Jump to content


Photo

Interesting Times ...Opinions Please.


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Chuck Barlow

Chuck Barlow

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 173 posts
  • LocationFort Worth TX

Posted 25 March 2017 - 04:01 AM

A Kennedy/Trump comparison and contrast.

 

Trump will never be embraced to the degree Kennedy was. He lacks the natural warmth ,charm and deep intellect that Kennedy had. In fact, Trump has an ability to grate, irritate and make one wince while he tries to remove the foot from his mouth. Many appreciate Trump's refusal to sugar coat his opinions. It's refreshing to hear unvarnished opinions free from politically correct bullshit.

 

JFK was smart enough to know that he was making a huge number of enemies by fighting their power and control. I believe his innate decency prevented him from really believing that they would stoop to murder. Trump has the example of what happened to JFK to shape his opinions of what depths his enemies are capable of sinking to.

 

While Trump does lack JFK's intellectual depth, he's far from stupid and has the heightened instincts of a street fighter. He can smell a rat a mile away and has no illusions of turning his enemies into converts. 

 

I guess what I'm asking Greg, Phil, Mark and others here is:

 

With the lenghty list of enemies Trump is up against, what odds do you give that he'll survive either physically or politically his term of office? I'm heartened by Phil's pointing out that Mockingbird is dead. However they have other tools in their box, such as the handy switch that causes airplanes to suddenly nosedive. I don't think they would hesitate to even sabotage Air Force One.

 

On the positive side there appears to be a faction within the intelligence community that wants to see Trump really drain the swamp. What do you folks think????

 



#2 Mark Jamieson

Mark Jamieson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 80 posts
  • LocationWashington State

Posted 27 March 2017 - 07:02 PM

Chuck,

 

I'm humbled to even be mentioned with Greg and Phil, so I thank you.  Your focus is multifaceted, and certainly justice would not be served with a brief or flippant reply.

 

I believe strongly that the Deep State is continuing to grow and prosper.  The monstrous governmental bureaucracy, combined with the marriage of media (I dare not say "journalism," for it is all but deceased) and intelligence factions perpetuates their goals of said DS.  

 

That being said, I was most encouraged by the outcome of the election.  To see the Queen-elect not ascend to the throne proved to be a ray of hope.  President Trump is an outsider, as witnessed by the vitriol of both parties, the press, and the "resistance" groups.  His Sisyphusian task is exacerbated by the fact that, just like JFK, he has had to appoint advisors and cabinet members who are NOT outsiders.  The ongoing marginalization he faces will limit his effectiveness and probably preserve his life, IMO.  If, however, he is able to overcome the massive hurdles ahead, who knows...

 

Mark


  • Greg Burnham and Chuck Barlow like this

#3 Chuck Barlow

Chuck Barlow

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 173 posts
  • LocationFort Worth TX

Posted 28 March 2017 - 07:34 AM

Thanks Mark . I've learned to value your opinions because they're insightful, well thought out and expressed.

 

I want to believe Trump is a maverick but, there's this nagging doubt that it's just theater for the masses like pro wrestling. I guess we shall see.


  • Mark Jamieson likes this

#4 Phil Dragoo

Phil Dragoo

    Founding Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 566 posts

Posted 28 March 2017 - 05:45 PM

ndsbrl.jpg

 

Gentlemen, in an homage to JFK's inaugural, in the age of universal deceit, in this era of Ministry of Truth propaganda and historical revision, on this Earth, in this America, truth's work must truly be our own.

 

We saw in Enemy of the State (1998) how pervasive surveillance serves hidden tyrants.

 

James Douglass' JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters, 2008, presented the miasma, the poisonous fog, surrounding 35.

 

Eric Snowden has revealed the surveillance panoply. 

 

Julian Assange has amplified our view and revealed all the little Machiavellis with their pumped up agendas

 

Trump rose among the sixteen or seventeen contenders, swinging a sword

 

He received the laurel wreath from fully half the mad-as-hell electorate

 

while Bernie Sanders with his facile socialist cliches sucked any remaining air from Hillary's funereal events

 

Then she slew him with the other senators, Wasserman-Schultz, Brazille, Podesta et al

 

But the eleven per cent margin was so much video game audio-visual candy

 

She went down in flames, or rather, melted in the bucket of reality poured on her head

 

The crypto dba Obama had installed the Muslim as DCI, Brennan who stipulated jihad a legitimate religious tenet

 

Clapper lied and Snowden showed he lied

 

Michael Hastings died, as they do, the Scalias and Breitbarts, sans the fingerprints of the technical services division

 

There is no Russian connection, only the pathetic loser and her field of flying monkeys

 

They will trap and trace and tap and race about squeaking and leaking

 

The King will be mock-assaulted daily

 

(witness the fencejumpers and bombcallers and blog threateners)

 

Heavy lies the crown

 

Stephen Cohen and John Batchelor commented on the positive aspects of Trump viewing Putin realistically

 

I found this essay on Putin from Imprimus to be quite useful:

 

How to Think About Vladimir Putin

 

Christopher Caldwell
Senior Editor, The Weekly Standard

 

We have Saudi and Kuwait refusing "refugees"

 

We have Bill getting millions for a speech in Moscow, Hillary virtually selling U.S. uranium to Russia, and Podesta holding 75K shares of Russian stock

 

We have zero indication there's any Russian hand in Hillary's defeat--it was suicide

 

Donald Trump is no newcomber to prominence and danger and we trust he surrounds himself with reliable security experts

 

The way forward is threatening to the media establishment and the progressive choke hold on academia

 

It responds in Marxian violence--and Alinsky was a Marxist in drag, and his saps dba Obama and Hillary are Marxist dragsters

 

with the added hook of Muslim service handled by Jarrett and Abedin

 

JFK was targeted as inconvenient to the business model and the same may be applied to Donald Trump

 

The enemy of freedom would likely classify the Signers as Deplorables

 

but we are not traitors--did not sell missile technology to China, uranium to Russia, the Bomb Gold Card to Iran

 

No one is safe who places principle above ambition

 

2csi4xl.jpg


  • Greg Burnham, Chuck Barlow and Mark Jamieson like this

#5 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,015 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 29 March 2017 - 06:30 PM

If we focus on policy and not personality, then the two presidents are much closer than what it might appear at first glance.

 

Both presidents won the electoral college in contests that each were expected to lose by landslides.

 

Both presidents entered office under accusations of election tampering. JFK's relates mostly to Chicago; Trump's relates to Russia.

 

Both presidents were strongly accused of being "soft on Russia."

 

JFK was accused of being a Communist sans any supporting evidence for the claim. Trump has been accused of being a fascist sans any supporting evidence for the claim.

 

On strong borders and immigration, both presidents are very similar.

 

However, the problem that we currently face in terms of illegal immigration was not nearly as big an issue in 1960's America as it is today.

 

So we don't know exactly how JFK would have responded to the problem.

 

However, we do know that both he and his brother, Attorney General, Robert Kennedy, were extremely tough on crime and equal application under the law.

 

With that in mind--and coupled with their crack down on organized crime--it is very possible, if not likely, that JFK and RFK would have made drug cartel destruction a major law enforcement consideration.

 

Controlling the influx of both the substances and the personnel who distribute drugs would have very likely been a dominant theme, just as cracking down on the mafia was dominant in their time.

 

Would that have led to the building of a wall? We will never know for sure one way or another. Anyone who claims to know is disingenuous, at best. But it is possible.

 

We also know that JFK believed that the first and foremost consideration for granting legal immigration status was prioritized according to the benefit that the immigrant could bring TO the US -- not what they needed FROM the US.

 

We also know that JFK was a populist president more than a Democrat president--and Trump is a populist president more than a Republican president.

 

We know that both presidents ran on a platform that included major tax cuts for corporations and individuals.

 

Indeed, no president before JFK had slashed corporate taxes more than he. In 1962 he reduced investment taxes on corporations and the economy grew 5% per year for the next 8 years as a result! 

 

We know that both presidents are quite reluctant to involve the US in globalism at the expense of nationalism.

 

While it is true that JFK was quite engaged with foreign countries, he also believed in "America First" as evidenced by many of his policies and also mentioned in his inaugural address when he said:

 

"My fellow citizens of the world: Ask not what America can do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man."

 

JFK required that other nations do and pay their fare share rather than to become overly dependent on the US.

 

Both presidents began their term with an extremely skeptical media and JFK enjoyed no more of a honeymoon period than Donald Trump. However, JFK soon would win them over.

 

Both presidents began their term in an adversarial relationship with the intelligence community, particularly with the CIA and the FBI.

 

JFK was faced with operating in a White House that was surveilled by the FBI's J Edgar Hoover. Trump is possibly facing similar surveillance.

 

There is much more, but that's a start.


  • Phil Dragoo, Chuck Barlow and Mark Jamieson like this

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#6 Phil Dragoo

Phil Dragoo

    Founding Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 566 posts

Posted 04 April 2017 - 02:45 AM

I've finished John M. Newman, Countdown to Darkness, his second of a trilogy. 

 

As he brings us to the eve of the Bay of Pigs invasion, he wonders that Lyman Lemnitzer, Curtis LeMay, Arleigh Burke allowed the President to go forward without warning of catastrophe.

 

He ponders the self-deception and deception of Allen Dulles, Richard Bissell, and Charles Cabell

 

advising the President regarding chances for the success given that:

 

1.  There would be no popular uprising: Many were favorable toward Castro; those not were dead or in prison.

 

2.  The initial plan for a half dozen raids utilizing sixteen B-26s each were pared to a single raid of a half dozen planes--which failed to destroy Castro's air force.

 

3.  A Soviet ship a day was arriving with arms, tanks, planes, and military advisors.

 

4.  The destroyer screen was ordered twenty miles off shore instead of three.

 

5.  The site was moved from one near mountains to a swamp far from mountains.

 

6.  Castro had penetrated all the interior resistance and all the Miami exiles.

 

For reasons presented in this work, and for other revelations--many from Greg's presentations and essays--I believe the operation was forged into a trap to blow back on Kennedy, to create an army of assassins motivated by seething hatred, ditto their CIA handlers.

 

Hunt's Give Us this Day (1973) and Newman's depiction of despairing Phillips with a bottle leaning against a tree, may seem merely sad--

 

--but the mask conceals a cold rage, a Welcome to Dallas, Mr. President/Welcome to Washington, Mr. Lincoln.

 

With today's revelation Susan Rice was calling on intelligence agencies for spreadsheets on Trump administration figures

 

With earlier admission by Evelyn Farkas she was pushing intel on Trump people on "friends on the Hill"

 

With cunning denial by Comey and Clapper that the president was a target

 

we see a parallel to the poisonous fog described in Douglass' Unspeakable

 

Mockingbird enmeshed all the media that mattered, and sang the songs the CIA wanted sung

 

Now it's Russian Meddling with Trump Collusion ad nauseum

 

albeit sans any evidence--

 

With Kennedy, the spooks and brass wanted carte blanche based on poor or nonexistent planning despite catastrophic consequence

 

With Trump, the President isn't keen on more trillion-dollar escapades in the desolate quadrilateral of Orwell

 

and is marked for character assassination as the fence-jumpers and celebrity threateners proliferate in the background

 

Robert DeNiro would like to punch Trump in the nose

 

I don't believe Jimmy Hoffa or Carlos Marcello were ever so injudicious in public

 

The target of so much bile donates the first quarter's salary to the National Parks Service

 

Teddy Roosevelt is grinning

 

from the era when bully meant jolly good

 

The question in my mind is

 

With all the Trump-snooping being done by FBI and NSA

 

do they have any time and manpower to spare to stave off the next 9/11-scale terror event?

 

One thing is certain, when the milint complex got its war in 'Nam, it allowed LBJ and Nixon and the Democrat Congress

 

to cripple the U.S. effort with rules of engagement the enemy found laughable

 

Are Putin and Xi laughing at the spectacle created by Schumer and Schiff?

 

Ho and friends laughed over tea at LBJ's professed fear of Chinese and Soviet intercession

 

The wizards of Langley and the Pentagon get their 'nam war and their Iraq war

 

and somehow through the mess described by Sibel Edmonds

 

they let it slip away

 

We would do well to recall the words of President John F. Kennedy at American University June 10, 1963 regarding the so-evil country Donald J. Trump is continually accused of colluding with:

 

Among the many traits the peoples of our two countries have in common, none is stronger than our mutual abhorrence of war. Almost unique, among the major world powers, we have never been at war with each other. And no nation in the history of battle ever suffered more than the Soviet Union suffered in the course of the Second World War. At least 20 million lost their lives. Countless millions of homes and farms were burned or sacked. A third of the nation's territory, including nearly two thirds of its industrial base, was turned into a wasteland--a loss equivalent to the devastation of this country east of Chicago.

 

When Khrushchev warmed to Kennedy's overtures he was surveilled and replaced--surveilled and replaced

 

for the milint machine rusts in peace

 

or so it says, as it grows fat on contracts for untested systems threatened by a businessman

 

Why are we listening to a milint machine which watched as China fell, North Korea invaded, Cuba fell, Vietnam fell, Iran fell, and Iran received the A-bomb gold card

 

Kennedy and Trump's skepticism is similarly based on observation of failure

 

Milint attitude is we may not always be right but we're never wrong and will kill you if you persist in insisting we are

 

 


  • Greg Burnham, Chuck Barlow and Mark Jamieson like this

#7 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,015 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 05 April 2017 - 05:29 PM

The tensions between the Soviet Union (today's Russia) and the USA began to escalate almost immediately following JFK's inauguration. The same can be said today: the tensions between the US and Russia have not been this high since the height of the cod war--IMO, as a direct result of the intelligence community's undermining of President Trump by attempting to link him to the Russians and accusing them of tampering with our "election outcome" sans evidence in support of the claim.

 

The failure of the US Intelligence Community to warn JFK, as Phil mentioned, regarding the likely failure of the Bay of Pigs as planned, created the framework for an extremely strained relationship with the Soviets eventually leading to both the Berlin crisis and later the Cuban missile crisis. The Bay of Pigs became JFK's tar baby, and if the opposition in the media get their way, the apparently fabricated connection between Team Trump and the Russians may become Trump's tar baby.

 

According to CIA's Jake Esterline it was not so much JFK's fault as it was Nixon's that the Bay of Pigs failed. Indeed, Esterline claims that Nixon deliberately delayed the operation until after Eisenhower had left office. In the interim, Nixon had the CIA build up the operation into an unmanageable size for a covert operation, thus insuring failure. It was an act of the losing side in the election attempting to sabotage the incoming administration. We seem to be witnessing a similar sabotage being launched against the incoming Trump administration by the outgoing Obama administration.

 

The similarities are becoming macabre.


  • Chuck Barlow and Mark Jamieson like this

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#8 Phil Dragoo

Phil Dragoo

    Founding Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 566 posts

Posted 06 April 2017 - 02:51 AM

Of course CIA would blame Nixon.  CIA would come for Nixon June '72 using McCord to place and replace the tape across the latch so as to present to the two security guards.  Woodward would keep Nixon turning on the Mockingbird spit, Woodward the ONI spook.

 

At the last planning stages JFK stipulated darkness, reduced the planes and moved the site, but CIA and Pentagon professionals never clarified the key points--weekend warriors had no chance against overwhelming numbers of heavily armed professionals and there would be no uprising.

 

JFK kept emulating the Rusk and Stephenson sensitivity to OAS and UN reaction--I would have said, "Monroe Doctrine:  Our hemisphere, our rules."

 

But JFK wasn't going for any pax americana--wasn't going for armed resistance in Laos, but rather a treaty-based neutrality.

 

He would learn that the world of nations and the world of military-intelligence complexes is not a world of hearts and minds but one of knives and guns.

 

As Angleton admitted the top of his field were the best liars.

 

Speaking of Susan Rice.

 

Hillary colluded with Podesta, Wasserman-Schultz, Brazille et al to steal the nomination from Bernie Sanders the man with the enthusiastic crowds and the actual vote count victories.

 

Did anyone notice last week every member of the DNC was quietly fired?  One of these phished the emails and gave them to Assange finishing the fatal tilt to the HMS Hillary.

 

After the election it was necessary to spy on the new administration.  The Russian excuse was an after the fact pretext.

 

Under this pretext the intelligence gathered on Trump staff daily lives was ordered spreadsheeted, unmasked, leaked.

 

The Mockingbird media complies--recall the fate of Breitbart and Michael Hastings, Rosen and AP, et cetera.

 

Today's gas attack in Syria pushes the new president to engage--but was this from material in rebel caches?

 

Northwood was a Lemnitzer presentation suggesting false-flag terror attacks on civilians to raise popular war fever.

 

Aerial footage of Iraq showed possible spesnaz assisted movement of chemical stocks to Syria. 

 

An example of reports from 2013: Inside the Ring: Syria, Iraq and weapons of mass destruction

 

Mr. Shaw said Syria’s stockpile of chemical weapons — about 1,000 tons of nerve and blister agents — is estimated to be 50 percent larger than it was in 2003.

 

“My people on the ground definitively tracked the Russian movement of Iraqi [chemical weapons] and high explosives to three locations in Syria and two in Lebanon in 2003,” Mr. Shaw told Inside the Ring.

 

Russian convoys of trucks that carried the arms were photographed by satellites and confirmed by the chief of Ukraine’s intelligence service, who provided the Pentagon with specifics on the special operations units involved and the material they removed, he said.

 

So in '61 we have B-26's said to be defecting Cuban pilots--which are provided by the U.S. CIA exposed by Castro with photos of plastic vs metal noses.

 

In 2017 we have a gas attack blamed on rebels yet evidence Russians provided the weapons to Syria and iraq, and moved those in Iraq to Syria in 2003.

 

Someone is testing Trump.  Publicly he's angry, blames the rebels, but how much of the rebel strength is due to CIA arming via Benghazi-like operations?

 

On the one hand US legacy spooks under outgoing Obama continue to undercut Trump--compare to LBJ going with the milint US troop plan in talks with Diem vs JFK's reserving presence for reforms (not forthcoming).

 

JFK stepped into the Bay of Pigs trap, then CIA withheld U-2 evidence of missile sites until a crisis was reached which might've resulted in a nuclear exchange.

 

Finally JFK's American University speech marked the end of the Cold War boom in the arms industry and the perennial party milint had with the world as its Risk board.

 

ISIS now calls on its lone wolves to assassinate those on an 8,000-name list everywhere possible.

 

The house of cards of Obama surveillance and subterfuge is collapsing and we have a gas attack.  Will Easter recess bring more surprises?

 

JFK faced the Cuban and Laotian problems when the Berlin Wall was erected to demonstrate how tenuous the US presence in Berlin was.

 

Now the UN claims Israel has no right to any part of Jerusalem.

 

Obama has given Iran the guarantee its nuclear program is protected.  Russia uses Iran for bases in its support of Assad.  The thrust is for a port on the Mediterranean.  In Syria.  Yet Hillary was ready to establish no-fly zones in Syria.

 

Seemingly a tough anti-Russian stance yet she gave Russia 20% of US uranium (capacity) for cash to her Clinton Foundation and $500K for Bill's Moscow speech.

 

Rather cozy for one of the plotters behind the Russians-stole-the-election gambit.

 

Similarly JFK was wary of being labelled soft on Communism, hence delayed promoting Vietnam withdrawal until after the 1964 election.

 

Ultimately it was not the public persona but the intrigue in the halls of Langley and the Pentagon and over the cocktails of the Wise Men that his fate was sealed.

 

Krock and Starnes warned of such a Seven Days in May coup, and Harry Truman lamented a CIA beyond its unclassified mission.

 

I believe both presidents evince a desire for an engaged and peaceful relationship with the Russian world power, Soviet and post-Soviet.

 

That both serve under the shadow of a malignant intelligence force which resents such a temporary resident of the oval office.

 

That it is in our interest that we not talk falsely now--the hour is getting late.

 

fxpua.jpg

 

 


  • Greg Burnham, Chuck Barlow and Mark Jamieson like this

#9 Chuck Barlow

Chuck Barlow

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 173 posts
  • LocationFort Worth TX

Posted 07 April 2017 - 04:45 AM

With the cruise missile attack on Syria, it's looking like the sabre rattlers have won over Trump. One of the things that attracted me to Trump was his campaign rhetoric that condemned our military meddling all over the world. Hillary is already gushing support for Trump's attack and that is the 1st sign that the Sarin Chemical attack that supposedly triggered this response, was just another war starting false flag operation.

 

I fell for another lying politician (what a shock). This missile attack on top of the grossly expanded military budget are proofs that when it comes to the military industrial complex, it's just business as usual.



#10 Mark Jamieson

Mark Jamieson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 80 posts
  • LocationWashington State

Posted 07 April 2017 - 08:23 AM

With the cruise missile attack on Syria, it's looking like the sabre rattlers have won over Trump. One of the things that attracted me to Trump was his campaign rhetoric that condemned our military meddling all over the world. Hillary is already gushing support for Trump's attack and that is the 1st sign that the Sarin Chemical attack that supposedly triggered this response, was just another war starting false flag operation.

 

I fell for another lying politician (what a shock). This missile attack on top of the grossly expanded military budget are proofs that when it comes to the military industrial complex, it's just business as usual.

Chuck,

 

I wouldn't be so quick to judge Trump as "another lying politician."  JFK was "forced" into the "Bay of Pigs" fiasco not of his own doing, for reasons even he didn't fully understand.  Time will tell if Trump has become a warrior or if he, like JFK, inherited a foregone operation.

 

Mark


  • Greg Burnham and Chuck Barlow like this

#11 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,015 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 07 April 2017 - 10:38 AM

Have we become so cynical that we forget that there are sometimes legitimate concerns requiring a military response?

 

While it is true that military actions have political consequences--some positive for one side or the other, and some negative--the question becomes: "Was the political gain the point of the operation or was it merely a by-product?"

 

What do we know for certain? Assad is using a type of weapon--that was banned following the first world war nearly a century ago--against non-combatant citizens of his own country in order to maintain his position.

 

These are facts not in dispute.

 

We also know that the target of the US air strikes was infrastructure, rather than personnel.

 

The target was chosen because it was from whence the original violation of international law (chemical weapon deployment) had been launched.

 

At the very least, the military action has disabled Assad's ability to launch future attacks from that specific airfield.

 

It has served to protect citizens of Syria from attacks launched from that location and it sent a message as to the US' resolve.

 

As for Russia, Trump's message is simple and straight forward: "Tell your boy (Assad) to 'stand down and comply' with International Law or we may have no choice but to run the board. It's your move."

 

I do not believe even for a second that the "saber rattlers" convinced President Trump to act.

 

I think having grandchildren of his own may have.


  • Mark Jamieson likes this

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#12 Chuck Barlow

Chuck Barlow

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 173 posts
  • LocationFort Worth TX

Posted 07 April 2017 - 12:54 PM

Mark ... I hope you're right.

 

Greg .... I am cynical ... Trump's opponents have been foaming at the mouth to start a war for months in order to divert Trump away from his swamp draining. Many have pointed out that Assad would have to be crazy to gas his own people at this time. The last time the chemical warfare accusation was thrown at Assad, evidence turned up that it was ISIS's doing. Hillary is practically ecstatic at this turn of events and we know she never saw a war she couldn't love. How convenient timing this all turns out to be. Bannon's apparent ouster from the security councill is another sign that wedges are being driven into Trump's original agenda.There's infighting taking place within the administration and I'm afeared it doesn't bode well. I guess we'll have to see how this all unfolds and hope the Russians don't over-react. It seems pretty precarious to me



#13 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,015 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 07 April 2017 - 02:06 PM

Chuck,

 

I share many of your concerns. Yet hope springs eternal.

 

It is my honest belief that the American People are wiser than our politics reveal. And it was from that wisdom that Donald J. Trump became the 45th President of the United States.

 

The early days of every administration are strenuously tested both from forces within our country and from forces outside of our borders.

 

One notable exception is Obama's presidency, which enjoyed an uncharacteristically early and long honeymoon from outside forces prior to its having eventually caved in at the slightest challenge.

 

But in this case, I believe that the Russians--through an easily manipulated Assad--attempted to test Trump while he is under domestic pressure.

 

Their gambit failed.

 

He came into office with an olive branch in his hand stretched out to Russia.

 

They ordered their watchdog, a cock-a-poo mix (Assad), to bite the hand that held the olive branch.

 

We then spanked the watch dog with the other hand, which held a rolled up newspaper in it, and destroyed the dog's favorite dog house.

 

Next week we'll be talking to the dog's owner when Tillerson meets with his Russian counterpart in Moscow.

 

"Should we rehabilitate Old Yeller, Mr. Putin, or should we put him down since he appears to have rabies?"


  • Mark Jamieson likes this

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#14 Phil Dragoo

Phil Dragoo

    Founding Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 566 posts

Posted 13 April 2017 - 03:26 AM

_95504245_de27-2.jpg

 

Yes, Greg, a test.  Despite all manner of speculation the chemical attack: 1) was a hoax; 2) was perpetrated by rebels; 3) resulted from Syrians bombing a rebel stockpile; 4) was US in origin; 5) was Saudi in origin; 6) was the omnipresent malefactor Mossad at work--I am confident, as are our president, secretaries of State and Defense, was a Syrian Sukhoi from the base targeted.

 

There are a number of reports of a drone over the drop zone prior, and over a hospital where survivors were taken and which was struck thereafter.

 

Though Tillerson was at first denied an audience with Putin, the two did talk.  Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov are adamant: A) Syria did not drop chemical weapons; 2) Assad is the legitimate Syrian leader and will remain; 3) Syria is in no danger of collapse.

 

Though John McCain and Lindsey Graham insist US forces are necessary, President Trump says that will not happen.

 

The president's decision to send the Carl Vinson carrier group in response to Kim Jong Un's provocations produced agreement from Chinese Premier Xi that North Korea requires discipline.  Reports of a 100,000-man Chinese force sent to North Korea's border with China ostensibly to block refugees indicates the current situation is not frivolous.

 

On the Republican side we have McCain for another theater of mobilization and Paul for no action in any theater.  The president's response seems measured, and has proved productive.

 

As it appears Seth Rich was murdered for leaking to Julian Assange, and a FISA warrant was sought for Carter Page as a wedge to surveil the entirety of the Trump team, we see the so-called Deep State solidfying from the fog.

 

ou5w5t.jpg

 

Theresa May appears to understand the danger of open borders, and the popularity of Marie Le Pen indicates many French do as well.  The president has spoken positively of NATO even as Merkel pursues as mad a policy as Trudeau the Grand Mufti of Ottawa.

 

Our darkest days were 1938-1942 when neutrality was being awakened to rid the world of the Axis.

 

The president seems to pre-empt the need for war by taking out the trash as it develops, and maintaining the strength to enforce the sanction.

 

fvd7oz.jpg


  • Greg Burnham and Mark Jamieson like this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Web Work by: XmasZen.com