’s scandalous.”

Of the recent revelations that President Trump appears to have been correct about the Obama Justice Department wiretapping Trump Tower during the 2016 presidential campaign, Gaffney said, “I think what we’re seeing dribbling out slowly, inexorably, is evidence that the Obama administration was engaged in political warfare.”

“I mean, ‘dirty tricks’ doesn’t begin to describe it,” he said, describing the Obama administration’s conduct as “political warfare that makes Nixon’s plumbers in Watergate look like pikers.”

“These were people that were using the instruments of the State, the Deep State if you will – the intelligence community, the law-enforcement community, and of course the National Security Council, Ben Rhodes and his whole disinformation operation and political warfare capabilities – to destroy those like Donald Trump and his campaign that they feared might actually prevent them from having a third term,” Gaffney charged.

“This is why it’s so important to get to the bottom of this, and not be distracted by these deflections, and misinformation, and special prosecutors who are off on a red tear to get us away from the reality that Barack Obama and his minions are Watergate on steroids,” he said. “We need to know the full truth of it.”

Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. Eastern

LISTEN:

Trump’s America-first UN speech was the best of his presidency

President Donald Trump speaks during the 72nd session of the UN General Assembly, September 19, 2017. Mary Altaffer | AP Images

Conservative Review, by Jordan Schachtel, Sept. 19, 2017:

President Trump delivered the most America-first speech of his presidency in front of the United Nations Tuesday morning in New York City. It was a no-holds-barred address that shined a light on the threat posed by the enemies to the free world, such as Iran, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, and the global “radical Islamic terror” groups. Trump’s language adopted the “peace through strength” philosophy popularized by former President Ronald Reagan, and his promotion of American exceptionalism is sure to fire up the base that elected him president.

Trump took a 180-degree turn away from the Obama administration’s soft posture and rhetoric on Iran and radical Islam. He promised to hold accountable the terrorist regime in Tehran and separated the Iranian people from their fundamentalist rulers, demanding that the regime “stop supporting terrorists” and “begin serving its own people.”

He castigated the nuclear deal with Iran, which was negotiated by the Obama administration along with the P5+1 world powers. Trump said that the world would see “very soon” America’s future position on the deal. He has until October 15 to decide whether the U.S. will cancel its involvement in the nuclear accord or remain in the deal for another 90 days.

After taking a brief hiatus from identifying the threat that is the global jihadist movement, President Trump again warned of “the Islamic extremist” threat that continues to menace the free world across the globe. “We will stop radical Islamic terrorism, because we cannot allow it to tear up our nation and, indeed, to tear up the entire world,” Trump declared.

“No nation on Earth has an interest in seeing this band of criminals arm itself with nuclear weapons and missiles,” Trump said of the “depraved regime” in North Korea. “Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime,” Trump added of dictator Kim Jong Un, promising never to settle for anything less than a de-nuclearized Pyongyang.

Attacking the ideology of the Maduro regime in Venezuela, the president stated: “The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented, but that socialism has been faithfully implemented.” He said that the U.S. would not sit idly by while “the government of Venezuela persists on its path to impose authoritarian rule on the Venezuelan people.”

Moving to Syria, Trump described the Assad dictatorship that rules Damascus as a “criminal regime.” He went on to discuss how Assad uses horrific methods in bombing his own countrymen and is seemingly indiscriminate about whether they are men, women, or even innocent children.

On Tuesday morning, Trump delivered a Reaganesque, America-first speech that is sure to fire up conservatives and his base of support. In front of their representatives, he took direct shots at the rogue regimes of the world. Time will tell whether President Trump can make good on the best speech of his presidency with the needed policy outcomes to follow through on his rhetoric.

Jordan Schachtel is the national security correspondent for Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @JordanSchachtel.

***

TRANSCRIPT  – Remarks by President Trump to the 72nd Session of the United Nations General Assembly

No, Trump: The UN’s problem is not ‘bureaucracy,’ it’s despotism

Conservative Review, by Jordan Schachtel, Sept. 18, 2017:

President Trump delivered remarks at the United Nations Monday morning, arguing that the international body has yet to reach its “full potential” because there is simply too much “bureaucracy and mismanagement” in its current structure.

“The United Nations was founded on truly noble goals,” President Trump said in New York City, before getting to the heart of his message. Despite an increase in U.N. funding, Trump said, “we are not seeing the results in line with this investment.”

“We seek a United Nations that regains the trust of the people around the world. In order to achieve this, the United Nations must hold every level of management accountable, protect whistle-blowers and focus on results rather than on process,” Trump said.

But “bureaucracy and mismanagement” have little to do with the U.N.’s failure to reach the aforementioned goals. Over the past few decades, the United Nations has merely served as cover for rogue states with totalitarian ambition. These nations and groups now utilize the U.N. as a pulpit to harass and bully nations that don’t subscribe to authoritarian regional agendas.

The U.N.’s inherent flaw comes in its foundationally collectivist, idealistic structure. Following the horrors of World War II, the U.N. was founded on the noble cause of maintaining international peace and security. But with its one-country, one-vote system, the United Nations will act as a body that enables iron-fisted regimes so long as unfree countries continue to outnumber free countries.

Even if it was running with 100 percent efficiency, the institution would still be churning out resolutions and reports that undermine freedom and prosperity.

Moreover, the veto power included in the UN Security Council cannot do much to produce powerful sanction packages and/or human rights initiatives, due to the adversarial nations of China and Russia having a permanent seat at the table.

Totalitarian nations with common interests have used the U.N. as a machine to advance their collective agenda. One such prominent group, the 57-state Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), is notorious for pushing U.N. policy that adheres to Islamic supremacist ideals. The OIC blocks discussion on issues such as Islamic terror and the human rights abuses that occur inside Muslim-majority countries.

But it’s not just outside bodies that cause problems at the U.N. Its longstanding institutions have been corrupted to their cores.

The U.N. Human Rights Council (UNHRC), Turtle Bay’s most influential U.N. body, has turned into a tool for notorious regimes. Several dictatorial nations maintain good standing on the council, including Venezuela, Cuba, Qatar, and other nations with horrific domestic human-rights records. Instead of promoting human rights, the UNHRC churns out resolution after resolution attacking the nation of Israel, while ignoring the real atrocities being committed across the globe on a daily basis.

In its heyday, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) was revered as an agency dedicated to the preservation of important global institutions. Today, UNESCO acts as an Islamic supremacist propaganda machine, attacking Jewish and Christian claims to holy sites in Jerusalem.

Other agencies, such as the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), has promoted the destruction of Israel and helped perpetuate Arab-Israeli hostilities. During Israel’s 2014 war with Hamas, UNRWA-owned construction materials were found in Hamas terror tunnels. The terrorist group also utilized UNRWA schools to stockpile its missiles.

Despite its anti-American agenda, the United States continues to contribute about $3 billion annually to the United Nations — about a quarter of its annual budget. U.S. citizens also keep the U.N. subsidiaries afloat (e.g. UNRWA, UNESCO, UNHRC) via hundreds of millions in donations.

According to Freedom House, 67 countries suffered net declines in overall freedom last year (while 36 registered gains). “Bureaucracy and mismanagement” is not the problem at the United Nations, as Trump believes. The problem at the United Nations is the fact that totalitarian nations outnumber the free ones, and control its agenda.

Jordan Schachtel is the national security correspondent for Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @JordanSchachtel.

Also see: