Oh, and this item. What on earth do you mean by this?? Who is saying horrible things about people? Is it OK to incessently call Trump a murderer an oath breaker and a liar and ignore everything else. That seems pretty horrible to me . . . . or are you saying I'm saying horrible things about you by pointing out your black-and-white judgementality of Trump. Is it taboo to point out someone's extreme prejudices?
Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
-
larsenb
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 10902
- Location: Between here and Standing Rock
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
-
eddie
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2405
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
Actually Larson I think you've been very patient in fair with your comments, a good example for us all. So has FFA, I let Silver get to me sometimes, and I think that's his goal, taking delight in stirring the pot.( I love the gif FFA posted, haha. If your goal is to stay at the top of the page, then you needle people in to posting.larsenb wrote: ↑June 16th, 2017, 10:19 pmOh, and this item. What on earth do you mean by this?? Who is saying horrible things about people? Is it OK to incessently call Trump a murderer an oath breaker and a liar and ignore everything else. That seems pretty horrible to me . . . . or are you saying I'm saying horrible things about you by pointing out your black-and-white judgementality of Trump. Is it taboo to point out someone's extreme prejudices?
I have learned slot from FFA and yourself, thanks!
-
Silver
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
Meanwhile, the idea of not 4,000 but 20,000 more troops back to Afghanistan to protect the poppy seed production is being floated around. Bloody hands all around. Anybody could have seen it coming. It's what the murderous Gadiantons do.
Of course, this leaves Trump supporters with only more cognitive dissonance and more compromised each day. Oh well, they can't say they were warned.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... fghanistan
US General Wants 20,000 Additional Ground Troops Sent To Afghanistan
Tyler Durden's picture
by Tyler Durden
Jun 17, 2017 2:30 PM
The US is definitely going to be sending more ground troops to Afghanistan soon, but, as AntiWar.com's Jason Ditz notes, the exact number is yet to be determined, with the Pentagon today backing away from media reports yesterday that they’d settled on a figure of 4,000 more troops, saying no final decisions have been made yet on numbers.
That might suggest they’re leaning toward an even bigger number, with influential retired Gen. Jack Keane suggesting that the US needed to send up to 20,000 more ground troops if they wanted to win the war, saying he believed the 4,000 figure was not likely to change the direction of the war.
Defense Secretary James Mattis conceded in testimony to the Senate this week that the US is “not winning” in Afghanistan, and President Trump has since given him unilateral authority to decide on troop levels and strategy. Mattis was seen as leaning toward the high end of escalation proposals.
It’s not clear whether that means the 4,000 to 5,000 figures being bandied about by Pentagon officials, however, or if proposals by former officials for far bigger escalations, like Keane’s today, might have some traction. Keane explicitly faulted President Obama for removing the 100,000 troops the US had in Afghanistan at one point and leaving only around 8,000 insisting that “we have to put that back if they’re going to be effective.”
The Afghan War hasn’t exactly been popular, however, and while the roughly 8,500 troops there presently mostly fly under the radar, moves to double or triple the number of US troops in the country could prove very controversial, particularly since, 16 years into the war, the US seems further than ever from something resembling victory.
So, as TheAntiMedia's Darius Shahtahmasebi explains... The US will never win the war in Afghanistan.
Defense Secretary Jim “Mad Dog” Mattis told Congress on Tuesday that the United States is not winning the war in Afghanistan, Reuters reports.
The United States has been formally at war with (or within) Afghanistan since 2001, with little to no tangible progress to show for it. In that context, Mattis’ admission should hardly come as a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention.
However, while Mattis spoke the truth about the non-existent success of the war in Afghanistan, he followed up his statement with a dismal “[a]nd we will correct this as soon as possible.”
This proposed correction involves giving Mattis complete authority to determine troop levels in the war-torn country, something President Trump approved on Tuesday. It is believed that Mattis will be looking to send several thousand more American troops to Afghanistan, though the official number has not yet been confirmed.
In a video published by the Washington Post, Mattis was incredibly critical of restrictions imposed during the Obama era, which he believes caused the ongoing failures in Afghanistan.
“I retired from military service three months after sequestration took effect,” Mr. Mattis, a former Marine general, told the House Armed Services Committee. “Four years later, I returned to the department [of defense], and I have been shocked by what I’ve seen about our readiness to fight … No enemy in the field has done more to harm the readiness of our military than sequestration.”
But here’s what you aren’t being told: the U.S. has been increasing – and decreasing – troop levels by the thousands over the course of the conflict. Still, no victory has emerged despite almost 16 years of war under both George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
Barely even a month into his presidency, Obama approved a significant troop increase of at least 8,000 Marines, as well as 4,000 additional Army troops to Afghanistan (another 5,000 troops were to be deployed at a later date). By November of that year, Obama announced he was planned to send over 30,000 more troops to the war-stricken nation, highlighting a major escalation in the war and bringing the official number of U.S. troops to a whopping 100,000.
As confirmed by Politifact:
“Obama took office with about 34,000 troops. There are now 94,000 troops and closing in on 98,000 troops by summer.”
Although he originally indicated he would wind down the war, as early as 2009 it was reported that at one national security meeting, Obama told his advisors, “I want to take off the table that we’re leaving Afghanistan.” By 2014, he announced that the war was going to last additional two-and-a-half years.
A NATO night raid in February of 2010 conducted in a village in Paktia province, Afghanistan — and exposed by investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill — left seven civilians dead, including two pregnant women. As the story reached the media, NATO stated in response that the force entered the compound due to intelligence that confirmed the site was one of “militant activity.” As they were engaged in a firefight with several insurgents, the troops killed the insurgents and discovered that three women had been bound and gagged before being executed. However, a British reporter, Jerome Starkey, had already reported that this was a false narrative upon going to the area to interview witnesses following the incident.
The compound actually belonged to an anti-Taliban policeman trained by the United States. At the time, the family had gathered to celebrate the naming of a newborn son, and the gathering included a prosecutor and a university vice-chancellor – both of whom were related to the policeman.
In order to cover the tracks of their reckless decision to execute unarmed civilians, the American troops used knives to dig out the bullets from the bodies of the pregnant women killed.
Scahill reports:
“Months later, when I sat with the family elder, Hajji Sharabuddin, at his home, his anger seemed only to have hardened. ‘I don’t accept their apology. I would not trade my sons for the whole kingdom of the United States,’ he told me, holding up a picture of his sons. ‘Initially, we were thinking that Americans were the friends of Afghans, but now we think that Americans themselves are terrorists. Americans are our enemy. They bring terror and destruction. Americans not only destroyed my house, they destroyed my family. The Americans unleashed the Special Forces on us. These Special Forces, with the long beards, did cruel, criminal things.’
“‘We call them the American Taliban,’ added Mohammed Tahir, the father of Gulalai, one of the slain women.”
According to Scahill, night raids of this kind take place thousands of times a year in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other countries we are not even informed about.
The United States’ indiscriminate violence against its own allies on the ground — initiated by Bush and carried on recklessly under Obama — has been inherited by Trump. Barely a week ago, the U.S. killed three Afghan policemen in an air strike. The U.S. is killing its own allies on the ground, and it doesn’t take a military analyst to see that the U.S. is creating more and more enemies in the process.
It is, therefore, no surprise at all – from a logical standpoint – that Afghans who have been trained by the U.S. turn their American-supplied weapons on the American soldiers who prepared them for battle. The latest incident of this kind occurred around the same time as the aforementioned U.S. air strike, which murdered three policemen – but it is not a new or unforeseen issue. These incidents have occurred multiple times in the past.
Anyone who thinks that attempting this already tried and failed Afghanistan strategy over and over again will provide different results needs to prepare for what’s likely to come.
At this rate, the war will never. If anything, it is just getting started, this time with a Trump-esque tinge of its own. According to Reuters, Mattis also said he will be taking a “regional approach” rather than looking at Afghanistan in isolation.
What could a “regional approach” possibly mean?
As a region, one of the countries bordering Afghanistan is Iran, a long-time adversary of the United States (meanwhile, on another front, the U.S. has reportedly just deployed a long-range rocket launcher to confront Iranian-backed militia in Syria). Someone as experienced as Mattis should know that the United States can never “win” a war in Afghanistan — for every bomb dropped, another “terrorist” pops up out of the rubble. For every anti-Taliban policeman killed, the U.S. loses more and more points with the local population, who cannot conceivably welcome such a terrorizing force.
However, the U.S. can and will continue to exert added pressure on its rival, the Islamic Republic of Iran, by surrounding the country with American troops. The U.S. will almost certainly keep its defense contractors and arms dealers in business by ramping up a war with Afghanistan that has been escalated countless times with not so much as a shred of success.
Mattis also has a similar strategy for fighting ISIS in Syria, yet ISIS fighters appear to be escaping the current conflict in Raqqa unscathed so they can confront Iranian and Syrian troops elsewhere in the country.
As the film adaption of George Orwell’s 1984 observed, “The war is not meant to be won – it is meant to be continuous.”
Of course, this leaves Trump supporters with only more cognitive dissonance and more compromised each day. Oh well, they can't say they were warned.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... fghanistan
US General Wants 20,000 Additional Ground Troops Sent To Afghanistan
Tyler Durden's picture
by Tyler Durden
Jun 17, 2017 2:30 PM
The US is definitely going to be sending more ground troops to Afghanistan soon, but, as AntiWar.com's Jason Ditz notes, the exact number is yet to be determined, with the Pentagon today backing away from media reports yesterday that they’d settled on a figure of 4,000 more troops, saying no final decisions have been made yet on numbers.
That might suggest they’re leaning toward an even bigger number, with influential retired Gen. Jack Keane suggesting that the US needed to send up to 20,000 more ground troops if they wanted to win the war, saying he believed the 4,000 figure was not likely to change the direction of the war.
Defense Secretary James Mattis conceded in testimony to the Senate this week that the US is “not winning” in Afghanistan, and President Trump has since given him unilateral authority to decide on troop levels and strategy. Mattis was seen as leaning toward the high end of escalation proposals.
It’s not clear whether that means the 4,000 to 5,000 figures being bandied about by Pentagon officials, however, or if proposals by former officials for far bigger escalations, like Keane’s today, might have some traction. Keane explicitly faulted President Obama for removing the 100,000 troops the US had in Afghanistan at one point and leaving only around 8,000 insisting that “we have to put that back if they’re going to be effective.”
The Afghan War hasn’t exactly been popular, however, and while the roughly 8,500 troops there presently mostly fly under the radar, moves to double or triple the number of US troops in the country could prove very controversial, particularly since, 16 years into the war, the US seems further than ever from something resembling victory.
So, as TheAntiMedia's Darius Shahtahmasebi explains... The US will never win the war in Afghanistan.
Defense Secretary Jim “Mad Dog” Mattis told Congress on Tuesday that the United States is not winning the war in Afghanistan, Reuters reports.
The United States has been formally at war with (or within) Afghanistan since 2001, with little to no tangible progress to show for it. In that context, Mattis’ admission should hardly come as a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention.
However, while Mattis spoke the truth about the non-existent success of the war in Afghanistan, he followed up his statement with a dismal “[a]nd we will correct this as soon as possible.”
This proposed correction involves giving Mattis complete authority to determine troop levels in the war-torn country, something President Trump approved on Tuesday. It is believed that Mattis will be looking to send several thousand more American troops to Afghanistan, though the official number has not yet been confirmed.
In a video published by the Washington Post, Mattis was incredibly critical of restrictions imposed during the Obama era, which he believes caused the ongoing failures in Afghanistan.
“I retired from military service three months after sequestration took effect,” Mr. Mattis, a former Marine general, told the House Armed Services Committee. “Four years later, I returned to the department [of defense], and I have been shocked by what I’ve seen about our readiness to fight … No enemy in the field has done more to harm the readiness of our military than sequestration.”
But here’s what you aren’t being told: the U.S. has been increasing – and decreasing – troop levels by the thousands over the course of the conflict. Still, no victory has emerged despite almost 16 years of war under both George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
Barely even a month into his presidency, Obama approved a significant troop increase of at least 8,000 Marines, as well as 4,000 additional Army troops to Afghanistan (another 5,000 troops were to be deployed at a later date). By November of that year, Obama announced he was planned to send over 30,000 more troops to the war-stricken nation, highlighting a major escalation in the war and bringing the official number of U.S. troops to a whopping 100,000.
As confirmed by Politifact:
“Obama took office with about 34,000 troops. There are now 94,000 troops and closing in on 98,000 troops by summer.”
Although he originally indicated he would wind down the war, as early as 2009 it was reported that at one national security meeting, Obama told his advisors, “I want to take off the table that we’re leaving Afghanistan.” By 2014, he announced that the war was going to last additional two-and-a-half years.
A NATO night raid in February of 2010 conducted in a village in Paktia province, Afghanistan — and exposed by investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill — left seven civilians dead, including two pregnant women. As the story reached the media, NATO stated in response that the force entered the compound due to intelligence that confirmed the site was one of “militant activity.” As they were engaged in a firefight with several insurgents, the troops killed the insurgents and discovered that three women had been bound and gagged before being executed. However, a British reporter, Jerome Starkey, had already reported that this was a false narrative upon going to the area to interview witnesses following the incident.
The compound actually belonged to an anti-Taliban policeman trained by the United States. At the time, the family had gathered to celebrate the naming of a newborn son, and the gathering included a prosecutor and a university vice-chancellor – both of whom were related to the policeman.
In order to cover the tracks of their reckless decision to execute unarmed civilians, the American troops used knives to dig out the bullets from the bodies of the pregnant women killed.
Scahill reports:
“Months later, when I sat with the family elder, Hajji Sharabuddin, at his home, his anger seemed only to have hardened. ‘I don’t accept their apology. I would not trade my sons for the whole kingdom of the United States,’ he told me, holding up a picture of his sons. ‘Initially, we were thinking that Americans were the friends of Afghans, but now we think that Americans themselves are terrorists. Americans are our enemy. They bring terror and destruction. Americans not only destroyed my house, they destroyed my family. The Americans unleashed the Special Forces on us. These Special Forces, with the long beards, did cruel, criminal things.’
“‘We call them the American Taliban,’ added Mohammed Tahir, the father of Gulalai, one of the slain women.”
According to Scahill, night raids of this kind take place thousands of times a year in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other countries we are not even informed about.
The United States’ indiscriminate violence against its own allies on the ground — initiated by Bush and carried on recklessly under Obama — has been inherited by Trump. Barely a week ago, the U.S. killed three Afghan policemen in an air strike. The U.S. is killing its own allies on the ground, and it doesn’t take a military analyst to see that the U.S. is creating more and more enemies in the process.
It is, therefore, no surprise at all – from a logical standpoint – that Afghans who have been trained by the U.S. turn their American-supplied weapons on the American soldiers who prepared them for battle. The latest incident of this kind occurred around the same time as the aforementioned U.S. air strike, which murdered three policemen – but it is not a new or unforeseen issue. These incidents have occurred multiple times in the past.
Anyone who thinks that attempting this already tried and failed Afghanistan strategy over and over again will provide different results needs to prepare for what’s likely to come.
At this rate, the war will never. If anything, it is just getting started, this time with a Trump-esque tinge of its own. According to Reuters, Mattis also said he will be taking a “regional approach” rather than looking at Afghanistan in isolation.
What could a “regional approach” possibly mean?
As a region, one of the countries bordering Afghanistan is Iran, a long-time adversary of the United States (meanwhile, on another front, the U.S. has reportedly just deployed a long-range rocket launcher to confront Iranian-backed militia in Syria). Someone as experienced as Mattis should know that the United States can never “win” a war in Afghanistan — for every bomb dropped, another “terrorist” pops up out of the rubble. For every anti-Taliban policeman killed, the U.S. loses more and more points with the local population, who cannot conceivably welcome such a terrorizing force.
However, the U.S. can and will continue to exert added pressure on its rival, the Islamic Republic of Iran, by surrounding the country with American troops. The U.S. will almost certainly keep its defense contractors and arms dealers in business by ramping up a war with Afghanistan that has been escalated countless times with not so much as a shred of success.
Mattis also has a similar strategy for fighting ISIS in Syria, yet ISIS fighters appear to be escaping the current conflict in Raqqa unscathed so they can confront Iranian and Syrian troops elsewhere in the country.
As the film adaption of George Orwell’s 1984 observed, “The war is not meant to be won – it is meant to be continuous.”
-
freedomforall
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
Anonymous, aka, Silver for POTUS in 2020. Anyone up for? Then he can put his money where his mouth is! Then he can tell everyone in the country that Trump was murderer, a liar and an oath breaker during his campaign. Who knows, perhaps he would be able to get us out of the big mess our country is in, because the globalists would fear him. Maybe he could get the Judicial System to straighten up and fly right; Judges would honor their oath. Lawyers would honor their oath. Cops would learn the laws they are supposed to know and enforce, instead of making up their own rules and treating everyone they meet as a suspect and a fool to be pulled around by the nose at will. Illegal check points could be eliminated because they are unconstitutional. The BLM or any other police type agency would not be able to set up dinky "free speech" zones. The Constitution would be honored, whereas now judges refuse to allow it in their courtroom. And the list goes on and on.
Silver, for President! :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause:
Silver, for President! :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause:
-
eddie
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2405
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
=))freedomforall wrote: ↑June 17th, 2017, 9:28 pm Anonymous, aka, Silver for POTUS in 2020. Anyone up for? Then he can put his money where his mouth is! Then he can tell everyone in the country that Trump was murderer, a liar and an oath breaker during his campaign. Who knows, perhaps he would be able to get us out of the big mess our country is in, because the globalists would fear him. Maybe he could get the Judicial System to straighten up and fly right; Judges would honor their oath. Lawyers would honor their oath. Cops would learn the laws they are supposed to know and enforce, instead of making up their own rules and treating everyone they meet as a suspect and a fool to be pulled around by the nose at will. Illegal check points could be eliminated because they are unconstitutional. The BLM or any other police type agency would not be able to set up dinky "free speech" zones. The Constitution would be honored, whereas now judges refuse to allow it in their courtroom. And the list goes on and on.
Silver, for President! :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause:
:-ss-
eddie
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2405
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
I have a good campaign slogan,
Dont pick your nose,
Pick ME for President! Instead of a bugger biting
You and a sticky finger ,Silver will be your reward.
MAKE AMERICA SHINE AGAIN
Dont pick your nose,
Pick ME for President! Instead of a bugger biting
You and a sticky finger ,Silver will be your reward.
MAKE AMERICA SHINE AGAIN
-
freedomforall
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
Shock! Millions Of Illegals In For A Brutal Surprise—Trump Cancels Massive Obama Law!
Trump Just Ordered Massive Arrest – Here’s What Happening At D.C. Airport Right Now!
Trump Just Ordered Massive Arrest – Here’s What Happening At D.C. Airport Right Now!
-
freedomforall
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
This is happening right here in America. And if it gets hold the gadiantons and foreign wars will be among the least of our worries. Muslims are trying to take over America, already a Florida Police Chief has told people to arm themselves.
MUSLIMS ATTACK CHRISTIANS IN AMERICA OVER SHARIA LAW
Fed-Up Sheriff Just INFURIATED All Muslims In Florida With What He Ordered Patriots To Do Ramadan
Brevard County Sheriff Says To Prepare For A Terror Attack - This Is WAR
It's Time To Fight Back
MUSLIMS ATTACK CHRISTIANS IN AMERICA OVER SHARIA LAW
Fed-Up Sheriff Just INFURIATED All Muslims In Florida With What He Ordered Patriots To Do Ramadan
Brevard County Sheriff Says To Prepare For A Terror Attack - This Is WAR
It's Time To Fight Back
-
Silver
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
What a difference between the world's reaction and the Church's quiet emphasis on charity.
https://www.lds.org/refugees
I Was a Stranger—An Effort to Help Refugees
“For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me in; Naked, and ye clothed me; I was in prison, and ye came unto me.” Matthew 25:35-36
How You Can Serve
Five Ways to Get Started:
Get informed about the needs in your community
Volunteer with an organization you admire
Make a new friend
Do something you enjoy with someone new
Invite someone to your family night
Seven Challenges Refugees Face:
Learning a new language
Building a new support network of friends
Understanding different cultural customs and practices
Providing the appropriate academic support for their children
Accessing basic services, such as medical care
Finding transportation
Securing employment
Want more ideas on helping refugees?
Where You Can Serve
Local Organizations That Might Need Volunteers:
Government resettlement agencies
Schools
Religious places of worship
Interfaith groups
Low-income health clinics
Local nonprofits
Community centers
In the United States, members can find local service opportunities at 211.org or JustServe.org to learn about opportunities to serve refugees in their communities. Outside the United States, leaders can contact their area welfare manager for help in identifying trusted organizations in their area.
Five Questions to Ask When Identifying Potential Organizations:
Whom do you help?
How are you helping them?
What needs would you like to address but aren’t able to?
Beyond financial contributions, how can I help?
How do the services you offer help people to eventually meet their own needs?
mother and children
How the Church Is Serving
As the worldwide refugee crisis has worsened in recent years, LDS Charities, the humanitarian arm of the Church, has responded by developing a three-pronged approach for helping refugees: immediate relief, long-term aid, and resettlement support.
LDS Charities works with many trusted partners—both local and global—who support refugees, including:
Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA)
Catholic Relief Services (CRS)
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)
International Medical Corps (IMC)
International Rescue Committee (IRC)
United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
World Relief
LDS Charities also works with refugee resettlement agencies such as the ones on this list.
In addition to helping refugees, LDS Charities provides aid with disaster relief, clean water and sanitation, wheelchairs, maternal and newborn care, immunization campaigns, vision care, and family gardening. Learn more about the Church’s global humanitarian work.
https://www.lds.org/refugees
I Was a Stranger—An Effort to Help Refugees
“For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me in; Naked, and ye clothed me; I was in prison, and ye came unto me.” Matthew 25:35-36
How You Can Serve
Five Ways to Get Started:
Get informed about the needs in your community
Volunteer with an organization you admire
Make a new friend
Do something you enjoy with someone new
Invite someone to your family night
Seven Challenges Refugees Face:
Learning a new language
Building a new support network of friends
Understanding different cultural customs and practices
Providing the appropriate academic support for their children
Accessing basic services, such as medical care
Finding transportation
Securing employment
Want more ideas on helping refugees?
Where You Can Serve
Local Organizations That Might Need Volunteers:
Government resettlement agencies
Schools
Religious places of worship
Interfaith groups
Low-income health clinics
Local nonprofits
Community centers
In the United States, members can find local service opportunities at 211.org or JustServe.org to learn about opportunities to serve refugees in their communities. Outside the United States, leaders can contact their area welfare manager for help in identifying trusted organizations in their area.
Five Questions to Ask When Identifying Potential Organizations:
Whom do you help?
How are you helping them?
What needs would you like to address but aren’t able to?
Beyond financial contributions, how can I help?
How do the services you offer help people to eventually meet their own needs?
mother and children
How the Church Is Serving
As the worldwide refugee crisis has worsened in recent years, LDS Charities, the humanitarian arm of the Church, has responded by developing a three-pronged approach for helping refugees: immediate relief, long-term aid, and resettlement support.
LDS Charities works with many trusted partners—both local and global—who support refugees, including:
Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA)
Catholic Relief Services (CRS)
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)
International Medical Corps (IMC)
International Rescue Committee (IRC)
United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
World Relief
LDS Charities also works with refugee resettlement agencies such as the ones on this list.
In addition to helping refugees, LDS Charities provides aid with disaster relief, clean water and sanitation, wheelchairs, maternal and newborn care, immunization campaigns, vision care, and family gardening. Learn more about the Church’s global humanitarian work.
-
Silver
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
Well, would you look at that? Here's another article proving what I've been saying for months. I'm just getting correcter and correcter. LOL. It's fun when I share truth and get called out for hate-speech.
So here's the deal. When you elect a member of the elite class to president, see. And then that elitist gets a bunch of elitist billionaires in his administration...OK? Then what happens is this...the debt serfs, like, you know, just about everybody that occupies this forum, well, they get the shaft.
Why? Because that's what billionaires do. Click on the link below to see charts. A picture is worth a thousand words, especially when the chart proves me right.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... ive-elites
We're In A Boiling-Point Crisis Of Exploitive Elites
by Tyler Durden
Jun 18, 2017 7:00 PM
Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,
The "fixes" to the stagnation of postwar Capitalism in the 1970s were financialization, globalism, and the sustained expansion of debt--all have run out of steam.
Many of us have written about cycles in the past decade: Kondratieff economic cycles, business/credit cycles, the Strauss–Howe generational theory (an existential national crisis arises every four generations, as described in their book The Fourth Turning), and long-wave cycles of growth and decline, as described in seminal books such as The Great Wave: Price Revolutions and the Rhythm of History and War and Peace and War: The Rise and Fall of Empires.
There is another Rhythm of American History that few recognize: the economic, social and political crises sparked by exploitive Elites. There are two dynamics that drive these crises:
1. The exploitation of commoners by financial/political Elites reaches extremes that create systemic instability as commoners no longer have the means to improve their conditions.
2. The economic mode of production that generated Elite wealth no longer functions, but the Elites cling to the failing system and enforce it with increasingly violent suppression of dissent.
Here are the previous Crises of Exploitive Elites:
1. Slavery, 1850 to 1865. Though the toxins generated by slavery are still with us, the existential political, social and economic crisis arose in the years between 1850 and the end of the Civil War in 1865.
In broad brush, the rise of the American West triggered a political crisis in the U.S. as the southern states realized the non-slave West's rising political power would doom the fragile balance between the non-slave Northern industrial-economy states and the cotton/agricultural slave-economy South.
It was a trend the South couldn't possibly win, but the South's exploitive Elites refused to concede any of their power--and that refusal to adapt to changing conditions guaranteed the Civil War.
The first Industrial Revolution radically transformed the source of wealth creation. The plantation agrarian mode of production of the South was eclipsed by the vast wealth-generating might of the rapidly industrializing North.
The Southern political and economic Elites could not win economically or politically, so they attempted a military solution--a war they might have won had it not been for the Westerners Lincoln, Grant and Sherman. (Lincoln was born and raised in the frontiers of Kentucky, Indiana and Illinois; both Grant and Sherman were born in Ohio and served in Army postings along the West Coast.)
The moral tide was rising against slavery. The Christian world had long been divided on the issue of slavery, but the tide turned against slavery in the early-to-mid-1800s, both in Great Britain an the U.S. Moral turnings are powerful instigators of political crises, and once again the Southern Elites attempted to stem this tide with military force.
2. The Crisis of Gilded-Age Exploitation, 1892 to 1914. The dates of this crisis are inexact and open to interpretation, but in broad brush, the Second Industrial Revolution (mass production, integrated industrial corporations, the rising dominance of Finance and Industrial Capital, emergence of monopolies and cartels, etc.) forced millions of commoners into the penury of wage-labor while concentrating the gains of capital and speculation into the hands of the few.
Adjusted for inflation, the wealth of the financier-industrialists in this era exceeds the wealth of today's billionaires, and is on par with the extremes of wealth concentration that characterize the last stages of the Roman Empire.
Commoners attempting to unionize were brutally suppressed by hired private enforcers and the police/military forces of the American government. Radical unions such as the I.W.W. (Industrial Workers of the World, a.k.a. Wobblies) were destroyed by coordinated, concerted government suppression, much of it by means that are visibly illegal by today's standards.
The conflict between exploited industrial labor and politically dominant Capital was eventually resolved by progressive anti-trust laws (aided by President Theodore Roosevelt) and the beginnings of social rights and welfare programs--universal education, limits on hours worked per week, etc.
3. The Great Depression and the Failure of Debt-Based Capitalism, 1929 to 1941. Capital was increasingly concentrated in the hands of the Elites in the Roaring 20s, but the commoners had new access to the financial magic of credit: banks sprouted by the thousands, anxious to loan money to fund the purchase of more farmland, new autos, and all the other output of a consumerist economy.
But alas, credit is not collateral, nor is it wealth. When the debt bubble burst, so did the stock market, which was based on highly leveraged margin debt.
The Elite financiers resisted writing down the debt that had made them so rich, and as a result the Depression dragged on, immiserating millions who then turned to fascism or radical socialism as the political fixes to the systemic exploitation and dominance of Elites.
4. Civil Rights and Global Empire, 1954 to 1973. The legacy of slavery's oppression had lingered on for almost 100 years, and the rising prosperity of the 1950s and 60s generated a social, moral, political and economic movement to throw off the most oppressive aspects of an exploitive social/political order.
At the same time, the costs of maintaining a Global Empire were raised to a boiling point by the war in Vietnam, which destabilized the moral, political, social and economic orders.
In response the Elites instigated waves of violent, suppressive state tactics designed to disrupt and destroy the organized dissent of social movements. These tactics included the FBI's COINTELPRO programs as well as other blatantly illegal, heavy-handed government enforcement of the dominance of exploitive Elites.
I've written extensively about state over-reach and illegal suppression of dissent: remember, the state exists to enforce the dominance of Elites: everything else is propaganda, misdirection and obfuscation.
Welcome to the United States of Orwell, Part 3: We had to Destroy Democracy in Order to Save It (March 28, 2012)
State Over-Reach: Stripmining the Citizenry for Fun and Profit (November 13, 2009)
When It Becomes Serious, First They Lie--When That Fails, They Arrest You (March 16, 2015)
For more on COINTELPRO, please read War at Home: Covert action against U.S. activists and what we can do about it.
Simply put: when lies no longer work, the government devotes its resources not to eliminating wars of choice, cronyism and corruption but to suppressing dissent and resistance to those extractive, exploitive policies.
Which brings us to the present-day Crisis of Exploitive Elites. The "fixes" to the stagnation of postwar Elite/state-dominated Capitalism in the 1970s were financialization, globalism, and the sustained expansion of debt in all sectors--state, corporate and household.
Now all three engines of "growth" have run out of steam. All three greatly exacerbated wealth and income inequality, as these two charts reveal:
Once again, the political and economic Elites are resisting the tides that are undermining their Empires of Debt and Exploitation. The Elite-controlled Corporate Media has been ordered to War Status, an DefCon-5 emergency requiring an endless spew of all-out propaganda designed to distract, disrupt and destroy organized dissent and any resistance to the dominance of Exploitive political and financial Elites.
The Exploitive Elites cannot turn back the clock, so they cling to their failed "fixes" and demand our compliance.
The Exploitive Elites cannot turn back the tides of history, but they can immiserate millions. That seems to be "solution" enough for them, but you cannot destroy rising moral revulsion to soaring inequality and the abject failure of debt-based global capitalism with mere media propaganda.
So here's the deal. When you elect a member of the elite class to president, see. And then that elitist gets a bunch of elitist billionaires in his administration...OK? Then what happens is this...the debt serfs, like, you know, just about everybody that occupies this forum, well, they get the shaft.
Why? Because that's what billionaires do. Click on the link below to see charts. A picture is worth a thousand words, especially when the chart proves me right.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... ive-elites
We're In A Boiling-Point Crisis Of Exploitive Elites
by Tyler Durden
Jun 18, 2017 7:00 PM
Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,
The "fixes" to the stagnation of postwar Capitalism in the 1970s were financialization, globalism, and the sustained expansion of debt--all have run out of steam.
Many of us have written about cycles in the past decade: Kondratieff economic cycles, business/credit cycles, the Strauss–Howe generational theory (an existential national crisis arises every four generations, as described in their book The Fourth Turning), and long-wave cycles of growth and decline, as described in seminal books such as The Great Wave: Price Revolutions and the Rhythm of History and War and Peace and War: The Rise and Fall of Empires.
There is another Rhythm of American History that few recognize: the economic, social and political crises sparked by exploitive Elites. There are two dynamics that drive these crises:
1. The exploitation of commoners by financial/political Elites reaches extremes that create systemic instability as commoners no longer have the means to improve their conditions.
2. The economic mode of production that generated Elite wealth no longer functions, but the Elites cling to the failing system and enforce it with increasingly violent suppression of dissent.
Here are the previous Crises of Exploitive Elites:
1. Slavery, 1850 to 1865. Though the toxins generated by slavery are still with us, the existential political, social and economic crisis arose in the years between 1850 and the end of the Civil War in 1865.
In broad brush, the rise of the American West triggered a political crisis in the U.S. as the southern states realized the non-slave West's rising political power would doom the fragile balance between the non-slave Northern industrial-economy states and the cotton/agricultural slave-economy South.
It was a trend the South couldn't possibly win, but the South's exploitive Elites refused to concede any of their power--and that refusal to adapt to changing conditions guaranteed the Civil War.
The first Industrial Revolution radically transformed the source of wealth creation. The plantation agrarian mode of production of the South was eclipsed by the vast wealth-generating might of the rapidly industrializing North.
The Southern political and economic Elites could not win economically or politically, so they attempted a military solution--a war they might have won had it not been for the Westerners Lincoln, Grant and Sherman. (Lincoln was born and raised in the frontiers of Kentucky, Indiana and Illinois; both Grant and Sherman were born in Ohio and served in Army postings along the West Coast.)
The moral tide was rising against slavery. The Christian world had long been divided on the issue of slavery, but the tide turned against slavery in the early-to-mid-1800s, both in Great Britain an the U.S. Moral turnings are powerful instigators of political crises, and once again the Southern Elites attempted to stem this tide with military force.
2. The Crisis of Gilded-Age Exploitation, 1892 to 1914. The dates of this crisis are inexact and open to interpretation, but in broad brush, the Second Industrial Revolution (mass production, integrated industrial corporations, the rising dominance of Finance and Industrial Capital, emergence of monopolies and cartels, etc.) forced millions of commoners into the penury of wage-labor while concentrating the gains of capital and speculation into the hands of the few.
Adjusted for inflation, the wealth of the financier-industrialists in this era exceeds the wealth of today's billionaires, and is on par with the extremes of wealth concentration that characterize the last stages of the Roman Empire.
Commoners attempting to unionize were brutally suppressed by hired private enforcers and the police/military forces of the American government. Radical unions such as the I.W.W. (Industrial Workers of the World, a.k.a. Wobblies) were destroyed by coordinated, concerted government suppression, much of it by means that are visibly illegal by today's standards.
The conflict between exploited industrial labor and politically dominant Capital was eventually resolved by progressive anti-trust laws (aided by President Theodore Roosevelt) and the beginnings of social rights and welfare programs--universal education, limits on hours worked per week, etc.
3. The Great Depression and the Failure of Debt-Based Capitalism, 1929 to 1941. Capital was increasingly concentrated in the hands of the Elites in the Roaring 20s, but the commoners had new access to the financial magic of credit: banks sprouted by the thousands, anxious to loan money to fund the purchase of more farmland, new autos, and all the other output of a consumerist economy.
But alas, credit is not collateral, nor is it wealth. When the debt bubble burst, so did the stock market, which was based on highly leveraged margin debt.
The Elite financiers resisted writing down the debt that had made them so rich, and as a result the Depression dragged on, immiserating millions who then turned to fascism or radical socialism as the political fixes to the systemic exploitation and dominance of Elites.
4. Civil Rights and Global Empire, 1954 to 1973. The legacy of slavery's oppression had lingered on for almost 100 years, and the rising prosperity of the 1950s and 60s generated a social, moral, political and economic movement to throw off the most oppressive aspects of an exploitive social/political order.
At the same time, the costs of maintaining a Global Empire were raised to a boiling point by the war in Vietnam, which destabilized the moral, political, social and economic orders.
In response the Elites instigated waves of violent, suppressive state tactics designed to disrupt and destroy the organized dissent of social movements. These tactics included the FBI's COINTELPRO programs as well as other blatantly illegal, heavy-handed government enforcement of the dominance of exploitive Elites.
I've written extensively about state over-reach and illegal suppression of dissent: remember, the state exists to enforce the dominance of Elites: everything else is propaganda, misdirection and obfuscation.
Welcome to the United States of Orwell, Part 3: We had to Destroy Democracy in Order to Save It (March 28, 2012)
State Over-Reach: Stripmining the Citizenry for Fun and Profit (November 13, 2009)
When It Becomes Serious, First They Lie--When That Fails, They Arrest You (March 16, 2015)
For more on COINTELPRO, please read War at Home: Covert action against U.S. activists and what we can do about it.
Simply put: when lies no longer work, the government devotes its resources not to eliminating wars of choice, cronyism and corruption but to suppressing dissent and resistance to those extractive, exploitive policies.
Which brings us to the present-day Crisis of Exploitive Elites. The "fixes" to the stagnation of postwar Elite/state-dominated Capitalism in the 1970s were financialization, globalism, and the sustained expansion of debt in all sectors--state, corporate and household.
Now all three engines of "growth" have run out of steam. All three greatly exacerbated wealth and income inequality, as these two charts reveal:
Once again, the political and economic Elites are resisting the tides that are undermining their Empires of Debt and Exploitation. The Elite-controlled Corporate Media has been ordered to War Status, an DefCon-5 emergency requiring an endless spew of all-out propaganda designed to distract, disrupt and destroy organized dissent and any resistance to the dominance of Exploitive political and financial Elites.
The Exploitive Elites cannot turn back the clock, so they cling to their failed "fixes" and demand our compliance.
The Exploitive Elites cannot turn back the tides of history, but they can immiserate millions. That seems to be "solution" enough for them, but you cannot destroy rising moral revulsion to soaring inequality and the abject failure of debt-based global capitalism with mere media propaganda.
-
Silver
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
Trump supporters didn't like Kathy Griffin holding a fake Trump head covered in blood. I agree that it is in very poor taste. I hope she never gets a job doing anything in the public eye again.
Meanwhile Trump supporters say nothing of the real blood on Trump's hands. Curious, ain't it?
See pictures and info at the link below.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... n-warplane
U.S-Led Coalition Shoots Down Syrian Warplane
Tyler Durden's picture
by Tyler Durden
Jun 18, 2017 3:48 PM
Update: U.S. Central Command issued a statement saying the plane was downed "in collective self-defense of Coalition-partnered forces," identified as fighters of the Syrian Democratic Forces near Tabqah. It is unclear if these particular "forces" were getting their funding from Saudi Arabia or Qatar.
And a quick situational take from Worldview:
A U.S. Navy fighter jet shot down a Syrian government Su-22 fighter jet on June 18 that had dropped bombs on Syrian rebel forces fighting the Islamic State in Syria, ABC News reported. The U.S.-led coalition said in a statement that its focus is on fighting the militant group, and not fighting the Syrian government or Russian forces, but it will defend coalition forces coming under attack. The incident occurred in a town south of Tabqa, Syria, which had been retaken from the Islamic State by the Syrian Democratic Forces, an umbrella group of Syrian Kurdish and Arab rebel forces, in preparation for the offensive on the stronghold of Raqqa.
The downing is the latest escalation between the U.S.-led coalition and pro-government forces in Syria. The United States has also recently conducted airstrikes at pro-Syrian government forces that have moved into a deconfliction zone around the town of at al-Tanf in southwest Syria, which is the location of a coalition training base for local forces fighting the Islamic State.
Meanwhile, the Syrians are not happy with the US strike:
Majd Fahd
✔ @Syria_Protector
You American bastards just shot down my cousin's aircraft (Ali) while taking out the scumbags of ISIS in the area.
Ali hope you are OK bro
3:45 PM - 18 Jun 2017
1,123 1,123 Retweets 1,075 1,075 likes
* * *
The US-led, so-called anti-terrorist, coalition has reportedly shot down a Syrian government forces aircraft. Reuters reports the Syrian Arab Army announced that the aircraft was brought down in the southern Raqqa countryside, while it was engaging a fleeing ISIS convoy. The pilot remains missing.
Within Syria @WithinSyriaBlog
SyAAF Su-22 was lost in #Rasafa area while striking #ISIS positions
12:33 PM - 18 Jun 2017
50 50 Retweets 53 53 likes
Statement issued by the Syrian General Command of the Army and Armed Forces
The International Alliance (IAAF) this afternoon called for the targeting of one of our fighter jets in the Rusafa area in the southern Rifqa district while carrying out a combat mission against an organization calling on the terrorist in the area, which led to the plane crash and the loss of the pilot.
This blatant attack confirms beyond doubt the reality of the US position supporting terrorism, which aims to try to influence the ability of the Syrian Arab army the only effective force with its allies that exercise their legitimate right to fight terrorism throughout the territory of the homeland, especially as this attack comes at a time that achieves In which the Syrian Arab Army and its allies made clear progress in fighting the organization calling on the terrorist who is being defeated in the Syrian desert on more than one direction.
It also affirms the existing coordination between the United States of America and the organization of the terrorist advocate, and exposes the malicious intentions of the United States of America in the management and investment of terrorism to achieve its objectives in passing the American Zionist project in the region.
The General Command of the Army and the Armed Forces, warning of the serious consequences of this blatant attack on counterterrorism efforts, affirms that such attacks will not discourage them from their determination and determination to continue the war against the terrorist organizations and groups associated with them and restore security and stability to all the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic.
Damascus, 18 June 2017
General Command of the Army and Armed Forces
Freelance Journalist Alaa Ebrahim reports the aircraft was engaging a fleeing ISIS convoy...
Follow
Alaa Ebrahim @Alaa_Ebrahim_tv
#Syria army: #US-led coalition shoots down1of our fighter jets that was engaging a fleeing #ISIL convey in Rusafah 30km southeast of Araqqa
2:24 PM - 18 Jun 2017 · Syria
88 88 Retweets 29 29 likes
Which comes just days after US military reported watched as ISIS escaped from Raqqa.
Meanwhile Trump supporters say nothing of the real blood on Trump's hands. Curious, ain't it?
See pictures and info at the link below.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... n-warplane
U.S-Led Coalition Shoots Down Syrian Warplane
Tyler Durden's picture
by Tyler Durden
Jun 18, 2017 3:48 PM
Update: U.S. Central Command issued a statement saying the plane was downed "in collective self-defense of Coalition-partnered forces," identified as fighters of the Syrian Democratic Forces near Tabqah. It is unclear if these particular "forces" were getting their funding from Saudi Arabia or Qatar.
And a quick situational take from Worldview:
A U.S. Navy fighter jet shot down a Syrian government Su-22 fighter jet on June 18 that had dropped bombs on Syrian rebel forces fighting the Islamic State in Syria, ABC News reported. The U.S.-led coalition said in a statement that its focus is on fighting the militant group, and not fighting the Syrian government or Russian forces, but it will defend coalition forces coming under attack. The incident occurred in a town south of Tabqa, Syria, which had been retaken from the Islamic State by the Syrian Democratic Forces, an umbrella group of Syrian Kurdish and Arab rebel forces, in preparation for the offensive on the stronghold of Raqqa.
The downing is the latest escalation between the U.S.-led coalition and pro-government forces in Syria. The United States has also recently conducted airstrikes at pro-Syrian government forces that have moved into a deconfliction zone around the town of at al-Tanf in southwest Syria, which is the location of a coalition training base for local forces fighting the Islamic State.
Meanwhile, the Syrians are not happy with the US strike:
Majd Fahd
✔ @Syria_ProtectorYou American bastards just shot down my cousin's aircraft (Ali) while taking out the scumbags of ISIS in the area.
Ali hope you are OK bro
3:45 PM - 18 Jun 2017
1,123 1,123 Retweets 1,075 1,075 likes
* * *
The US-led, so-called anti-terrorist, coalition has reportedly shot down a Syrian government forces aircraft. Reuters reports the Syrian Arab Army announced that the aircraft was brought down in the southern Raqqa countryside, while it was engaging a fleeing ISIS convoy. The pilot remains missing.
Within Syria @WithinSyriaBlog
SyAAF Su-22 was lost in #Rasafa area while striking #ISIS positions
12:33 PM - 18 Jun 2017
50 50 Retweets 53 53 likes
Statement issued by the Syrian General Command of the Army and Armed Forces
The International Alliance (IAAF) this afternoon called for the targeting of one of our fighter jets in the Rusafa area in the southern Rifqa district while carrying out a combat mission against an organization calling on the terrorist in the area, which led to the plane crash and the loss of the pilot.
This blatant attack confirms beyond doubt the reality of the US position supporting terrorism, which aims to try to influence the ability of the Syrian Arab army the only effective force with its allies that exercise their legitimate right to fight terrorism throughout the territory of the homeland, especially as this attack comes at a time that achieves In which the Syrian Arab Army and its allies made clear progress in fighting the organization calling on the terrorist who is being defeated in the Syrian desert on more than one direction.
It also affirms the existing coordination between the United States of America and the organization of the terrorist advocate, and exposes the malicious intentions of the United States of America in the management and investment of terrorism to achieve its objectives in passing the American Zionist project in the region.
The General Command of the Army and the Armed Forces, warning of the serious consequences of this blatant attack on counterterrorism efforts, affirms that such attacks will not discourage them from their determination and determination to continue the war against the terrorist organizations and groups associated with them and restore security and stability to all the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic.
Damascus, 18 June 2017
General Command of the Army and Armed Forces
Freelance Journalist Alaa Ebrahim reports the aircraft was engaging a fleeing ISIS convoy...
Follow
Alaa Ebrahim @Alaa_Ebrahim_tv
#Syria army: #US-led coalition shoots down1of our fighter jets that was engaging a fleeing #ISIL convey in Rusafah 30km southeast of Araqqa
2:24 PM - 18 Jun 2017 · Syria
88 88 Retweets 29 29 likes
Which comes just days after US military reported watched as ISIS escaped from Raqqa.
-
freedomforall
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
Worrying about what Trump is doing and not handling the build up of Islamic terrorism here at home is rather foolish. Muslims are hard at taking over city by city and Silver worries more about Trump?
If three Muslims came to his door and demanded he live by Sharia Law, would Silver simply tell him "sure, I can do that, but Trump is a liar, a murderer and a oath breaker and has to be watched like a hawk, because he has become a real threat to freedom and liberty." Come on in and tell me how to assimilate into your way of life.
If three Muslims came to his door and demanded he live by Sharia Law, would Silver simply tell him "sure, I can do that, but Trump is a liar, a murderer and a oath breaker and has to be watched like a hawk, because he has become a real threat to freedom and liberty." Come on in and tell me how to assimilate into your way of life.
-
Elizabeth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 11796
- Location: East Coast Australia
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
That is ridiculous Silver and incorrect. Why should you assume that "just about everybody that occupies this forum" are, as you say, "debt serfs" ???
Also, obviously one would expect leaders to be, as you say, "of the elite". Why would financially burdened, unsuccessful losers, unable to support themselves, as you say "debt serfs" be eligible or able to be leaders ???
Also, obviously one would expect leaders to be, as you say, "of the elite". Why would financially burdened, unsuccessful losers, unable to support themselves, as you say "debt serfs" be eligible or able to be leaders ???
Silver wrote: ↑June 18th, 2017, 8:20 pm When you elect a member of the elite class to president, see. And then that elitist gets a bunch of elitist billionaires in his administration...OK? Then what happens is this...the debt serfs, like, you know, just about everybody that occupies this forum, well, they get the shaft.
Why? Because that's what billionaires do
-
Silver
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
Australia is worse off than the US. You guys have an external debt of 115% of your GDP. If you're a citizen of Australia, you're a debt serf.Elizabeth wrote: ↑June 18th, 2017, 10:19 pm That is ridiculous Silver and incorrect. Why should you assume that "just about everybody that occupies this forum" are, as you say, "debt serfs" ???
Also, obviously one would expect leaders to be, as you say, "of the elite". Why would financially burdened, unsuccessful losers, unable to support themselves, as you say "debt serfs" be eligible or able to be leaders ???Silver wrote: ↑June 18th, 2017, 8:20 pm When you elect a member of the elite class to president, see. And then that elitist gets a bunch of elitist billionaires in his administration...OK? Then what happens is this...the debt serfs, like, you know, just about everybody that occupies this forum, well, they get the shaft.
Why? Because that's what billionaires do
Here's the data:
http://www.usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html
-
Elizabeth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 11796
- Location: East Coast Australia
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
Australia had a surplus until the goody two shoes decided to support the bludgers of the world and give away the Australian tax payers monies to other countries and to the United Nations. Countries should look after their own, and all peoples work to support themselves and their families, plus no one should have children if they cannot feed and support them.
-
Silver
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
Now you're saying something completely different. Did you accept the fact then that most citizens of advanced countries are debt serfs?Elizabeth wrote: ↑June 18th, 2017, 10:40 pm Australia had a surplus until the goody two shoes decided to support the bludgers of the world and give away the Australian tax payers monies to other countries and to the United Nations. Countries should look after their own, and all peoples work to support themselves and their families, plus no one should have children if they cannot feed and support them.
Elizabeth, I'd like to remind you of how proud the Nephites were of their civilization. They thought they were the best. Then they grew haughty and they began to be swept off the land. If you were there at that time what would you have said to the parents of Nephite children when they could no longer "feed and support them" as you described it?
What about now? What if a married couple get pregnant and then lose their jobs, should they be forced to get an abortion because they can no longer support their child when she is born?
-
Silver
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
Kissinger's legacy lives on. Cheney's legacy lives on. Trump is making the same (intentional) mistakes. Gadiantons in charge, as usual. (Wondering if President Pence will be any different.)
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... iddle-east
Washington's "Good Terrorists, Bad Terrorists" Policy In Middle East
by Tyler Durden
Jun 19, 2017 2:00 AM
Submitted by Nauman Sadiq,
Karl Marx famously said that history repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce. The only difference between the Afghan jihad back in the ‘80s that spawned Islamic jihadists like the Taliban and al Qaeda for the first time in history and the Libyan and Syrian civil wars, 2011-onward, is that the Afghan jihad was an overt jihad: back then, the Western political establishments and their mouthpiece, the mainstream media, used to openly brag that the CIA provides all those AK-47s, RPGs and stingers to the Afghan so-called “freedom fighters” to combat the Soviet troops in Afghanistan.
After the 9/11 tragedy, however, the Western political establishments and corporate media have become a lot more circumspect, therefore this time around, they have waged covert jihads against the Arab-nationalist Gaddafi regime in Libya and the anti-Zionist Assad regime in Syria, in which Islamic jihadists (aka terrorists) have been sold as “moderate rebels” with secular and nationalist ambitions to the Western audience.
Since the regime change objective in those hapless countries went against the mainstream narrative of ostensibly fighting a war against terrorism, therefore the Western political establishments and the corporate media are now trying to muddle the reality by offering color-coded schemes to identify myriads of militant and terrorist outfits that are operating in Syria: such as the red militants of the Islamic State and al-Nusra Front, which the Western powers want to eliminate; the yellow Islamic jihadists, like Jaysh al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham, with whom the Western powers can collaborate under desperate circumstances; and the green militants of the Free Syria Army (FSA) and a few other inconsequential outfits, which together comprise the so-called “moderate” Syrian opposition.
If we were to draw parallels between the Soviet-Afghan jihad of the ‘80s and the Syrian civil war of today, the Western powers used the training camps located in the Af-Pak border regions to train and arm Afghan “Mujahideen” against the Soviet troops in Afghanistan.
Similarly, the training camps located in the border regions of Turkey and Jordan are being used to provide training and weapons to Sunni Arab militants to battle the Shi’a-dominated Syrian regime with the collaboration of Turkish, Jordanian and Saudi intelligence agencies.
During the Afghan jihad, it is a known historical fact that the bulk of so-called “freedom fighters” was comprised of Pashtun Islamic jihadists, such as the factions of Jalaluddin Haqqani, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, Abdul Rab Rasul Sayyaf and scores of others, some of which later coalesced together to form the Taliban Movement.
Similarly, in Syria, the majority of so-called “moderate rebels” is comprised of Sunni Arab jihadists, such as Jaysh al-Islam, Ahrar al-Sham, al-Nusra Front, the Islamic State and myriads of other militant groups, including a small portion of defected Syrian soldiers who go by the name of Free Syria Army (FSA).
Moreover, apart from Pashtun Islamic jihadists, various factions of the Northern Alliance of Tajiks and Uzbeks constituted the relatively “moderate” segment of the Afghan rebellion, though those “moderate” warlords, like Ahmad Shah Massoud and Abul Rashid Dostum, were more ethnic and tribal in character than secular or nationalist, as such.
Similarly, the Kurds of the so-called “Syrian Democratic Forces” can be compared with the Northern Alliance of Afghanistan. The socialist PYD/YPG Kurds of Syria, however, were allied with the Baathist regime against the Sunni Arab jihadists for the first three years of the Syrian civil war, i.e. from August 2011 to August 2014.
At the behest of American stooge in Iraqi Kurdistan, Massoud Barzani, the Syrian Kurds have switched sides in the last couple of years after the United States policy reversal and declaration of war against one faction of the Syrian opposition, the Islamic State, when the latter overstepped its mandate in Syria and overran Mosul and Anbar in Iraq in June 2014, from where, the US troops had withdrawn only a couple of years ago in December 2011.
Regarding the Western powers’ modus operandi of waging proxy wars in the Middle East, since the times of the Soviet-Afghan jihad during the eighties, it has been the fail-safe game plan of the master strategists at NATO to raise money from the oil-rich emirates of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE and Kuwait; then buy billions of dollars’ worth of weapons from the arms’ markets of the Eastern Europe; and then provide those weapons and guerilla warfare training to the disaffected population of the victim country by using the intelligence agencies of the latter’s regional adversaries. Whether it’s Afghanistan, Chechnya, Libya or Syria, the same playbook has been executed to the letter.
More to the point, raising funds for proxy wars from the Gulf Arab States allows the Western executives the freedom to evade congressional scrutiny; and the benefit of buying weapons from the unregulated arms’ markets of the Eastern Europe is that such weapons cannot be traced back to the Western capitals; and using jihadist proxies to achieve strategic objectives has the advantage of taking the plea of “plausible deniability” if the strategy backfires, which it often does. Remember that al-Qaeda and Taliban were the by-products of the Soviet-Afghan jihad, and the Islamic State and its global network of terrorists are the blowback of the proxy war in Syria.
On the subject of the supposed “powerlessness” of the US in the global affairs, the Western think tanks and the corporate media’s spin-doctors generally claim that Pakistan deceived the US in Afghanistan by not “doing more” to rein in the Taliban; Turkey hoodwinked the US in Syria by using the war against Islamic State as a pretext for cracking down on Kurds; Saudi Arabia and UAE betrayed the US in Yemen by mounting airstrikes against the Houthis and Saleh’s loyalists; and once again Saudi Arabia, UAE and Egypt went against the ostensible policy of the US in Libya by destabilizing the Tripoli-based government, even though the renegade general in eastern Libya, Khalifa Haftar, is an American stooge who had lived for two decades in the US right next to the CIA’s headquarter in Langley, Virginia.
If the US policymakers are so naïve then how come they still control the global political and economic order? This perennially whining attitude of the Western corporate media that such and such regional actors had betrayed them otherwise they were on the top of their game is actually a clever stratagem that has been deliberately designed by the spin-doctors of the Western mainstream media and foreign policy think tanks to cast the Western powers in a positive light and to vilify adversaries, even if the latter are their tactical allies in some of the regional conflicts.
Fighting wars through proxies allows the international power brokers the luxury of taking the plea of “plausible deniability” in their defense and at the same time they can shift all the blame for wrongdoing on the minor regional players. The Western powers’ culpability lies in the fact that because of them a system of international justice based on sound principles of morality and justice cannot be constructed in which the violators can be punished for their wrongdoing and the victims of injustice, tyranny and violence can be protected.
Leaving the funding, training and arming aspects of insurgencies aside, but especially pertaining to conferring international legitimacy to an armed insurgency, like the Afghan so-called “freedom struggle” of the Cold War, or the supposedly “moderate and democratic” Libyan and Syrian insurgencies of today, it is simply beyond the power of minor regional players and their nascent media, which has a geographically and linguistically limited audience, to cast such heavily armed and brutal insurrections in a positive light in order to internationally legitimize them; only the Western mainstream media that has a global audience and which serves as the mouthpiece of the Western political establishments has perfected this game of legitimizing the absurd and selling Satans as saviors.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... iddle-east
Washington's "Good Terrorists, Bad Terrorists" Policy In Middle East
by Tyler Durden
Jun 19, 2017 2:00 AM
Submitted by Nauman Sadiq,
Karl Marx famously said that history repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce. The only difference between the Afghan jihad back in the ‘80s that spawned Islamic jihadists like the Taliban and al Qaeda for the first time in history and the Libyan and Syrian civil wars, 2011-onward, is that the Afghan jihad was an overt jihad: back then, the Western political establishments and their mouthpiece, the mainstream media, used to openly brag that the CIA provides all those AK-47s, RPGs and stingers to the Afghan so-called “freedom fighters” to combat the Soviet troops in Afghanistan.
After the 9/11 tragedy, however, the Western political establishments and corporate media have become a lot more circumspect, therefore this time around, they have waged covert jihads against the Arab-nationalist Gaddafi regime in Libya and the anti-Zionist Assad regime in Syria, in which Islamic jihadists (aka terrorists) have been sold as “moderate rebels” with secular and nationalist ambitions to the Western audience.
Since the regime change objective in those hapless countries went against the mainstream narrative of ostensibly fighting a war against terrorism, therefore the Western political establishments and the corporate media are now trying to muddle the reality by offering color-coded schemes to identify myriads of militant and terrorist outfits that are operating in Syria: such as the red militants of the Islamic State and al-Nusra Front, which the Western powers want to eliminate; the yellow Islamic jihadists, like Jaysh al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham, with whom the Western powers can collaborate under desperate circumstances; and the green militants of the Free Syria Army (FSA) and a few other inconsequential outfits, which together comprise the so-called “moderate” Syrian opposition.
If we were to draw parallels between the Soviet-Afghan jihad of the ‘80s and the Syrian civil war of today, the Western powers used the training camps located in the Af-Pak border regions to train and arm Afghan “Mujahideen” against the Soviet troops in Afghanistan.
Similarly, the training camps located in the border regions of Turkey and Jordan are being used to provide training and weapons to Sunni Arab militants to battle the Shi’a-dominated Syrian regime with the collaboration of Turkish, Jordanian and Saudi intelligence agencies.
During the Afghan jihad, it is a known historical fact that the bulk of so-called “freedom fighters” was comprised of Pashtun Islamic jihadists, such as the factions of Jalaluddin Haqqani, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, Abdul Rab Rasul Sayyaf and scores of others, some of which later coalesced together to form the Taliban Movement.
Similarly, in Syria, the majority of so-called “moderate rebels” is comprised of Sunni Arab jihadists, such as Jaysh al-Islam, Ahrar al-Sham, al-Nusra Front, the Islamic State and myriads of other militant groups, including a small portion of defected Syrian soldiers who go by the name of Free Syria Army (FSA).
Moreover, apart from Pashtun Islamic jihadists, various factions of the Northern Alliance of Tajiks and Uzbeks constituted the relatively “moderate” segment of the Afghan rebellion, though those “moderate” warlords, like Ahmad Shah Massoud and Abul Rashid Dostum, were more ethnic and tribal in character than secular or nationalist, as such.
Similarly, the Kurds of the so-called “Syrian Democratic Forces” can be compared with the Northern Alliance of Afghanistan. The socialist PYD/YPG Kurds of Syria, however, were allied with the Baathist regime against the Sunni Arab jihadists for the first three years of the Syrian civil war, i.e. from August 2011 to August 2014.
At the behest of American stooge in Iraqi Kurdistan, Massoud Barzani, the Syrian Kurds have switched sides in the last couple of years after the United States policy reversal and declaration of war against one faction of the Syrian opposition, the Islamic State, when the latter overstepped its mandate in Syria and overran Mosul and Anbar in Iraq in June 2014, from where, the US troops had withdrawn only a couple of years ago in December 2011.
Regarding the Western powers’ modus operandi of waging proxy wars in the Middle East, since the times of the Soviet-Afghan jihad during the eighties, it has been the fail-safe game plan of the master strategists at NATO to raise money from the oil-rich emirates of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE and Kuwait; then buy billions of dollars’ worth of weapons from the arms’ markets of the Eastern Europe; and then provide those weapons and guerilla warfare training to the disaffected population of the victim country by using the intelligence agencies of the latter’s regional adversaries. Whether it’s Afghanistan, Chechnya, Libya or Syria, the same playbook has been executed to the letter.
More to the point, raising funds for proxy wars from the Gulf Arab States allows the Western executives the freedom to evade congressional scrutiny; and the benefit of buying weapons from the unregulated arms’ markets of the Eastern Europe is that such weapons cannot be traced back to the Western capitals; and using jihadist proxies to achieve strategic objectives has the advantage of taking the plea of “plausible deniability” if the strategy backfires, which it often does. Remember that al-Qaeda and Taliban were the by-products of the Soviet-Afghan jihad, and the Islamic State and its global network of terrorists are the blowback of the proxy war in Syria.
On the subject of the supposed “powerlessness” of the US in the global affairs, the Western think tanks and the corporate media’s spin-doctors generally claim that Pakistan deceived the US in Afghanistan by not “doing more” to rein in the Taliban; Turkey hoodwinked the US in Syria by using the war against Islamic State as a pretext for cracking down on Kurds; Saudi Arabia and UAE betrayed the US in Yemen by mounting airstrikes against the Houthis and Saleh’s loyalists; and once again Saudi Arabia, UAE and Egypt went against the ostensible policy of the US in Libya by destabilizing the Tripoli-based government, even though the renegade general in eastern Libya, Khalifa Haftar, is an American stooge who had lived for two decades in the US right next to the CIA’s headquarter in Langley, Virginia.
If the US policymakers are so naïve then how come they still control the global political and economic order? This perennially whining attitude of the Western corporate media that such and such regional actors had betrayed them otherwise they were on the top of their game is actually a clever stratagem that has been deliberately designed by the spin-doctors of the Western mainstream media and foreign policy think tanks to cast the Western powers in a positive light and to vilify adversaries, even if the latter are their tactical allies in some of the regional conflicts.
Fighting wars through proxies allows the international power brokers the luxury of taking the plea of “plausible deniability” in their defense and at the same time they can shift all the blame for wrongdoing on the minor regional players. The Western powers’ culpability lies in the fact that because of them a system of international justice based on sound principles of morality and justice cannot be constructed in which the violators can be punished for their wrongdoing and the victims of injustice, tyranny and violence can be protected.
Leaving the funding, training and arming aspects of insurgencies aside, but especially pertaining to conferring international legitimacy to an armed insurgency, like the Afghan so-called “freedom struggle” of the Cold War, or the supposedly “moderate and democratic” Libyan and Syrian insurgencies of today, it is simply beyond the power of minor regional players and their nascent media, which has a geographically and linguistically limited audience, to cast such heavily armed and brutal insurrections in a positive light in order to internationally legitimize them; only the Western mainstream media that has a global audience and which serves as the mouthpiece of the Western political establishments has perfected this game of legitimizing the absurd and selling Satans as saviors.
-
Silver
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
I wonder why it never occurs to Trump supporters that the very reason the US will get attacked and torn apart is because America's citizens have allowed America's politicians to commit unspeakable war crimes around the globe for decades. It never occurs to the Gadiantons in charge, including the current bunch, that we should bring our troops home. So Trump's hands will get bloodier and bloodiest.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... s-operatio
Russia Halts Cooperation With US In Syria, Will "Intercept Any Aircraft" In Russian Areas Of Operation
by Tyler Durden
Jun 19, 2017 8:01 AM
Shortly after Russia's deputy foreign minister slammed the US downing of a Syrian Su-22 jet as an "act of aggression" and "support for terrorists", Russia announced that starting June 19 it was halting all interactions with the US under the framework on the "memorandum of incident prevention in Syrian skies", the Russian Defense Ministry said on Monday, thereby assuring the probability of even more deadly escalations between Russia and the US-led coalition.
In retaliation, the ministry warned that Russian missile defense will intercept any aircraft in the area of operations of the Russian Aerospace Forces in Syria,
"In areas where Russian aviation is conducting combat missions in the Syrian skies, any flying ojects, including jets and unmanned aerial vehicles of the international coalition discovered west of the Euphrates River will be followed by Russian air and ground defenses as air targets," the Russian Defense Ministry announced, quoted by Sputnik.
Contrary to the earlier statement by the US according to which, it "contacted its Russian counterparts by telephone via an established "de-confliction line" to de-escalate the situation and stop the firing", Russia claims the US-led coalition command didn't use the deconfliction channel with Russia to avoid an incident during an operation in Raqqa:
"Russian Aerospace Forces' jets were conducting operations in Syrian airspace that time. However, the command of the coalition forces didn't use the existing channel between the air command of the Qatari airbase al Udeid and the [Russian] Hmeymim airbase to avoid incidents over Syria."
The Russian ministry also "demands a thorough investigation by the US command with the provision of its results and measures taken."
"We consider such actions of the US command as an intentional violation of its obligations in the framework of the memo on avoiding incidents and the safety of aviation flights during operations in Syria signed on October 20, 2015."
A bilateral memorandum of understanding was signed between the United States and Russia signed in October 2015 to ensure the safety of flights during combat missions over Syria.
On June 18, the Syrian army said that the US-led coalition had brought down its aircraft in southern Raqqa countryside when it was fulfilling its mission against Daesh. Later, the coalition confirmed the attack saying that it shot down the Syrian government forces' Su-22 aircraft as it had allegedly been bombing in an area where US-backed rebel forces, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), were stationed, south of Tabqa in the Raqqa province. The US-led coalition called its attack on the Syrian army's jet "collective self-defense," adding that it contacted the Russian military to de-escalate the situation after the incident.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... s-operatio
Russia Halts Cooperation With US In Syria, Will "Intercept Any Aircraft" In Russian Areas Of Operation
by Tyler Durden
Jun 19, 2017 8:01 AM
Shortly after Russia's deputy foreign minister slammed the US downing of a Syrian Su-22 jet as an "act of aggression" and "support for terrorists", Russia announced that starting June 19 it was halting all interactions with the US under the framework on the "memorandum of incident prevention in Syrian skies", the Russian Defense Ministry said on Monday, thereby assuring the probability of even more deadly escalations between Russia and the US-led coalition.
In retaliation, the ministry warned that Russian missile defense will intercept any aircraft in the area of operations of the Russian Aerospace Forces in Syria,
"In areas where Russian aviation is conducting combat missions in the Syrian skies, any flying ojects, including jets and unmanned aerial vehicles of the international coalition discovered west of the Euphrates River will be followed by Russian air and ground defenses as air targets," the Russian Defense Ministry announced, quoted by Sputnik.
Contrary to the earlier statement by the US according to which, it "contacted its Russian counterparts by telephone via an established "de-confliction line" to de-escalate the situation and stop the firing", Russia claims the US-led coalition command didn't use the deconfliction channel with Russia to avoid an incident during an operation in Raqqa:
"Russian Aerospace Forces' jets were conducting operations in Syrian airspace that time. However, the command of the coalition forces didn't use the existing channel between the air command of the Qatari airbase al Udeid and the [Russian] Hmeymim airbase to avoid incidents over Syria."
The Russian ministry also "demands a thorough investigation by the US command with the provision of its results and measures taken."
"We consider such actions of the US command as an intentional violation of its obligations in the framework of the memo on avoiding incidents and the safety of aviation flights during operations in Syria signed on October 20, 2015."
A bilateral memorandum of understanding was signed between the United States and Russia signed in October 2015 to ensure the safety of flights during combat missions over Syria.
On June 18, the Syrian army said that the US-led coalition had brought down its aircraft in southern Raqqa countryside when it was fulfilling its mission against Daesh. Later, the coalition confirmed the attack saying that it shot down the Syrian government forces' Su-22 aircraft as it had allegedly been bombing in an area where US-backed rebel forces, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), were stationed, south of Tabqa in the Raqqa province. The US-led coalition called its attack on the Syrian army's jet "collective self-defense," adding that it contacted the Russian military to de-escalate the situation after the incident.
-
eddie
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2405
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
eSilver wrote: ↑June 18th, 2017, 10:48 pmNow you're saying something completely different. Did you accept the fact then that most citizens of advanced countries are debt serfs?Elizabeth wrote: ↑June 18th, 2017, 10:40 pm Australia had a surplus until the goody two shoes decided to support the bludgers of the world and give away the Australian tax payers monies to other countries and to the United Nations. Countries should look after their own, and all peoples work to support themselves and their families, plus no one should have children if they cannot feed and support them.
Elizabeth, I'd like to remind you of how proud the Nephites were of their civilization. They thought they were the best. Then they grew haughty and they began to be swept off the land. If you were there at that time what would you have said to the parents of Nephite children when they could no longer "feed and support them" as you described it?
What about now? What if a married couple get pregnant and then lose their jobs, should they be forced to get an abortion because they can no longer support their child when she is born?
SOPHIST, someone who twists words to fit their own logic. Elizabeth did not suggest abortion, nor would she.
The antics you use are similar to the media, and we all know what that means, goes without saying.
I do find it entertaining, perhaps a book is in order,
" How to lose friends and not influence people." Or,
" How to take a lickin and keep on tickin!"
-
iWriteStuff
- blithering blabbermouth
- Posts: 5523
- Location: Sinope
- Contact:
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
To: Silvereddie wrote: ↑June 19th, 2017, 10:46 ame
SOPHIST, someone who twists words to fit their own logic. Elizabeth did not suggest abortion, nor would she.
The antics you use are similar to the media, and we all know what that means, goes without saying.
I do find it entertaining, perhaps a book is in order,
" How to lose friends and not influence people." Or,
" How to take a lickin and keep on tickin!"
Love: Eddie
- boomroasted.jpg (26.5 KiB) Viewed 1217 times
-
eddie
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2405
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
Dang it Iwrite I see you are still upset about the idiot remark, I thought he knew.iWriteStuff wrote: ↑June 19th, 2017, 11:16 amTo: Silvereddie wrote: ↑June 19th, 2017, 10:46 ame
SOPHIST, someone who twists words to fit their own logic. Elizabeth did not suggest abortion, nor would she.
The antics you use are similar to the media, and we all know what that means, goes without saying.
I do find it entertaining, perhaps a book is in order,
" How to lose friends and not influence people." Or,
" How to take a lickin and keep on tickin!"
Love: Eddie
boomroasted.jpg
-
iWriteStuff
- blithering blabbermouth
- Posts: 5523
- Location: Sinope
- Contact:
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
oh come on, now, that was funny!eddie wrote: ↑June 19th, 2017, 9:28 pmDang it Iwrite I see you are still upset about the idiot remark, I thought he knew.iWriteStuff wrote: ↑June 19th, 2017, 11:16 amTo: Silvereddie wrote: ↑June 19th, 2017, 10:46 ame
SOPHIST, someone who twists words to fit their own logic. Elizabeth did not suggest abortion, nor would she.
The antics you use are similar to the media, and we all know what that means, goes without saying.
I do find it entertaining, perhaps a book is in order,
" How to lose friends and not influence people." Or,
" How to take a lickin and keep on tickin!"
Love: Eddie
boomroasted.jpg
:)) :)) :))-
Silver
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
"Leave Hillary alone. She's been through a lot. They're good people." says the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. He was wrong then and he's a traitor now, besides being a murderer in Syria and Yemen.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... ne-side-ta
Hillary Clinton Told FBI's Mueller To Deliver Uranium To Russians In 2009 "Secret Plane-Side Tarmac Meeting"
by Tyler Durden
Jun 20, 2017 5:51 AM
Authored by Shepard Ambellas via Intellihub.com,
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton facilitated the transfer a highly enriched uranium (HEU) previously confiscated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) during a 2006 “nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices,” a newly leaked classified cable shows.
So-called “background” information was provided in the cable which gave vague details on a 2006 nuclear smuggling sting operation in which the U.S. government took possession of some HEU previously owned by the Russians.
"Over two years ago Russia requested a ten-gram sample of highly enriched uranium (HEU) seized in early 2006 in Georgia during a nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices. The seized HEU was transferred to U.S. custody and is being held at a secure DOE facility."
The secret “action request,” dated Aug. 17, 2009, was sent out by Secretary of State Clinton and was addressed to the United States Ambassador to Georgia Embassy Tbilisi, the Russian Embassy, and Ambassador John Beyrle.
It proposed that FBI Director Robert Mueller be the one that personally conduct the transfer a 10-gram sample of HEU to Russian law enforcement sources during a secret “plane-side” meeting on a “tarmac” in the early fall of 2009.
"We require that the transfer of this material be conducted at the airport, on the tarmac near by the plane, upon arrival of the Director's aircraft."
The FBI Director was originally scheduled to ‘return’ a sample from the DOE stockpile to the Russians in April but the trip was postponed until September 21.
Paragraph number 6 of the leaked cable confirms Dir. Mueller’s Sept. 21 flight to Moscow.
“(S/Rel Russia) Action request: Embassy Moscow is requested to alert at the highest appropriate level the Russian Federation that FBI Director Mueller plans to deliver the HEU sample once he arrives to Moscow on September 21. Post is requested to convey information in paragraph 5 with regard to chain of custody, and to request details on Russian Federation’s plan for picking up the material. Embassy is also requested to reconfirm the April 16 understanding from the FSB verbally that we will have no problem with the Russian Ministry of Aviation concerning Mueller’s September 21 flight clearance."
But possibly even more shocking is the fact that the State Department wanted the transfer of the HEU to take place on an “airport tarmac” which is rather reminiscent of the infamous Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton meeting which occurred on a Phoenix, Arizona, tarmac back in June of 2016.
Past dealings with the Russians were also mentioned in the cable, signifying that previous deals have taken place.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... ne-side-ta
Hillary Clinton Told FBI's Mueller To Deliver Uranium To Russians In 2009 "Secret Plane-Side Tarmac Meeting"
by Tyler Durden
Jun 20, 2017 5:51 AM
Authored by Shepard Ambellas via Intellihub.com,
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton facilitated the transfer a highly enriched uranium (HEU) previously confiscated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) during a 2006 “nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices,” a newly leaked classified cable shows.
So-called “background” information was provided in the cable which gave vague details on a 2006 nuclear smuggling sting operation in which the U.S. government took possession of some HEU previously owned by the Russians.
"Over two years ago Russia requested a ten-gram sample of highly enriched uranium (HEU) seized in early 2006 in Georgia during a nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices. The seized HEU was transferred to U.S. custody and is being held at a secure DOE facility."
The secret “action request,” dated Aug. 17, 2009, was sent out by Secretary of State Clinton and was addressed to the United States Ambassador to Georgia Embassy Tbilisi, the Russian Embassy, and Ambassador John Beyrle.
It proposed that FBI Director Robert Mueller be the one that personally conduct the transfer a 10-gram sample of HEU to Russian law enforcement sources during a secret “plane-side” meeting on a “tarmac” in the early fall of 2009.
"We require that the transfer of this material be conducted at the airport, on the tarmac near by the plane, upon arrival of the Director's aircraft."
The FBI Director was originally scheduled to ‘return’ a sample from the DOE stockpile to the Russians in April but the trip was postponed until September 21.
Paragraph number 6 of the leaked cable confirms Dir. Mueller’s Sept. 21 flight to Moscow.
“(S/Rel Russia) Action request: Embassy Moscow is requested to alert at the highest appropriate level the Russian Federation that FBI Director Mueller plans to deliver the HEU sample once he arrives to Moscow on September 21. Post is requested to convey information in paragraph 5 with regard to chain of custody, and to request details on Russian Federation’s plan for picking up the material. Embassy is also requested to reconfirm the April 16 understanding from the FSB verbally that we will have no problem with the Russian Ministry of Aviation concerning Mueller’s September 21 flight clearance."
But possibly even more shocking is the fact that the State Department wanted the transfer of the HEU to take place on an “airport tarmac” which is rather reminiscent of the infamous Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton meeting which occurred on a Phoenix, Arizona, tarmac back in June of 2016.
Past dealings with the Russians were also mentioned in the cable, signifying that previous deals have taken place.
-
iWriteStuff
- blithering blabbermouth
- Posts: 5523
- Location: Sinope
- Contact:
Re: Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread
I do find it incredibly ironic that it was Hillary who had some extremely nefarious ties to Russia.... Nuclear ties, no less.Silver wrote: ↑June 20th, 2017, 6:38 am "Leave Hillary alone. She's been through a lot. They're good people." says the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. He was wrong then and he's a traitor now, besides being a murderer in Syria and Yemen.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... ne-side-ta
Hillary Clinton Told FBI's Mueller To Deliver Uranium To Russians In 2009 "Secret Plane-Side Tarmac Meeting"
Why is she still walking free? They're NOT "good people" and no crime should go unpunished.
Unless, of course, The Donald says so. Then it's ok. Right guys?
-
iWriteStuff
- blithering blabbermouth
- Posts: 5523
- Location: Sinope
- Contact:
