Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:05 am Post subject: Hillary Clinton - Democratic party run to be US president
As the probable Bilderberg choice for Demoprat Presidential candidate; we ought to know a little bit more about the disgusting creature.
Following is a little compilation of info; note particularly how BOTH parties, 'Demoprats' & 'Repugnants', are into Satanic symbolism, BIG TIME:
Notice on the following site, apart from the flag pic, there is a VERY interesting post by Noel Degrassi: apparently the 'Satanic' flag is always in front of here, whereas a normal one is behind her, the one the crowd will see (no pics, as all the relevant links on Clintons site have been removed, as have MOST (but certainly not all) on independent sites).
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=24756.0
'Noel Degrassi Re: Upside down stars on flag at Hillary Clinton rally':
« Reply #1 on: January 30, 2008, 11:04:24 pm »
'You'll also notice when you go to her (Spawn of Satan, The Succubus) website, you'll see several shots of the Pentagram Adorned Flag, but it is the flag Hillary is always facing. The flag behind her on the stage that the audience faces is normal and correct. There's no way this is accidental. She had to have her little Satan shrine (hidden once again in plain frickin' sight) for herself but pacify her victims with the big Patton flag. How easy would you think it to be to ask a flag maker "Hey Fred, any chance I can flip those little stars...noooo....no no no Fred......I'm the Angel of Change...I just wanted to show some change. So, change the flag Fred."? I just can't see it. You know, it's just like the Republican logo with the stars suddenly in Baphomet Mode. Nobody says a thing about it. Good Christian Folk just don't even notice. The deacons at the Baptist Church have no problem that their Masonic/Baphomet logo is not quite good or Godly (my paternal grandfather was EXACTLY like this. I acquired a few of his Freemason coins from my grandmother a few months ago. Almost got a Freemason-Distributed Troy Ounce of Silver). Yes, these are dark, short days.......'
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=24756.0
But the 'Hildabeast' is not the only one; apparently the Republican GOP Logo was changed, IN 2000 (Bush administration), to the Satanic Stars version:
'Satanic Stars On Republican Party Elephant Symbol':
http://amedeoministries.weebly.com/republican-logo-change.html _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Lice of a feather stick together! _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Sun Jun 28, 2015 7:40 am Post subject:
The Mena Connection, Murder,Drugs and Coverup Clinton & Bush Sr.:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VbK1zLS1jA _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
'Hillary Clinton’s speech today was the most progressive address on economics by a major-party presidential candidate in a generation. It was strongly feminist and pro-union. It called for “enhancing” Social Security and stepping up prosecutions of Wall Street malefactors, and specifically attacked HSBC, the banking giant and Clinton Foundation donor. The speech marks a decisive break from the technocratic triangulation of her husband’s administration. As Lawrence Mishel points out at the Economic Policy Institute, it was notable that Clinton didn’t propose market-based solutions for wage stagnation, which she defined as the central economic challenge of our time. Rather than offering Third Way panaceas like worker retraining or middle-class tax cuts, she championed strong government intervention on behalf of workers: a higher minimum wage, strengthened collective bargaining, full employment, and cracking down “on bosses who exploit employees by misclassifying them as contractors.”
That last bit seems particularly significant for what it says about how much politics has changed since the 1990s. Clinton’s words, after all, seem to directly allude to an employment dispute at Uber. As a story about the contingent workforce in today’s New York Times begins, “When the California Labor Commissioner’s Office ruled last month that an Uber driver was an employee deserving of a variety of workplace protections—and was not, as the company maintained, an independent contractor—it highlighted the divided feelings many Americans have about what is increasingly being called the ‘gig economy.’” Whereas Bill Clinton was known for championing Silicon Valley, Hillary Clinton has taken clear aim at the employment model underlying some of its hottest companies.
It’s also important that Hillary Clinton has put paycheck feminism at the center of her economic agenda. The speech focused on all that’s lost when women are forced out of the workplace by inadequate leave and childcare policies, without any wishy-washy obeisance to the glories of housewifery. “The movement of women into the workforce over the past forty years was responsible for more than three and a half trillion dollars in economic growth,” Clinton said. “But that progress has stalled. The United States used to rank 7th out of 24 advanced countries in women’s labor force participation. By 2013, we had dropped to 19th. That represents a lot of unused potential for our economy and for American families. Studies show that nearly a third of this decline relative to other countries is because they’re expanding family-friendly policies like paid leave and we are not…. It’s time to recognize that quality, affordable childcare is not a luxury—it’s a growth strategy.” Again, we’ve come a long way from the ’90s, when Clinton was excoriated for making it clear that she valued her career over stay-at-home motherhood, and, as penance, had to participate in a bake-off with Barbara Bush.
The obvious progressive rejoinder to this is that Hillary—negotiator of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, onetime member of Walmart’s board—is simply saying what she feels she needs to in order to get elected. To which I’d say: exactly! Clinton is a politician who believes in expediency and pragmatism, and she has come to believe that it is expedient and pragmatic to run an explicitly liberal campaign. This is a powerful statement about the evolution of American politics. It’s long been a truism that Republicans fear their base, while Democrats hate theirs. That is no longer true; this is a speech meant to appeal to Elizabeth Warren’s supporters, not Clinton’s Wall Street friends.
THE NATION IS READER FUNDED. YOUR SUPPORT IS VITAL TO OUR WORK.
DONATE NOW!
But won’t Clinton simply do those friends’ bidding once in office? Perhaps, but the political-science literature suggests that, contrary to conventional wisdom, politicians actually try to fulfill their campaign pledges. Jonathan Bernstein looked at the scholarship surrounding the issue in a 2012 Washington Monthly piece, discussing a book by Jeff Fishel that analyzed campaigns from John F. Kennedy through Ronald Reagan. “What he found was that presidents invariably attempt to carry out their promises; the main reason some pledges are not redeemed is congressional opposition, not presidential flip-flopping,” wrote Bernstein. “Similarly, Gerald Pomper studied party platforms, and discovered that the promises parties made were consistent with their postelection agendas. More recent and smaller-scale papers have confirmed the main point: presidents’ agendas are clearly telegraphed in their campaigns.”
George H.W.’s Bush’s reversal on his “no new taxes” pledge is considered the exception to the rule. More typical is the way he chiseled away at government support for family planning. It almost certainly contradicted his personal beliefs; as a congressman, Bush was so passionate about birth control that he was nicknamed “rubbers,” and as US representative to the United Nations, he championed global action on overpopulation. As Reagan’s vice president, however, he recognized that fealty to the anti-abortion movement was non-negotiable, and after promising to serve it faithfully in office, he never dared defy it. Politicians have very strong incentives to do what they say they’re going to do, whatever their actual ideas.
So pundits may spend a lot of time wondering about Hillary Clinton’s authenticity, but if you want to know what her administration would actually attempt, what’s in her speeches probably matters more than what’s in her secret heart. And so far in this campaign, what’s in her speeches sounds pretty good.'
And the Sheeple will believe this baloney, like they believed Obama, who has broken virtually every election promise he made (still, he did get the Nobel ('I'm good at killing people') Peace Prize, not unlike Kissinger).
And 'The Nation' laps it up; how the mighty have fallen.
'KEY CLINTON ADVISOR AS WELL AS THE HEAD OF GOLDMAN SACHS SET TO ATTEND GLOBALIST CONFERENCE
(INTELLIHUB) — The “official” Bilderberg Group website has released a list of participants for this years upcoming conference. The website also released a list of bullet points that they claim is the agenda for the secretive globalist confab.
In the past, Intellihub News and others have confirmed that while the list released by the Bilderberg website does include many who will be there, it also leaves out those that would rather not have their name released to the public.
It is also well-known that whatever agenda is discussed at Bilderberg will have repercussions for the entire world for years to come. (past attendees have claimed that the idea for the Euro was first discussed at Bilderberg)
Perhaps the biggest piece of news coming out of Austria and Bilderberg 2015 so far is the fact that a major Hillary Clinton advisor is on the list and set to attend.
Longtime Clinton friend and ally Jim Messina of The Messina Group will be attending the globalist conference where the globalist favorite for United States 2016 election will surely be decided. This news indicates that the powers that be have most likely decided to back Clinton for President.
Key topics listed in the official press release include:
◾Artificial Intelligence
◾Cybersecurity
◾Chemical Weapons Threats
◾Current Economic Issue
◾European Strategy
◾Globalisation
◾Greece
◾Iran
◾Middle East
◾NATO
◾Russia
◾Terrorism
◾United Kingdom
◾USA
◾US Elections
.........'
So, done and dusted... _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
'US Democrat presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton smeared and vilified the nonviolent Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement in a letter to Israeli-American billionaire Haim Saban.
The BDS movement seeks to pressure Israel to comply with international law and end its illegal occupation and oppression of the indigenous Palestinian people through peaceful economic measures. It was called for by Palestinian intellectuals and activists as a way by which human rights advocates around the world can express solidarity with and assist the Palestinian people in their struggle for liberation and equality.
BDS has just three demands for Israel, all of which are mandated under international law:
1.Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall;
2.Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and
3.Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN Resolution 194.
Given the rapidly burgeoning success of the movement throughout the world, the Israeli government and its allies, principally the US and Canada’s right-wing Harper government, have gone to great efforts to slander BDS as anti-Israel and even, in an egregious act of mudslinging dishonesty, “anti-Semitic”—in spite of the fact that the movement is led by Jews and non-Jews alike.
Hillary Clinton embracing Israeli-American billionaire Haim Saban, the 497th-richest man in the world
Hillary Clinton embracing fervent pro-Israel billionaire Haim Saban, the 497th-richest man in the world
Throughout her two-page missive (embedded in full below) to Saban, a media mogul with a net worth of $3.5 billion, Clinton echoes common Israeli PR propaganda (hasbara) talking points. Her rhetoric is essentially indistinguishable from that of far-right Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
In the letter, Hillary Clinton
◾expresses “alarm” over the movement, which she describes as “a global effort to isolate the State of Israel”;
◾smears BDS as an attempt “to isolate and delegitimize Israel” that “seeks to punish Israel”;
◾says to Saban “I know you agree that we need to make countering BDS a priority”;
◾insists the explicitly peaceful movement is “not a path to peace”;
◾asks the billionaire for advice on how to counter the nonviolent movement, “advice on how we can work together – across party lines and with a diverse array of voices”;
◾claims Israel, the only country with nuclear weapons in the Middle East, “faces existential threats to its survival”;
◾vilifies BDS as “the latest attempt to single out Israel on the world stage”;
◾emphasizes “how crucial it is for America to defend Israel at every turn”;
◾refers to UN resolutions calling on Israel to abide by international law and cease its illegal activity “anti-Israel resolutions”;
◾boasts that she “made sure the United States blocked Palestinian attempts at the UN to unilaterally declare statehood”;
◾“made it clear that America will always stand up for Israel,” assuring “and that’s what I’ll always to as President”;
◾requested Saban’s “thoughts and recommendations on how leaders and communities across America can work together to counter BDS”;
◾avers that BDS, which was called for by and is supported by the majority of Palestinians, is “harmful to Israelis and Palestinians alike”; and
◾characterizes Israel as “a modern day miracle – a vibrant bloom in the middle of a desert,” affirming her undying support for it.
According to Forbes, Saban is among the top 500 richest people in the world. He has long been a supporter of Hillary Clinton.
In an interview with the Nakba-denying Israeli publication the Jerusalem Post, Saban characterized Clinton as the ideal US presidential candidate for Israel.
“Hillary will be great for Israel,” he said. “Hillary has been a steadfast defender of Israel’s interests. She will be a fantastic president for the US, an incredible world leader and one under whom the relationship with the US and Israel will be significantly reinforced.”
In April 2015, Saban told the same publication that he knows Clinton’s secret opinions on the US nuclear negotiations with Iran, hinting that she, like the Republican Party, opposes them.
Clinton even held a fundraiser dinner at the mansion of the fervent pro-Israel billionaire in Beverly Park, LA in May. Those who hoped to dine with the Democrat leader paid $2,700 per person just to get in. In her remarks to the wealthy guests, Clinton quipped that “it was nice of the royal family to name their baby” Princess Charlotte after her granddaughter.
In the meantime, while Clinton was entertaining her ultra-rich donors at a luxury dinner in the home of one of the 500 richest people on the planet with discussion of the British royal family, Variety magazine notes, “in Beverly Hills, some union and environmental groups staged rallies calling for Clinton to oppose the Trans Pacific Partnership,” a secretive, neoliberal, anti-worker, anti-environment free trade agreement, often described as “NAFTA on steroids.”
(Copy of letter in link).
If you are not already aware and active in the BDS movement, join up to (or subscribe to):
They frequently hold demos, which are generally small, but are very well organised. If you're in the London area, get on their mailing list by free subscription on their website. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Jesse Ventura explains how the 2-Party system has it wrapped up, and how he got to be Governor of Minnesota (and how he was 'Interviewed' by 23 CIA merchants wanting to know how he came to be Governor): 'Governor Ventura confronted by the CIA' : (3 minute video clip):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7uLA2p2IZE
Whilst Jesse explains about how the system has been manipulated, and how Ross Perot was kept out of the debates, there is some stuff he may not know: another way of 'eliminating' Presidential candidates.
Below, Gene 'Chip' Tatum explains how he was ordered to 'neutralise' Gary Hart from the 1988 election campaign, but refused. He believes another agent did accept, and forced Hart to withdraw over a 'honeytrap' sex scandal. In 1991/2, 'Chip' Tatum was ordered to 'neutralise' Ross Perot, but again refused; he believes Perot was 'neutralised' by some kind of blackmail, he believes something to do with Perot's daughter; Perot dropped out of the race.
The Bush's and Clinton's were 'buddy-buddy', and part of the PTB's plans for running America (see 'Compromised' by Terry Reed, and 'Access Denied - For Reasons Of National Security' by Cathy O'Brien and Mark Phillips). They were also up to their eyes in massive drug imports and financial scams, as well as having people murdered who they considered threats (luckily Terry Reed and his family, and Cathy, her daughter Kelly and Mark were not assassinated. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
'Right now, it’s become glaringly evident to anyone paying attention that we’re either stuck with Hillary or Jeb in 2016.
“By and large, Wall Street so far appears to be betting on a 2016 presidential race that pits former Florida governor Jeb Bush against former US secretary of state Hillary Clinton, based on tallies of fundraising reports as of July 15 that revealed plenty of money from bank employees and financiers,” Quartz recently declared.
The big six megabanks and Wall Street are putting all their money behind Clinton and Bush, and since these people and corporations got to where they are by betting on rigged games over the years, they should all be experts at it by now.
Only three percent of Bush’s donations actually come from small donors. It’s all big money people. Goldman Sachs is Hillary’s largest financial supporter by employer. Hillary’s top contributors also include Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, and Lehman Brothers among others.
The Guardian reported, “Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush, the 2016 presidential candidates leading the money race in the Democratic and Republican fields, are amassing fortunes that will leave them politically indebted to some of the most influential lobbyists in Washington.”
Meanwhile, Billionaires like Manhattan Grocery Store mogul John Catsimatidis has proudly donated the personal limit to both Jeb and Hillary. “I’ve been friends with both of their families for many, many years. They both love America, and I’d be happy if either of them won,” he told the Washington Post.
And he’s not the only one. Via WAPO:
The billionaire is one of at least 60 donors hedging their bets heading into 2016 by giving to presidential campaigns of both parties, an Associated Press review of federal campaign finance records found. While those contributions totaled only about $300,000, they are an odd wrinkle of presidential politics in a race expected to see 22 candidates vying for billions of dollars in contributions.
Even if the average American’s vote counted (which, is highly doubtful for a number of reasons, the least of which is voter fraud and voter machine tampering), the average citizen’s contributions are far and away overshadowed by billionaires and corporations.
Jeb and Hillary have raised so much money for this coming election at this point that it can barely be called an “election” anymore; through everything including Super Pacs, over $60M in Hillary’s case and over $110M in Jeb’s have been raised. It is rumored Jeb’s goal is $1 billion. Hillary’s goal is a whopping $2 billion.
The bottom line is that America has two unofficial dynasty families, and we’re currently watching a new member of one of these families ascend the presidential throne.
Worse, they have the same billionaires backing them and the same corporations with the same globalist agendas backing them both, because they obviously realize that no matter which one we get for our next President, we are rest assured that everything will be business as usual. They are basically a face for the same system who will do whatever their told as this country continues to get flushed down the toilet.
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
'Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders has rocketed past longtime front-runner Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, a stunning turn in a race once considered a lock for the former secretary of state, a new Franklin Pierce University/Boston Herald poll shows.
Read the documents:
•Franklin Pierce-Boston Herald Dem poll document
•Franklin Pierce-Boston Herald Dem poll tables
Sanders leads Clinton 44-37 percent among likely Democratic primary voters, the first time the heavily favored Clinton has trailed in the 2016 primary campaign, according to the poll of 442 Granite-Staters.
Vice President Joe Biden got 9 percent support in the test primary match-up. The other announced Democrats in the race, former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee and former Virginia Gov. Jim Webb, barely register at 1 percent or below.
The live interview phone poll was conducted Aug. 7-10 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.7 percentage points.
Clinton is still viewed overwhelmingly by voters as the likely Democratic nominee, but the results suggest she faces an unexpectedly difficult fight to prevent an embarrassing opening loss in the first-in-the-nation primary.
The Franklin Pierce/Herald poll shows that most New Hampshire Democrats are lukewarm to Clinton, despite her campaign’s concerted effort to soften her image and connect with voters.
Just 35 percent of likely primary voters say they are “excited” about Clinton’s campaign, according to the poll. And 51 percent of voters say that while they could support her, they aren’t enthusiastic about her White House bid.
And while 80 percent of likely Granite State Democrats view her favorably, just 38 percent of those say they have a “very” favorable impression.
Sanders’ rise has been meteoric. The socialist senator trailed Clinton by a 44-8 margin in a Franklin Pierce/Herald poll in March.
More than half of New Hampshire’s likely Democratic primary voters say they view Sanders “very” favorably, an indication of the excitement the Vermont senator has generated among his mostly liberal supporters.
But while Sanders has surged ahead in New Hampshire, he does face what appears to be an electability problem, even among his staunch supporters.
Just 11 percent of likely Democratic voters picked him over Clinton to win the nomination, while 65 percent said she would emerge as the party’s general election candidate.
The poll also shows there is some appetite among New Hampshire Democrats for Biden to jump into the field. Forty-six percent of likely primary voters say Biden should launch a White House campaign, while 42 percent say he should stay out. Biden’s favorability numbers have also increased by 14 points since March.'
Just goes to show, just like Jesse Ventura, and Jeremy Corbyn in the UK, when people get to hear a decent opposition, they go for it. That's why, of course, the MSM keeps opposition views (that's opposition from anything but the 'Tweedle Dee, Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber' 'usual suspects' out of the news (and why Jesse Ventura was summoned to a meeting with 24 CIA agents to explain HOW he managed to get elected as Governor of Minnesota!). _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Stand With Bernie:
https://berniesanders.com/ _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
'Yesterday Hillary Clinton gave a speech in Washington at the Saban Forum of Brookings that included more pandering to Israel than any speech I’ve heard from any American politician. It was endless. Israel is a brave democracy, a light unto the nations, a miracle, its “prowess in war” is “inspiring,” and we must take the US-Israel relationship to the “next level.”
Introduced by her good friend the Israeli-American megadonor, Haim Saban, Clinton bragged that she and Israel were born a few months apart, gave a shoutout to Israel’s former lawyer in the White House, Dennis Ross, and assured Ari Shavit the rightwing Israeli columnist that the military option was still on the table with Iran. In fact, she repeatedly slammed Iran as a bad actor and did all she could to distance herself from the Iran deal and from secretary of state John Kerry, who gave a more realistic speech the day before. She never mentioned the occupation, vaguely touched on settlements as a problem, and praised the late Clintonite Sandy Berger as a “steadfast friend to Israel.”
Just as the Republican candidates had attacked Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS) at the Republican Jewish Coalition last week, Clinton said that BDS was hurting the U.S.’s ability to fight terrorism. This is language straight out of Benjamin Netanyahu’s office.
Speaking of Netanyahu, Clinton was asked by Saban what she would do on her first day in office and she said dutifully:
on the first day I would extend an invitation to the Israeli prime minister to come to the United States hopefully within the first month, certainly as soon as it could be arranged to do exactly what I briefly outlined. To work toward very much strengthening and intensifying our relationship on military matters, on terrorism and on everything else that we can do more to cooperate on that will send a strong message to our own peoples as well as the rest of the world. So that is on my list for the first day.
Here are more incredible pander quotes. Now and forever we’re together, Clinton says; she’s even visited Israeli terror victims in hospitals:
yes, we stand with our ally and true friend Israel now and forever. Of course, Israel is no stranger to terrorism. I’ve sat in Israeli hospital rooms and held the hands of victims wounded by terrorist attacks, listening to doctors as they sometimes even showed me x-rays describe how much shrapnel was left in a leg, an arm, or a head. Today Israel faces growing threats in its own neighborhood.
She describes the latest wave of violence as occurring “inside Israel itself.” Though many of these attacks have been in occupied territories.
The boycott movement against Israel is making our alliance with Israel “more indispensable than ever”. Here is where she suggests that BDS is hurting US efforts to fight terrorism:
In this period of period of peril, Israel needs a strong America by its side, and America needs a strong and secure Israel by our side. It’s in our national interest to have an Israel that remains a bastion of stability and a core ally in a region in chaos. An Israel strong enough to deter its enemies, and strong enough to take steps in the pursuit of peace. We need a brave democracy whose perseverance and pluralism are a rebuke to every extremist and tyrant. We need a light unto the nations as darkness threatens. Today three trends in the region and the world are converging and making our alliance with Israel more indispensable than ever. The first is a rising tide of extremism across a wide arc of instability, from North Africa to South Asia. The second is Iran’s continued aggression.
The third is the growing effort to delegitimize Israel on the world stage. America and Israel need to address these threats together. We must take an already strong relationship to the next level. We have to develop a common, strategic vision and pursue a coordinated approach, deepen our cooperation and consultation across the board.
Why is fighting BDS an American interest? Clinton never says, though she links the movement with anti-Semitism globally.
As Secretary of State I called out systemic structural anti-Israel basis at the UN and fought to block the one sided Goldstone report particularly at a time when anti-semitism is on the rise across the world especially in Europe. We need to repudiate efforts to malign and undermine Israel and the Jewish people. The boycott, divestment and sanctions movement known as BDS is the latest front in this battle. Demonizing Israeli scientists and intellectuals, even young students, comparing Israel to South African apartheid, now no nation is above criticism. But this is wrong and it should stop immediately.
And as for diplomacy, she says that no outside pressure should be brought on Israel:
Some proponents of BDS may hope that pressuring Israel may lead to peace. Well that’s wrong too. No outside force is going to resolve the conflict between Israeli’s and Palestinian’s. Only a two state solution can provide Palestinian’s independence, sovereignty and dignity and provide Israelis the secure and recognized borders of a democratic Jewish state.
She says the two state solution is the only answer. And she’ll never give up. Though she pointedly did not echo the Obama administration’s citation of the ’67 borders.
I refuse to give up on the goal of two states for two peoples and no matter how unattainable it may seem at the moment Israelis and Palestinians shouldn’t give up on it either. Instead they should demand their leaders seek every opportunity to demonstrate their commitment. Inaction is not an option and a one state solution is no solution, it is a prescription for endless conflict. Israelis deserve security, recognition and a normal life free from terror and Palestinians should be able to govern themselves in their own state in peace and dignity.
Tough talk about Arab neighbors:
It’s also time to stop pretending that solving the Israeli/Palestinian conflict will solve all of the middle-east’s problems. For too long Arab states have used the Israeli/Palestinian conflict as an excuse to avoid facing their own challenges at home. The people of the region have shown that they will no longer accept this. Their leaders should drop the excuses and pick up the pace of getting their own houses in order
Obama was just a fly on the windshield of the special relationship;
we can see how Israel’s search for security, stability and peace goes hand in hand with the broader effort the United States must lead to secure and stabilize the middle east. Now we know our governments have had their share of disagreements in recent years, but the relationship has always been stronger and deeper than… So let’s expand high level U.S. Israel strategic consultations. Bring our best minds together for deeper discussions about enforcing the nuclear deal, countering Iran’s regional ambitions and developing new defense technologies for the future. If Israel and the United States stand shoulder to shoulder and present a united front to the region and the world I’m confident we can meet the threats and challenges we face today.
Clinton and Israel were born within months of each other. Israel is a miracle and a democracy and we are joined at the hip spiritually and militarily:
I was born just a few months before the state of Israel and my generation came of age admiring the talent and tenacity of the Israeli people. We marveled as you coaxed a dream into reality out of the harsh dessert soil and built a thriving raucous democracy in a region full of adversaries and autocrats determined to push Israel into the sea. We watched a small nation fight fearlessly for its right to exist and Israel’s pursuit of peace was inspiring as its prowess in war…
Many Americans feel a deep emotional connection with Israel. In its story we see some of our own and we see the story of all people who struggle for freedom and self-determination. We see a homeland for people long oppressed and a thriving economy that is a model for how innovation, entrepreneurship and freedom can delivery prosperity even in unforgiving circumstances. So we are two nations woven together. Lands built by immigrants and exiles seeking to live and worship in freedom, given life by democratic principles and sustained by the service and sacrifice of generations of patriots. Yet even with all this history, with all our common interests and shared values none of us can or should take our relationship for granted.
Some of this language is defensive. Clinton knows that the Democratic base doesn’t care about Israel:
With every passing year we must tie bonds tighter, reach out to the next generation to bring them with us and do the hard necessary work of friendship because there is a new generation in both countries today that does not remember that shared past… Ben Gurion once said, “In Israel, in order to be a realist you must believe in miracles.” Well, tonight is the first night of Hanukah and the Jewish people and Israel and all over the world praise the almighty for the miracles, for the redemption, for the mighty deeds, for the saving acts. This season and this moment in history is a time once again for mighty deeds and saving acts. For us to rededicate and renew our great alliance. For us once again to light candles of hope that will shine through the darkness for our peoples and all peoples if we do it together.
So Clinton is completely flouting the Democratic base. Because she feels secure inside the party on this issue. Imagine if she insulted Black Lives Matter in the way she’s insulting Palestinian-Americans and Arab-Americans. There would be an uprising in her own base. I have to believe that uprising will come on this issue too. As it is, Clinton is using fear to try and strengthen the U.S. Israel relationship even more.' _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
The New Clinton Chronicles: Hillary's Trail Of Death:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ljg4t9HHJTY _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:00 pm Post subject:
We've had 'hanging chads', Diebold 'switch-a-votes', illegal Supreme Court interventions; now, why vote?
Let's just toss a coin (so now we know why they're called '*'!)!
And, of course, the evil bitch/witch won six out of six ties!
I don't lightly call anyone 'evil', but she and hubby 'Bill' are rotten evil; check out 'The Mena Connection'; Cathy O'Brien's 'Access Denied: For Reasons of National Security' or Terry Reed's 'Compromised'. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 4:59 pm Post subject:
The following video interview with the US Green Party Presidential candidate Jill Stein illuminates the racket of why they're allowing Bernie to get so far, and how mainstream parties use fringe candidates to absorb public anger with the Establishment, and then dump them:
US pursuing regime change in Iraq, Syria, aiming for Iran - Pres. Candidate Jill Stein: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwTl03A4kjU _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
But I would add this. You know, the Security Council finally got around to adopting a resolution. At the core of that resolution is an agreement I negotiated in June of 2012 in Geneva, which set forth a cease-fire and moving toward a political resolution, trying to bring the parties at stake in Syria together.
This is the kind of compulsive misrepresentation that makes Clinton unfit to be President. Clinton's role in Syria has been to help instigate and prolong the Syrian bloodbath, not to bring it to a close.
In 2012, Clinton was the obstacle, not the solution, to a ceasefire being negotiated by UN Special Envoy Kofi Annan. It was US intransigence - Clinton's intransigence - that led to the failure of Annan's peace efforts in the spring of 2012, a point well known among diplomats. Despite Clinton's insinuation in the Milwaukee debate, there was (of course) no 2012 ceasefire, only escalating carnage. Clinton bears heavy responsibility for that carnage, which has by now displaced more than 10 million Syrians and left more than 250,000 dead.
As every knowledgeable observer understands, the Syrian War is not mostly about Bashar al-Assad, or even about Syria itself. It is mostly a proxy war, about Iran. And the bloodbath is doubly tragic and misguided for that reason.
Saudi Arabia and Turkey, the leading Sunni powers in the Middle East, view Iran, the leading Shia power, as a regional rival for power and influence. Right-wing Israelis view Iran as an implacable foe that controls Hezbollah, a Shi'a militant group operating in Lebanon, a border state of Israel. Thus, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Israel have all clamored to remove Iran's influence in Syria.
This idea is incredibly naïve. Iran has been around as a regional power for a long time--in fact, for about 2,700 years. And Shia Islam is not going away. There is no way, and no reason, to "defeat" Iran. The regional powers need to forge a geopolitical equilibrium that recognizes the mutual and balancing roles of the Gulf Arabs, Turkey, and Iran. And Israeli right-wingers are naïve, and deeply ignorant of history, to regard Iran as their implacable foe, especially when that mistaken view pushes Israel to side with Sunni jihadists.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2016 4:11 am Post subject:
An interesting aspect of the 2016 election has opened up with a Repugnant 'Supreme Court Judge' keeling over, the prat that illegally gave the 2000 election to G W Bush, and enabled 9/11, Afghanistan and Iraq wars, '(un-)Patriot Act', War 'on' Terror' etc.
I don't have much time for 'The Nation', but this article is interesting:
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2016 1:28 pm Post subject:
Following on the above theme, our friend the indomitable, beautiful, 'People-Championing' hero (I really am bowled over by Cynthia's grit and integrity) further enlightens us on US 'Elections':
'...Jesus once remarked to a wealthy man that “it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to go to heaven.”
Today, we could amend the words of that Biblical reference with the US presidential race underway:
“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a voter in the US to know and understand the rules regulating the administration of all elections, including elections for President of the United States.”
Let’s start with the phenomenon of what is called a “minority president.” No, that is not a president who identifies as an ethnic or racial minority in the US. A minority president is one who has failed to win a plurality of the votes cast in the race for president, and yet is still able to become President of the United States. This is the exact opposite of what a true democracy would require; perhaps not even a pure democracy would entertain such a position such as the 'Office of the Presidency'. But that is an entirely different matter.
The United States has actually had several minority presidents in its history, while the 21st century began ominously enough with yet another minority President: George W. Bush, the Republican who failed to secure the most votes cast by the people [in the 2000 election, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling, decided the victor of the race after moving to halt the recount process in the state of Florida].
Both the US House and the US Senate are charged with counting the Electoral College votes, and this is a process in which I have participated. The constitutionally mandated process was circumvented by the precedent-setting Bush v. Gore Supreme Court ruling that instructed future Courts not to use the decision as a precedent!
As this case aptly proved, it’s not the people who have the last word in US elections. It’s a non-democratic construct called the Electoral College that does, except in those rare instances when it doesn’t.
The Electoral College was created by the framers of the US Constitution to ensure that the votes of the plebes did not supersede the interests of the landed gentry. That’s not just my opinion. For example, according to FairVote, an organization with which I have worked in the 2000 Presidential election, a whopping 78 percent of the votes cast were rendered unimportant due to the arcane rules of the Electoral College. They estimate that in 2008, the figure still topped 70 percent..........' _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
'My guest today is Coleen Rowley, former FBI special agent, whistleblower and one of TIME magazine's "Persons of the Year" in 2002.
JB: Welcome to OpEdNews, Coleen. You've been critical of the War in Iraq virtually from the get-go. What did you know that so many people within the Beltway didn't?
CR: Thanks! Here's what I knew and warned FBI Director Mueller about on Feb 26, 2003 (published in the New York Times on March 6, 2003):
1) The diversion of attention from al-Qaeda to invade Iraq, would be a step likely to bring an exponential increase in the terrorist threat to the U.S., both at home and abroad.
2) The Bush Administration was threatening Mueller with breaking up the FBI which served as additional pressure on him to politicize intelligence and keep him from voicing any objection to the plan to attack Iraq, a country that had no connection to Al Qaeda or to the 9-11 attacks. I knew the Bush Administration had lied and confused people so much that, incredibly, they had gotten 70% of all Americans to believe that Iraq was behind 9-11.
3) I knew that the figure that were leaked estimating thousands of Al Qaeda terrorists already in the U.S. ("sleeper cells") was greatly exaggerated.
4) I knew that the objectives and justifications that officials were giving about increasing people's security and preventing future terrorist attacks rang hollow inasmuch as officials were not even attempting to interview the first real Al Qaeda terrorist suspects in custody, Zacarias Moussaoui and Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber" to learn what they knew of other plots.
5) I knew that launching war on Iraq would damage liaison with European law enforcement and intelligence agencies who were more on the frontlines than the U.S.
6) The color code threat alerts touted after 9-11 were in many ways ludicrous and proving counterproductive.
7) None of the 1000 or so people rounded up and indefinitely detained after 9-11, mostly in the NYC area, had any connection to terrorism. It was just a way for the FBI to demonstrate it was doing something.
The looser "preemptive strike" rationale being applied to Iraq (and other situations abroad) was not consistent with deadly force policy. I warned that the looser standard could migrate back home, fostering a more permissive attitude towards shootings by law enforcement officers in this country.
9) Lacking patience to allow the U.N. Inspectors to do their job and instead launching an attack on Iraq was analogous to the FBI Swat Teams who, a few years before, had lost patience and improvidently rushed the Davidian Branch Compound at Waco, which resulted in the deaths of all the children there.
The NYT's article and my letter warning FBI Director Mueller to warn the President to reconsider launching war on Iraq are here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/06/us/threats-responses-whistleblower-a gent-who-saw-9-11-lapses-still-faults-fbi.html?
and here:
JB: That's quite a list, Coleen. Among other things, #8 reverberates today with the police shootings of unarmed civilians, largely black males, happening all over the country. Let's cut to the chase. With all due respect, taking your concerns to your boss accomplished exactly what? Was it enough to stop or even slow that incessant drumbeat for war echoing through the halls of power and the media?
CR: I didn't only write to FBI Director Mueller with my concerns--by the way, as he had suggested I do months before, the evening before I testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee (June 6, 2002, when I think he was trying to get me on his side by telling me he was also critical-minded and I ought to let him know the next time I saw something amiss). After a week of not getting any response from the FBI Director and with US troops poised to attack Iraq, I panicked and decided to make the letter public, sending it to the NY Times. So it turned out to be one of only a handful of mainstream front page stories opposing the Iraq War before the US launched its misbegotten war. But it obviously didn't stop anything. I ended up stepping down from my legal position which I had held for the prior 13 years as a direct result of that letter but in a way, if I had not tried, I don't think I would have been able to live with myself.
JB: I get that. And now, here we are, all these years later. Isn't this old news? Why is it relevant now, during this presidential primary season?
CR: Well it should be old news and the country should've learned from its mistakes, but unfortunately, most of the presidential candidates, with the exception of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, are still unwilling to admit these post 9-11 wars have been giant mistakes. So their answer is to double down and apply even more military force in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Ukraine as well as all other countries the US is drone-bombing in its global "war on terror." Only Sanders and Trump have indicated, in some ways, that they would be more careful in launching wars.
JB: Let's examine Hillary's position on this topic. She and her supporters tout her experience as former Secretary of State as proof that she can well fill the shoes of the Commander in Chief. Do you disagree?
CR: She IS experienced in starting wars and orchestrating "regime changes" around the world, but these have all proven disastrous. She and Bill have been involved in numerous financial and other scandals and deceits. She's experienced in that. But why would anyone vote for someone whose actions have served to increase the level of world-wide violence and terrorism, by some accounts, over 6000% since 9-11? I'm not sure if you can use this image but I've been posting this one on social media captioned: "Dick Cheney, now available in female." Coincidentally Hillary hired one of Cheney's assistants, Victoria Nuland who is PNAC Founder Robert Kagan's wife and who later helped orchestrate the coup in Ukraine.
CR: I didn't only write to FBI Director Mueller with my concerns--by the way, as he had suggested I do months before, the evening before I testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee (June 6, 2002, when I think he was trying to get me on his side by telling me he was also critical-minded and I ought to let him know the next time I saw something amiss). After a week of not getting any response from the FBI Director and with US troops poised to attack Iraq, I panicked and decided to make the letter public, sending it to the NY Times. So it turned out to be one of only a handful of mainstream front page stories opposing the Iraq War before the US launched its misbegotten war. But it obviously didn't stop anything. I ended up stepping down from my legal position which I had held for the prior 13 years as a direct result of that letter but in a way, if I had not tried, I don't think I would have been able to live with myself.
JB: I get that. And now, here we are, all these years later. Isn't this old news? Why is it relevant now, during this presidential primary season?
CR: Well it should be old news and the country should've learned from its mistakes, but unfortunately, most of the presidential candidates, with the exception of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, are still unwilling to admit these post 9-11 wars have been giant mistakes. So their answer is to double down and apply even more military force in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Ukraine as well as all other countries the US is drone-bombing in its global "war on terror." Only Sanders and Trump have indicated, in some ways, that they would be more careful in launching wars.
JB: Let's examine Hillary's position on this topic. She and her supporters tout her experience as former Secretary of State as proof that she can well fill the shoes of the Commander in Chief. Do you disagree?
CR: She IS experienced in starting wars and orchestrating "regime changes" around the world, but these have all proven disastrous. She and Bill have been involved in numerous financial and other scandals and deceits. She's experienced in that. But why would anyone vote for someone whose actions have served to increase the level of world-wide violence and terrorism, by some accounts, over 6000% since 9-11? I'm not sure if you can use this image but I've been posting this one on social media captioned: "Dick Cheney, now available in female." Coincidentally Hillary hired one of Cheney's assistants, Victoria Nuland who is PNAC Founder Robert Kagan's wife and who later helped orchestrate the coup in Ukraine.
JB: You've made some pretty strong claims just now, Coleen. And after you briefly specify the "numerous financial and other scandals and deceits", I'd like to see where you get your astounding 6000% increase figure, please.
CR: [Link here.] Not complete as I've never been that interested in compiling a list, but the main scandals and deceits that come to mind that the Clintons have been embroiled in are: Whitewater financial scandal; Lewinsky (and prior sex scandals) during which Hillary's husband slammed his fist and lied, then lamely explained that it depended upon what the meaning of "is" is; her exaggeration of being under fire after plane landing during one of her trips; Vince Foster suicide; the Clintons' raising of $3 billion over 41 years, including from foreign entities where there was a conflict of interest and which may figure into the FBI investigation of her use of a private server [see link]. There's a reason that Hillary gets such low marks in polls on the issue of honesty and trustworthiness.
JB: I just checked out your linkand you underestimated: the article says that, since 2002, the number of terror attacks has actually increased by 6,500%! As secretary of state, Hillary was carrying out her president's wishes. So, is it fair to tar her with war-ishness, if there is such a word?
CR: She wasn't exactly following Obama's orders. And that's not how it even works as Hillary is connected to powerful elements in the "Double State" (the Military Industrial Complex, AIPAC, Netanyahu, the neocon founders of the "Project for the New American Century and her powerful funders such as Haim Saban and George Soros). We know from Jeffrey Goldberg's exhaustive interviews in "The Obama Doctrine" recently published in the Atlantic, that Obama was pushed by Hillary (and Samantha Power) to bomb Libya and again pushed by Kerry and Hillary to arm the Syrian "rebels" (despite their connections to terrorist groups), set up a "no fly zone" (which is the same pretext they used to bomb Libya), to escalate the military occupation of Afghanistan, etc. See Diana Johnstone's book "Hillary: Queen of Chaos" and http://hillaryisaneocon.com/ for a more complete list of all the wars and "regime change" coups she's been involved in. Clinton maintained her vote giving authorization to Bush to launch war on Iraq was correct up until her first run for the presidency, long after it was known Bush-Cheney's pretexts were false. She overcame the objections of Robert Gates, Donlan and other top advisors to Obama regarding the decision to bomb and destroy Libya to take out Gaddafi.
JB: For those of us with faulty memories, remind us why having Gaddafi gone was a bad idea.
CR: Gaddafi, like Saddam, the Taliban, Assad, and other government leaders that the U.S. has either toppled or attempted to topple, may not be to our liking, but it's naive to believe that a democracy can be created, that it will be a "cakewalk" to remove a foreign government by bombing a country. Wars and the toppling of foreign governments creates a vacuum that inherently leads to civil strife and sectarian conflict, also providing "failed states" where Al Qaeda and ISIS can establish themselves. This is well known and predictable. The "Right to Protect" doctrine that was used by Clinton et al by alleging that we had to protect people in Benghazi was factually false just as Bush's lies about Iraq's WMD and ties to terrorism were false. Ultimately the US Ambassador was murdered as a result of Hillary Clinton's war on Libya and it was totally destabilized, destroyed and turned into a haven for terrorism.
JB: I'm pretty sure that Hillary would disagree with your assessment. For the last several months, in reaction to Bernie Sanders's surprising strength, she's been attempting to position herself as the true progressive and realist. Would you say that her foreign policy positions disqualify her from that claim?
CR: Again I urge readers to check out HillaryIsANeocon.com. There's a reason that the founder of PNAC, Robert Kagan and other neocon warhawks are now backing (and advising) Clinton over the other presidential candidates and it's not because she's a "true progressive" or a realist. Just the opposite. They know they can depend upon her to continue to wage wars and support "regime changes" around the world based on her solid track record of having done so during the last couple decades when she's had this power. Like other AIPAC cheerleaders, she has made statements about "obliterating Iran" so it may be that she would seek to undo the agreement that Obama has worked out. She has called for a "no fly zone" over Syria so I don't think she would support the current peace negotiations.
The neocon warhawks have been ascendant over foreign policy since 9-11 and they have a strange form of "idealism" (opposite of realist school of foreign policy) that they sometimes refer to as "creative chaos." But in bombing countries, and stirring up sectarian hatreds, to use to gain control in line with the (neocon) "Wolfowitz Doctrine," the violence has spilled into new areas and led to grassroots type terrorism that they can't control. I think Bernie Sanders would have an easy time, if he wished to make the debate about foreign policy, of challenging her long track record that is anything but progressive. Even Donald Trump exhibits more "progressive" and realistic positions on foreign policy than Hillary Clinton.
JB: That's an intriguing statement! Tell us more about this website, HillaryIsANeocon.com, that you keep referring to. I'd never heard of it before.
CR: I think the motivation for the website is precisely this false perception of Hillary Clinton as a feminist (even though younger women are not buying it) when in fact she is a female Dick Cheney if you actually look at her long track record of callously launching wars in line with the neoconservative ideology of using "creative chaos" to further the "Wolfowitz Doctrine" of seeking full spectrum dominance. The trauma of 9-11 has opened the door to the neocons' series of foreign policy blunders but we know from both leaked intelligence documents and Hillary's own e-mails that they are not so much blunders as coolly and coldly calculated.
JB: Do you think anyone out there is listening? So many people disregard policies and positions in deciding. For instance, many women simply want a woman president and they want her now, regardless of her past or policies. The pundits long ago anointed her the Democratic nominee. Is there time for enough of a dialogue about Hillary's true nature to affect the outcome of this race?
CR: So, there are still lots of unknowns. Bernie Sanders is winning the primaries today and he still has a chance. I will be terribly disappointed if he doesn't get the nomination but even more disappointed if he throws his support to Hillary Clinton. But if it does come down to Clinton vs Trump, as many political watchers predict, I think we may well see Trump not afraid to challenge her disastrous track record just as he was not afraid to challenge Jeb Bush's support of his brother's disastrous war on Iraq (even though Trump knew he would be booed in South Carolina).
I personally encourage people to consider the issues and not be blinded by party loyalties or "identity politics" as the two party system is such a game of ping pong, incapable of changing course for the better. The war party (based on MIC and AIPAC type special interests) has tentacles into both Democrats and Republicans. Progressives, true conservatives, greens and libertarians need to start noticing there is a big consensus for changing course off the post 9-11 perpetual war meme.
JB: I want to make sure I understand what you just said. You're hoping Bernie gets the nomination. But, if Hillary prevails, are you saying that you would support Trump over her?
CR: It's a bit too early as we'll have to wait and see what transpires. Trump is a loose cannon and no one knows what he'll say, or more importantly what he'll do. But we know what Hillary will do as she has already repeatedly done the worst. I should look up the links, but there are now more and more well known anti-war and anti-imperialist progressives such as William Blum, William Greider(who writes for The Nation) as well as anti-war libertarians such as Justin Raimondo who are making arguments (which I agree with) that if it comes down to having to vote between these two, the lesser evil at this point would seem to be Trump.
JB: Even with the Supreme Court and reproductive rights, to name just two, hanging in the balance?
CR: This argument about appointing Supreme Court judges is always the fallback but in my opinion, and as someone who's read and studied a number of Supreme Court decisions, it's an exaggerated concern and a false reason for voting straight party lines. A number of Supreme Court judges once they were appointed, have changed their stripes and if you look at all judges and judicial opinions, you're hard-pressed to identify the party of the President who appointed them. So I don't think the Supreme Court hangs in the balance.
JB: I wish I shared your confidence on that matter. Anything you'd like to add before we wrap this up?
CR: It will be an interesting election and I worry that unless more people realize their responsibility is not just to vote but to speak out and "make presidents do" what they promised, even after elections, we will be in for even worse times, and more dangerous times, if terrorism continues to rise and cold wars turn to hot wars, with nuclear-armed countries. If there is to be some solution, it's going to require pressure from a consensus of people, a tipping point, and not just allowing any "leader" to dictate policies, subject as they are to moneyed and powerful forces.
JB: Thanks so much for talking with me, Coleen. You've given me a lot to think about.
President Killary : Would The World Survive President Hillary?
Posted 04/14/2016 2:44 pm by PatriotRising with 0 comments
This is an English translation of an article that I wrote for the German magazine, Compact. I was encouraged by the high level of intelligent discourse that Compact brings to its readers. If only the US had more people capable of reaching beyond entertainment to comprehending the forces that affect them, there might be some hope for America.
http://patriotrising.com/2016/04/14/president-killary-world-survive-pr esident-hillary/
Compact brings hope to Germany. The German people are beginning to understand that their country is not sovereign but a vassal of Washington and that their chancellor serves Washington’s hegemony and American financial interests, and not the German people.
Hillary Clinton is proving to be the “Teflon candidate.” In her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, she has escaped damage from major scandals, any one of which would destroy a politician. Hillary has accepted massive bribes in the form of speaking fees from financial organizations and corporations. She is under investigation for misuse of classified data, an offense for which a number of whistleblowers are in prison. Hillary has survived the bombing of Libya, her creation of a failed Libyan state that is today a major source of terrorist jihadists, and the Benghazi controversy. She has survived charges that as Secretary of State she arranged favors for foreign interests in exchange for donations to the Clintons’ foundation. And, of course, there is a long list of previous scandals: Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate. Diana Johnstone’s book, Queen of Chaos, describes Hillary Clinton as “the top salesperson for the ruling oligarchy.”
Hillary Clinton is a bought-and-paid-for representative of the big banks, the military-security complex, and the Israel Lobby. She will represent these interests, not those of the American people or America’s European allies.
The Clintons’ purchase by interest groups is public knowledge. For example, CNN reports that between February 2001 and May 2015 Bill and Hillary Clinton were paid $153 million in speaking fees for 729 speeches, an average price of $210,000.
As it became evident that Hillary Clinton would emerge as the likely Democratic presidential candidate, she was paid more. Deutsche Bank paid her $485,000 for one speech, and Goldman Sachs paid her $675,000 for three speeches. Bank of American Morgan Stanley, UBS, and Fidelity Investments each paid $225,000.
Despite Hillary’s blatant willingness to be bribed in public, her opponent, Bernie Sanders, has not succeeded in making an issue of Hillary’s shamelessness. Both of the main establishment newspapers, the Washington Post and the New York Times have come to Hillary’s defense.
Hillary is a war-monger. She pushed the Obama regime into the destruction of a stable and largely cooperative government in Libya where the “Arab Spring” was a CIA-backed group of jihadists who were used to dislodge China from its oil investments in eastern Libya. She urged her husband to bomb Yugoslavia. She pushed for “regime change” in Syria. She oversaw the coup that overthrew the democratically elected president of Honduras. She brought neoconservative Victoria Nuland, who arranged the coup that overthrew the democratically elected president of Ukraine, into the State Department. Hillary has called President Vladimir Putin of Russia the “new Hitler.” Hillary as president guarantees war and more war.
In the United States government has been privatized. Office holders use their positions in order to make themselves wealthy, not in order to serve the public interest. Bill and Hillary Clinton epitomize the use of public office in behalf of the office holder’s interest. For the Clintons government means using public office to be rewarded for doing favors for private interests. The Wall Street Journal reported that “at least 60 companies that lobbied the State Department during her [Hillary Clinton’s] tenure as Secretary of State donated a total of more than $26 million to the Clinton Foundation.”
According to washingtonsblog.com, “All told, the Clinton Foundation and its affiliates have collected donations and pledges from all sources of more than $1.6 billion, according to their tax returns.”
According to rootsactionteam.com, multi-million dollar donors to the Clinton Foundation include Saudi Arabia, Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk, Kuwait, ExxonMobil, Friends of Saudi Arabia, James Murdoch, Qatar, Boeing, Dow, Goldman Sachs, Walmart, and the United Arab Emirates.
According to the International Business Times, “Under Hillary Clinton, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments had given millions to the Clinton Foundation.”
Hillary Clinton has escaped unharmed from so many crimes and scandals that she would likely be the most reckless president in American history. With the arms race renewed, with Russia declared “an existential threat to the United States,” and with Hillary’s declaration of President Putin as the new Hitler, Hillary’s arrogant self-confidence is likely to result in overreach that ends in a conflict between NATO and Russia. Considering the extraordinary destructive force of nuclear weapons, Hillary as president could mean the end of life on earth.
The Best of Paul Craig Roberts
Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, has been reporting shocking cases of prosecutorial abuse for two decades. A new edition of his book, The Tyranny of Good Intentions, co-authored with Lawrence Stratton, a documented account of how americans lost the protection of law, has been released by Random House. Visit his website. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Craig Murray found a very telling pic of the Clinton's and Trump's; the Clintons also used to be very pally with the bush's, too. All a charade, an illusion of choice... _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Thu May 12, 2016 8:40 pm Post subject:
OH DEAR!
REPORT: Hillary’s Emails Hacked by Russia – Kremlin Deciding Whether to Release 20,000 Stolen Emails (VIDEO)
Jim Hoft May 10th, 2016 8:02 am 344 Comments
Guest Post by Joe Hoft
The Kremlin is debating whether to release the 20,000 emails they have hacked off of Hillary Clinton’s server.
According to a report from four days ago, beginning in 2011, the Russians began monitoring Romanian computer hacker Marcel Lazăr Lehel (aka Guccifer) after he attempted, unsuccessfully, to break into the computer system of the Russian funded RT television network.
After monitoring Guccifer, the Russians were reportedly able to record (both physically and electronically) his actions which allowed the Russian intelligence analysts, in 2013, to not only detect his breaking into the private computer of Secretary Clinton, but also break in and copy all of its contents as well.
The report notes that shortly after Russia obtained Clinton’s emails, they released a limited amount to RT TV which were published in an article in March 2013, titled Hillary Clinton’s ‘hacked’ Benghazi emails: FULL RELEASE.
hillary hacked emails
Apparently no Western journalists promoted this story in 2013.
A couple of years later, in 2016, the US then brought in Guccifer for questioning related to this incident. According to the report, NBC news knew why Guccifer was being questioned but withheld this information from the American public.
The Associated Press reported in October 2015 that “Hillary Clinton’s private email server maintained in her home while serving as secretary of State was possibly hacked by Russia-tied authorities, and others, on five separate occasions.”
The AP report noted that investigators discovered among Clinton’s cache of released emails malicious software aimed at transmitting data to three overseas computers, including at least one in Russia. This malicious software was reportedly activated by clicking on it; but in October it was not clear if Clinton actually opened these messages or not, per the AP.
Recently separate reports have come out noting that Guccifer had indeed hacked Clinton’s emails. Now according to this latest report, Clinton’s server was not only compromised by Guccifer but also by Russia. Guccifer told FOX News last week that he hacked Hillary’s homebrew server and so did at least 10 others.
UPDATE: Judge Andrew Napolitano told Megyn Kelly on Monday,
“There’s a debate going on in the Kremlin between the Foreign Ministry and the Intelligence Services about whether they should release the 20,000 of Mrs. Clinton’s emails that they have hacked into.”
And again, check out the 'Scopes Hildabeast';
Also, Cathy O'Brien's 'Access Denied: For Reasons of National Security'; ideally, read the book; but here's a very good video:
Cathy O'Brien Ex Illuminati Mind Control Victim MK Ultra The Granada Forum 10/31/96: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoMAFr5pQck _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
'......Should Sanders go to the DNC next week and reaffirm his endorsement of Hillary Clinton in the general election, Stein said it would be a betrayal of his principles and of his supporters’ wishes for a political revolution.
“You want to affirm a corrupt party that just dragged you across the coals? You expect your supporters, who have a vision and who voted for integrity, to follow you into this *?” Stein told US Uncut. “Is there no respect here for his campaign and for himself? Are they just going to pretend it didn’t happen?”
Regardless of whether or not Sen. Sanders continues to remain with the Democratic Party, Stein believes his millions of supporters will be so disgusted with the leaks that they will exit the Democratic Party en masse and join her campaign.
“I think it would be very hard for a self-respecting Sanders supporter, in light of these revelations, to take the beating and humiliate themselves and disrespect themselves, to go into the campaign and support the predator who destroyed them,” Stein said.
In response to the question of being perceived as a “spoiler,” and whether or not it’s wise to try and run against both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump and risk a Trump presidency, Stein said Donald Trump’s defeat won’t come at the hands of Hillary Clinton and the Democrats, saying the leaks show the DNC has no trust left with the public.
“How is Hillary Clinton going to hold a candle to Donald Trump?” Stein said. “Not only does this destroy the unification efforts within the Democrats, but this destroys Hillary’s ability to portray herself as trustworthy to the American public. They already don’t trust her.”
“I don’t think Hillary Clinton is now capable of stopping Donald Trump,” Stein continued. “You have to begin to get out [of the two-party system], and trust the momentum and righteousness of what you’re going to do and what you must do, especially when you’re looking at oblivion.”
She was quick to add that a Hillary Clinton presidency would also be disastrous for America and the rest of the world.
“It’s not just Donald Trump on one hand, it’s climate catastrophe on the other, and nuclear weapons, and expanding war,” Stein said. “What we need to really look at here is the ticking clock on climate change, which wipes us all out. All of us forever, that’s it… We must do this, we have to get out of this pit that we’re in and understand if we’ve come that far, we are going to keep going. We have a moral imperative here, not just for us in this moment, but for humanity, forever.”
Stein will be in Philadelphia to protest at the DNC with tens of thousands of Sanders supporters who have been organizing the protests for months. US Uncut will provide daily coverage of the convention throughout next week.'
I make her right. Trump or Clinton will both be disasters.
But I don't expect Sanders will accept her offer! Pity. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2016 3:32 am Post subject:
Haitians Protest Outside Hillary Clinton’s Office Over ‘Billions Stolen’ by Clinton Foundation: http://goldenageofgaia.com/2016/04/25/haitians-protest-outside-hillary -clintons-office-billions-stolen-clinton-foundation/
'The original article refers to a protest that took place a year ago. In the midst of this presidential election, however, this is important for all Americans to know. I asked a friend who’s a Hillary supporter why she has chosen so, and the answer spoke to a complete lack of awareness of just what the Clintons have been engaging in all these years.
Haitians Protest Outside Hillary Clinton’s Office Over ‘Billions Stolen’ by Clinton Foundation
PoliticsintheUSA.com, April 24, 2016
-http://tinyurl.com/z2rch3e-
Haitian activists protested outside of the Clinton Foundation in New York over the loss of “billions of dollars” that was meant to help rebuild after the devastating 2010 earthquake. (1)
The activists are claiming the money was stolen through the Haiti Reconstruction Commission that was headed by Bill Clinton. In January 2015, the Clinton Foundation was the target of protests for wasting more than $10 billion and awarding contracts to non-Haitian companies.
The activists also said Haiti is a cover for foreign governments to funnel kickbacks of hundreds of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation. They believe that this was done for favors that Hillary was doing for the foreign governments while she was Secretary of State.
“We are telling the world of the crimes that Bill and Hillary Clinton are responsible for in Haiti,” said Dhoud Andre of the Committee Against Dictatorship in Haiti. “And we are telling the American people that the over 32,000 emails that Hillary Clinton said she deleted have evidence of the crimes they have committed.”
Five years, later a majority of Haiti is still in disrepair. The capital’s main hospital has yet to be finished, and there is a major rise of cholera. The Clinton Foundation said progress is being made especially in Haiti’s economic and tourist industry.
BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff March 20, 2015 8:27 am
Source ~ http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3270263/posts '
Exposed: How the Clintons likely stole billions from the world’s poorest:
https://www.intellihub.com/exposed-clintons-likely-stole-billions-worl ds-poorest/
'Investor and financial crimes researcher Charles Ortel joins me to uncover what he is calling “the “largest unprosecuted charity fraud ever attempted.” Charles reports that the Clinton Foundation is part of an “international charity fraud network whose entire cumulative scale approaches and may even exceed $100 billion, measured from 1997 forward.” And the most shocking aspect of the Clinton Foundation’s missing Billions is that much of it was stolen from those who need it most, the world’s poorest of the poor. Along with the Bush crime family, the Clintons formed The Clinton-Bush Haiti Fund after the devastating 2010 Haiti earthquake. Charles says, “What the Clintons have done, is they are stealing the people’s physical gold in Haiti, as well as perhaps stealing or diverting massive sums that were sent towards Haiti and refusing to make an accounting for it.”
This is a story of fraud and corruption so vast in scope that it should result in putting the Clintons in prison, not back in the White House.
You can get the very latest research from Charles, including 40 soon-to-be-released research reports about Clinton Foundation fraud, by visiting him at his site CharlesOrtel.com '
A Deep Dive into How the Clinton Foundation Operates Illegally and in Haiti: charlesortel.com/
And that's just one of the massive crimes the Clintons have got away with.
And rather than denouncing the cow, Bernie Sanders endorses her.
He should defect to the Greens, like Stein suggested. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:11 am Post subject:
You couldn't make it up!
This is the email '500,000 kids dead - we think it's worth it' Madeleine Albright is sending out in the States to Demoprats:
'There is no one I admire -- or trust -- more than Hillary Clinton, and that's what I'm going to say at the Democratic Convention this week.
This country needs her to win this election -- and she needs you on her side to do it.
Donald Trump simply has no credibility or standing to represent American interests abroad. His small-minded, unstable temperament, his shocking incoherence regarding the norms and details of foreign policy, and his dangerous ideology are all completely disqualifying.
Trump barely understood the Brexit decision, which sent ripples of economic anxiety and nationalist sentiment across Europe. He believes more, not fewer, nations should acquire nuclear weapons. He praises authoritarians like Vladimir Putin. He thinks people like President Obama and Hillary are to blame for the rise of ISIS and the collapse of Libya. He considers NATO -- a bedrock alliance dating back to 1949 -- a security agreement we could casually withdraw from or renegotiate unilaterally. Just this weekend, he talked about leaving the World Trade Organization as well.
I've known Hillary for decades, and I know that the choice we have to make in November could not be more clear or more consequential. If you're with her and trust her as much as I do, show her -- and show the world how much better we are than the disturbing and dark vision Donald Trump offers.'
Will even 'Old Nick' himself be roped into endorsing 'Killary Hildabeast?' _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2016 10:07 pm Post subject:
Expert report: Evidence proves election fraud and Bernie WON the Democratic nomination. Had enough .01% rogue state crimes to demand arrests, or need more lies, looting, wars?
Posted on July 31, 2016 by Carl Herman
“The difference between the reported totals, and our best estimate of the actual vote, varies considerably from state to state. However these differences are significant—sometimes more than 10%—and could change the outcome of the election.” ~ Fritz Scheuren, professor of statistics at George Washington University, President of the American Statistical Association (ASA)
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/07/expert-report-evidence-proves-e lection-fraud-bernie-won-democratic-nomination-enough-01-rogue-state-c rimes-demand-arrests-need-lies-looting-wars.html
1-minute expert testimony that unaccountable voting machines are a literal “black box” with absolutely nothing to see or count. Please note the distain of the off-screen “official” responding to clear and obvious proof of election fraud:
We’ve documented that the US use of electronic voting machines without a paper trail fails to meet the definition of election because it requires physical votes subject to independently verifiable counting (with videos).
We’ve documented that Clinton belongs in prison for support of lie-started and illegal Wars of Aggression in key vocal roles as US Senator and Secretary of State; the worst crimes a nation can commit, as well as election fraud in collusion with the Democratic National Committee.
Now, Election Justice USA issued their report of the 2016 primaries, Democracy Lost, with findings that Bernie Sanders won the Democratic primaries, but was denied victory from the following types of election fraud (pg. 95):
1) Targeted voter suppression
2) Registration tampering
3) Illegal voter purges
4) Exit polling discrepancies
5) Evidence for voting machine tampering
6) The security (or lack thereof) of various voting machine types
Their conclusion:
“Based on this work, Election Justice USA has established an upper estimate of 184 pledged delegates lost by Senator Bernie Sanders as a consequence of specific irregularities and instances of fraud. Adding these delegates to Senator Sanders’ pledged delegate total and subtracting the same number from Hillary Clinton’s total would more than erase the 359 pledged delegate gap between the two candidates. EJUSA established the upper estimate through exit polling data, statistical analysis by precinct size, and attention to the details of Democratic proportional awarding of national delegates. Even small changes in vote shares in critical states like Massachusetts and New York could have substantially changed the media narrative surrounding the primaries in ways that would likely have had far reaching consequences for Senator Sanders’ campaign.”
15-minute analysis of Election Justice USA’s report by Lee Camp (adult language):
But this is business as usual for .01% “leaders” in government and necessary corporate media accomplices to “cover” these crimes and to only and always herd We the People into ongoing rogue state empire with bs (a serious academic term) lies of omission and commission.
Americans who vote for Hillary or Trump are voting with relative ignorance to continue the following, with 95%+ who would never agree if honestly briefed on the facts:
All the wars were started with “reasons” known to be false as they were told. We know this absolutely from now-disclosed government agency documents. Did you know?
The wars are Orwellian unlawful; not even close to legal. If there’s one law responsible citizens must know, and to honor the awful sacrifices of all our families through not one but two world wars, it’s war law. Did you know?
The reason all levels of total debt increase is a Robber Baron-era system of fundamental criminal fraud to create what we use for money as debt owed to private banks, the principals of which are the “too big to fails.” The top 20 Americans now own more than the bottom 50%, the .1% own more than the bottom 90%, and the 1% are more wealthy than the 99%. Did you know?
The real solutions to correct the Robber Baron-era system are monetary reform (direct creation of debt-free money for productive infrastructure) and public banks (at-cost and in-house credit to reduce government borrowing costs by 50%). For just one example: if your state had their own bank with a 5% mortgage and credit card, all state taxes are abundantly paid for, with no other taxation ever needed. The benefits of just a few reforms are conservatively calculated to $1,000,000 per average US household. Literally, you have nothing more valuable for your time than to learn this. Did you know?
Of course, almost all Americans don’t know.
This is because US “leadership” isn’t about informing the public in a democratic republic, but to bs them to support either the Left or Right arm of one rogue state empire political body.
I use the word bs as an academic term from the most recognized living US philosopher’s Bestseller: relentless lies of omission and commission to disinform the public to get their approval through whatever means needed. It must be constantly applied to bury any appearance of comprehensive facts, because those facts will drive public opinion in an uncontrolled direction away from the bullshitters’ parasitic interests.
I use rogue state in its academic meaning: a nation constantly breaking international law with both threat and harm to others, ruled by authoritarians who restrict rights and proliferate weapons of mass destruction. Since WW2, Earth has had 248 armed conflicts. The US started 201 of them (81%). These ongoing illegal Wars of Aggression have killed ~30 million and counting; 90% of these deaths are innocent children, the elderly and ordinary working civilian women and men. The sum of 30 million means the US has war-murdered more than Hitler’s Nazis. Did you know?
Therefore: a vote for Hillary or Trump continues this bs:
Lying that “reasons” for war were “the best intelligence at the time” as the worst lie of commission a government can make to wage intentional Wars of Aggression. Or that “Saddam was a bad man” in a lie of omission that he was a CIA asset since 1958, and used in attempt to overthrow Iran’s government after they refused a US-friendly dictator. Or that “Israel has a right to self-defense” as a huge lie of omission to leave out their military siege and armed attacks on Gaza are obvious Crimes Against Humanity.
Lying in omission to never ever ever ever ever mention that war is illegal. Expect more lines like, “9/11 changed everything,” “We didn’t choose this war,” “We ended the war in Iraq,” but never to state the US/UK wars were started with known lies, in opposition to UN Security Council Resolutions, and exactly what two US treaties were meant to prevent in crystal-clear letter and intent.
Lying in criminal commission from positions of legal fiduciary responsibility to Americans that creating debt is actually “money,” and somehow “good” for us even as it grows to tragic-comic accelerating levels. Lying in omission to never tell Americans that creating what we use for money as negative numbers added forever means the debt can only become bigger over time, with greater and greater debt-servicing costs going to the owners of this scheme. Lying in criminal omission that Benjamin Franklin knew the obvious solutions of creating debt-free money and operating credit as a public service that was so successful he wrote a pamphlet documenting how colonial Pennsylvania’s government operated without charging any taxes. You don’t know this from “official” lies of omission and commission.
Corporate media is complicit in this bs: six corporations that generate ~90% of what Americans receive for “news” that ongoingly lie in omission and commission in the above topics. The CIA admitted to the US Senate in 1975 they had over 400 operatives controlling US media. Did you know?
If you need further evidence of election fraud through unaccountable electronic voting machines, “leadership” and corporate media manipulated primaries, and the general characteristics of both Clinton and Trump beyond being illegal rogue state supporters driving We the People further and further into debt slavery, look here, here, here, here, here, here, here for further documentation as clear as we’ve covered so far.
There is an alternative to voting for bs evil: Demand .01% arrests
The responsible citizen response to these Emperor’s New Clothes obvious crimes centered in war, money, and lies is to demand arrests of US Left and Right .01% leaders.
Please read that sentence again to appreciate its elegant power and truth.
The alternative is to lie to one’s self, nation, and global community to allow ongoing crimes that annually kill millions, harm billions, and loot trillions. This is not a responsible alternative, let alone to take the criminal fraud further to vote the Left or Right’s chosen puppet to bs for further crimes.
In fact, unless one wishes to condone, bond, and join such evil and bs, one cannot vote for it. If one wishes to stand as an American under our ideals and Constitution, one must demand arrests for such outrageous crimes.
The categories of crime include:
Wars of Aggression (the worst crime a nation can commit).
Likely treason for lying to US military, ordering unlawful attack and invasions of foreign lands, and causing thousands of US military deaths.
Crimes Against Humanity for ongoing intentional policy of poverty that’s killed over 400 million human beings just since 1995 (~75% children; more deaths than from all wars in Earth’s recorded history).
US military, law enforcement, and all with Oaths to support and defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, face an endgame choice:
Demand arrests, with those with lawful authority to enact it. An arrest is the lawful action to stop apparent crimes, with the most serious crimes documented here meaning the most serious need for arrests.
Watch the US escalate its rogue state crimes under President Clinton or President Trump.
In just 90 seconds, former US Marine Ken O’Keefe powerfully states how you may choose to voice “very obvious solutions”: arrest the criminal leaders (video starts at 20:51, then finishes this episode of Cross Talk):
**
Note: I make all factual assertions as a National Board Certified Teacher of US Government, Economics, and History, with all economics factual claims receiving zero refutation since I began writing in 2008 among Advanced Placement Macroeconomics teachers on our discussion board, public audiences of these articles, and international conferences. I invite readers to empower their civic voices with the strongest comprehensive facts most important to building a brighter future. I challenge professionals, academics, and citizens to add their voices for the benefit of all Earth’s inhabitants.
'......But the list of establishment Republicans that say they are voting for Hillary Clinton is staggering... (as The End of The American Dream blog's Michael Snyder details)...
Who would have ever believed that so many big names in the Republican Party would publicly pledge to vote for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election? All throughout the primaries and the caucuses, the Republican establishment expressed tremendous disdain for Donald Trump, but they were unable to derail his march to the nomination. Now that we have reached the general election, some of the biggest names in the GOP are actually taking the unprecedented step of crossing over to the other side and are publicly announcing their support for Hillary Clinton. This shows that many of these individuals were only “Republicans in name only” to begin with, and it also demonstrates the lengths that the elite are willing to go to in order to keep Donald Trump out of the White House.....'
'Bernie Sanders may have endorsed Hillary Clinton, praised Hillary Clinton and urged his supporters to vote for Hillary Clinton, but it seems even the maverick Vermont senator has been unable to convince his fans, many of whom say they are planning to cast their ballot for the Green party candidate Jill Stein instead on 8 November.
Support for Stein, who won 469,501 votes as the Green party nominee in 2012, was impossible to escape at the Democratic national convention last week. Inside the Wells Fargo Center, some Sanders delegates dressed in green and wore Green party pins.
Outside the hall, hundreds of Sanders supporters – in Philadelphia to demonstrate against Clinton’s nomination – attended a Green party rally at which Stein accused the Democratic party of derailing Sanders’ campaign.
Vanessa Perez was among the protesters outside the Wells Fargo arena. Originally a Sanders supporter, she plans to vote for Stein in November and will canvass for the presumptive Green party nominee over the next three months.
“She has a lot of stances that are very similar to Bernie’s. And I just really strongly believe that you should always vote your conscience,” Perez said.
“The Democratic party clearly doesn’t really care for the Bernie supporters and our stances, so we might as well work for a party that will.”
Perez, 23, is from Florida – a crucial swing state that offers 29 electoral college votes. It is also the state where Ralph Nader, running as a Green candidate, won 97,488 votes – 2.5% of the state’s total – in the 2000 presidential election. George W Bush narrowly defeated Democratic candidate Al Gore – the margin is still disputed – in the state, and some believe Nader’s candidacy cost Gore the election.
Perez said she is aware of that, but “can’t get herself” to vote for Clinton.
“I think I would regret more voting for her than I would voting for Jill and then possibly risking a Trump presidency,” she said.
“Because it condones all of the rigging and the fraud that went on and you’re letting go of the prime opportunity to push forward a third party.”....' _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Chris Hedges is spot on in this Democracy Now! video. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
You won’t find anyone in the mainstream press talking about this anywhere. Take a look yourself — there’s barely a peep (and that peep is confined to alt media).
It’s almost as if it didn’t happen, but it did.
On August 1st, Victor Thorn (below, pictured with his books), a seasoned Clinton researcher and writer for American Free Press, was found dead from a gunshot wound on a mountaintop near his home. It was his birthday. He would have been 54 years old.
His death is being called a suicide.
Via AFP:
Best known for his investigate research on the Clintons, Thorn wrote the Clinton trilogy —three definitive works that delved into the history of the power couple including their sordid scandals, Bill Clinton’s sexual assaults of multiple women, and the drug running out of Mena, Arkansas while Clinton was governor of the state.
Four days later, and no official press releases have gone out on Thorn’s “apparent” suicide.
Dave Gahary of AFP interviewed Victor’s (whose real name is Scott) brother William J. “Bill” Makufka about Victor’s death, but never straight out asked the burning question of whether or not William thought his brother may have been the victim of a professional hit, as commenter William Dietrich pointed out:
You failed to ask the obvious question. How can Brother Bill be so certain it was not a professional hit? Professional assassins can make a hit look like a suicide. That’s what they did to Vince Foster. You get two strong muscular guys who pin him down and force a gun in the mouth or side of head and squeeze the trigger. How can the Brother be so absolutely positive that was not done? He was not there. How can he be so certain it was not a professional hit?
The very next day, on August 2nd, another anti-Clinton activist was found dead.
Shawn Lucas
Shawn Lucas (above), who was recently featured in a video (below) personally serving the Democratic National Committee and Debbie Wasserman Schultz with a nationwide class action lawsuit at the DNC HQ accusing the DNC and its former chairwoman of committing fraud by favoring Hillary Clinton and rigging the primary process in her favor over Bernie Sanders, was found dead from so-far “unknown causes”.
His girlfriend found his body on his bathroom floor and called 9-1-1, but there were no signs of life by the time paramedics showed up. His cause of death has still not been released, but rumors have been floated that the young man suddenly died in sleep… on the bathroom floor?
So that’s two dead anti-Clinton men in the course of two days. Coincidence?
The mainstream press isn’t saying a word.
But Lucas and Thorn aren’t the only two bodies that are piling up around Hillary this election season.
Just a few weeks ago, DNC staffer Seth Rich (below), a 27-year-old in charge of the DNC’s voter expansion data, was gunned down around 4 a.m. while out walking near his home in D.C. He was shot twice in the back and was found with bruises on his face, his hands, and his knees.
So far police claim that there are no suspects, no witnesses, and no motive.
sethrich-facebook
A few weeks prior to that on June 23rd, former United Nations official John Ashe died while lifting weights. The UN reported Ashe’s death as a heart attack, but local police reported his throat had actually been crushed when he supposedly accidentally dropped a barbell on himself working out. (Interestingly, an episode of Columbo called “An Exercise in Fatality” features a plot where a murderer drops a barbell on a victim to kill him, staging it to look like a weightlifting accident.)
Ashe was set to testify in a bribery scandal that might have led back to the DNC and, you guessed it, the Clintons.
Via WND:
“The death by barbell of disgraced U.N. official John Ashe could become a bigger obsession for conspiracy theorists than Vince Foster’s 1993 suicide,” the report by Richard Johnson said.
It’s because Ashe was scheduled to testify in just days with Chinese businessman and co-defendant Ng Lap Seng, who was accused of smuggling $4.5 million into the U.S. and lying that it was to buy casino chips and more.
The New York Post said Ng earlier was identified in a 1998 Senate document “as the source of hundreds of thousands of dollars illegally funneled through an Arkansas restaurant owner, Charlie Trie, to the Democratic National Committee during the Clinton administration.”
“One source told me,” Johnson wrote, “‘During the trial, the prosecutors would have linked Ashe to the Clinton bagman Ng. It would have been very embarrassing. His death was conveniently timed.”
How close was Ng to the Clintons? According to a 2015 article in The Daily Beast:
Ng being the mega-rich Chinese national who used a proxy to pour more than $1 million into the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton-Gore campaign back in 1996. Scandal was joined by embarrassment when it turned out that Ng had been favored with 10 visits to the White House, including an elevator ride with Hillary Clinton.
John-Ashe-And-Hillary-Clinton
Ashe shaking hands with Hillary Clinton
Hm… Did Ashe know too much?
If he did, he won’t be talking too much, at all, anymore. Kind of ironic that, of all things, his throat was crushed. If this was a mafia movie, Ashe’s cause of death would send a pretty strong message to any other potential snitches out there about the importance of not talking, now wouldn’t it.
Four dead people in just six weeks.
One thing is certain. A lot of bodies are starting to pile up (again) around the Clintons. Makes one wonder…
Just how many more people have to die while the country is forced to pretend to elect Hillary?
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
We encourage you to share and republish _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
The looser "preemptive strike" rationale being applied to Iraq (and other situations abroad) was not consistent with deadly force policy. I warned that the looser standard could migrate back home, fostering a more permissive attitude towards shootings by law enforcement officers in this country.