Kirk Gallaway

Hi Mark, The Former Mayor of NYC has the same spelling of his last name. Can you please clarify, your projection is too vague. Lol Matthew;Hi Mark, The Former Mayor of NYC has the same spelling of his last name. Can you please clarify, your projection is too vague. Lol Ron, When Mark was referring to "them", being the Koch brothers, Matthew not knowing at the time who the Koch brothers were, thought Mark was slurring him and Ed Koch for being a Jew. Good grief!

Ron, He didn't even know who the Koch brothers were, even though he shares a name with them!, and he says he was once a Libertarian! He confused Marks reference as being against Ed Koch, a former NYC mayor who was Jewish. We've seen this before, the rights not very broadly read. I'd say we need the equivalent of K&K to get people up to speed about politics here. Of course I guess that would be Jim's politics. Hmmm........ Well I'm 90% down with that. At least we wouldn't have these massive dislocations!ill

Joe, as a visitor, I'm familiar with some of the places you're talking about. Have you ever been to the La Mesa Military Housing Complex off Farargut Rd.? I happened to cruise up there one day and found that housing complex. That's a pretty nice hidden little enclave! A friend of mine wanted to move from the East coast to the Monterey area and I inquired about it for her about a year ago, and they do rent , the smallest 1BDRM. I bath started at $2350 and the biggest were 3/2's as I recall up at $4500-4800! , You could be a civilian, but they had a waiting list of at least 6 months, and a pretty thorough vetting process from what I remember. The cost was prohibitive for her.

Ben:Mar 26, 2565 BE — President Joe Biden said Russian leader Vladimir Putin “cannot remain in power” over his invasion of Ukraine. In a sweeping speech in Poland ... I live in the U.S. You're the only one who fixates on that statement anymore. It was a gaffe. But Trump has established that a President can say anything one day and something different the next, and no one will remember. I don't think Biden was aware of that and played it brilliantly, but he got over to the public and his allies that he cares, which is important for a politician. It's also important that he hasn't hammered "Regime Change" as a war aim, because that would harden Russian resolve. All those words are chosen carefully. Ben: It was Rolling Stone that published a pretty solid article (as I recall) that the GOP swiped Ohio in 2004, If you glean your own writing, you were making a statement to Matthew concerning a hegemony of consensus among people on this thread. I answered all 3 of your assertions, and regarding 2004, I did read the RS article way back. I'm telling you I don't fit into that category, which disproves your theory that we all think the same. I'll go even further and say I opened your link and the only substance offered in your link was that RFK Jr., Jesse Jackson and Howard Dean are believers. Of those 3 , Howard Dean, in my judgment is the most credible. Not that RFK Jr. is incredible. Now how does that play into your thread hegemony theory? Ben: Very few of the problems concerning the hacking or manipulation of voting machines and counts, detailed in the 2018 NYT cover-story article, have been fixed. The popular vote, in the national election, does not count. Gaming a few key close states is what counts. The first sentence goes into the category of "I answered you precisely why that continues to happen, but you're not listening." The second sentence no one disagrees with, we attain thread hegemony! Ben:It is also fair for any citizen to ask, "What is the goal of this war?" Is it regime change, or a stable peace, an armistice, or complete elimination of Russia troops from Ukraine, including Crimea? This also goes into that category. I've already told you this as well. Biden and the U.S. are playing a waiting game right now. There's no political pressure to defund, which you can disagree with. They'll continue and see how their NATO allies react to fuel shortages this winter.They'll continue monitoring and they'll take what they can get as the situations arise. What don't you understand about that? * Ben:The US spent 20 years in Afcrapitsan, and never had a goal. Some say it was only the unorthodox, mercurial Trump who got the US out of Afcrapistan. "Afcrapistan", that's very clever. I expect to hear it 1000 more times. That's even more clever than the "donks and the phants". So that officially admits Afcrapistan into the Trump category of sh-thole countries? Ok *We both agree on a goal to cut U.S, military spending. Unfortunately that's not going go happen soon.And it doesn't help when there are many more voices like yours who seem to forget our long term goal and chide Biden for not being macho. Biden/NATO are flatfooted? Seems so. No new plans, no initiatives, no means to deliver some real losses to Russians. Biden may not be a Putin-stooge, but the results are the same. But the US invents reasons to not enforce a No Fly Zone in Ukraine, bowing to Putin threats. I happen to be hawkish on Ukraine, and would prefer going to No Fly Zones. I now advocate a No Fly Zone for Ukraine, and possibly even NATO boots on the ground. Times change and so yes, I have moved to a more-hawkish position on Ukraine. Since there were only 2 old east bloc NATO admissions since 2005. Why now? Sure there was some chicanery in 2014, but it was a popular uprising against a corrupt elected government. And Putin seized Crimea and that was 7 years ago! No one's completely blameless, But Putin bears responsibility for his actions. In the final analysis, Ukraine is a sovereign country. Do these people have the right to decide what government. they want to have?

OK, Just to show we don't always disagree.In your first 4 paragraphs (or sentences) I'm largely in agreement. Ben:All along, Biden has seemed adrift, behind the curve, unable to counter Putin. Maybe NATO will wake up. No he just doesn't mouth off like you, and why should he? I assume you're not much of a poker player. Ben: Maybe NATO will wake up. No, just the opposite,it's nato that would crack. Ben:Also, concern abut mission creep is legitimate. Is this war to preserve Ukraine, or has it morphed into a regime change operation on Moscow? Biden was waffled on that. Is that Biden "was" waffled or "has" waffled on that? To use the correct term, I assume you mean "has". And Biden hasn't. Since he hasn't committed American troops, he's under no obligation to state any goals, than for Russia to get out of Ukraine.And publicly stating a goal of regime change would be stupid and self defeating, and ensure the opposite! . Obviously Putin being forced out of power would be a great thing for his Presidency. Despite what you hear that's probably not realistic at this juncture and he knows that. He's playing a waiting game.Nothing mysterious. That's just politics. Now you're commentary on the "free speech" of this thread. Ben:dogmatic partisan sentiments can become hardened beyond reason. -Yes, it is a crime to say the 2020 election was stolen, It's not a crime, its completely inaccurate and wacko. This was the most successful election we ever had. In 2016 there was around 123 million people voting and in 2020 there was 155 million!. That's an increase of 25% and the greatest increase in participation in American history! That's why the hysteria about this is so stupid and slavish! For both the increase and the hysteria, you can credit Trump. There's no way the election was thrown by 7 million votes! Ben: but OK to say Putin stole the 2016 election-- I haven't heard anybody say that here, but he did try to influence the election, but I personally don't think it altered the result. Ben: and the 2004 election was stolen by Bushie absentee ballots in Ohio (the latter charge probably true, btw). I've heard that a few times here. Including you right now, but I think you're wrong. Don't assume something because you read it in the NYT, but it is a good article, and I do think the 2000 election ended up being stolen. But one side was very gracious about that, while now the other side lost by a margin that wasn't even close and are causing a lot of trouble. But the reason we don't get a better election system is for the same reason that the IRS is using 40 year old computer systems and is manned by mostly near retirees, and the same reason the SEC is undermanned in regulators and Wall Street can get away with murder. it's because the Republicans have chose for the last 40 years to defund the government, and strip it of regulators, and there are too many other things on the Democrats plates to make it a priority. The election problem they are talking about in the NYT article is agreed upon by both parties. Period!

Yes well done W.! Wow!, I just came in here as if entering Matthew's space ship! Matthew I can tell by your self portrait that you fathom yourself as an illuminating presence, and were probably a big childhood fan of ET, the movie? Is this indicative of your social skills at introducing yourself to everyone you meet?

Intercepted talks from soldiers on the Russian front lines in Ukraine. Warning! I can't emphasize enough! Explicit language! heh heh Russian soldiers made thousands of calls from the battlefield in Ukraine to relatives at home. Here are their conversations. (Note: They contain explicit language.) https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/09/28/world/europe/russian-soldiers-phone-calls-ukraine.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20220929&instance_id=73232&nl=the-morning&regi_id=61798350&segment_id=108417&te=1&user_id=48552702f942aacb0810b9de5ca41c55

Poor Dennis, he had such great hopes to gather in the spoils when 80 % of the human population die as result of taking the spike protein vaccines to protect against the covid hoax. But that didn't materialize. What a shame! , it was so elegant too! And true to norm, as all grand plans that go awry, he thinks the fact that it didn't materialize is the result of a conspiracy. But wait!... wasn't the fallacy because he assumed it was all a huge conspiracy in the first place?. Oh well! Unfortunately it looks like mankind has put the pandemic largely in the rear view mirror, Tough break! P.S. But wait!, maybe he was trying to discourage us from taking the vaccines because he was trying to get us to get full blown covid? Well. it didn't work anyway. **** Dennis:Sounds like biden just gave the far-far-far-right wing WEF (started by Kissinger/Schwab, good ole Republicans) an early christmas gift. Get ready for a whole new level of MK-Ultra coming at you and your children! Just occurred to me, Ben: You might find some good websites to post in from Dennis where your "Biden bombed the Russian pipeline" idea, might get off the ground. Just a suggestion.

Doug's right, you get older and more of your talk with your friends is about your health problems and you see everyone's got different problems. I've always dreaded a day when I would get a wake up call, because you never know when it could happen. It sounds like you've gotten a double wake up call. Please do what you need to do to have a lasting recovery because we want you here!

Miles, Matt's completely right. You made the same such statement and I went into great detail about this specifically answering your questions and I never heard from you again. I told you at the time.There's is no greater difference between the 2 parties in your lifetime or in mine than now. They've politically polarized each other into completely different philosophical camps. Miles:Nearly all other first-world and many second/third world countries have some form of nationalised health care. That's very boiler plate Miles, as if read from a Poly Sci 101 textbook. But there is a marked difference between the 2 parties regarding health care, and Matt has highlighted one such example, and there are others.. Let me give you some history. In the 90's the Clinton's tried to initiate an expanded health care system. Hilary Clinton was appointed by her husband to try to push it through Congress. If we could have pushed it through 30 years ago. Judging by the eventual acceptance of the ACA, We would have had much more expanded health benefits now. Probably to the degree that we wouldn't have needed the ACA, and having it done earlier, it would now be much cheaper, just as it would have been cheaper yet, if Hubert Humphrey as President had started in 1968, which could easily have happened, but that's another story.* Hilary Clinton was stopped by Dick Armey and the Republicans big money, and it never happened. Part of reading politics is not what politicians or parties say, but what they don't say. The Republicans will always say when cornered that they are for expanded Health Care. When Obama came into office, he naively believed them. In order to try to get something going and get some consensus, he opted for a Health Care proposal from Republican Mitt Romney. We then found out what many of us suspected all along, the Republicans never wanted to expand health care. In the next 6 weeks, you might get sucked into believing that Republicans do want decent health care because the Democrats are going to show the Republicans previous voting record on Health Care and hang it on them.. And you can be sure the Republicans won't come up with their own health care alternative, but will just say that all these rumors about cutting medicaid or social services are false Democrat propaganda. But we've had enough record by now to know what's truly going on. Miles:No major candidate for the presidency in either party in the last 50 years has publically challenged the value and necessity of Social Security while running for office (Republicans love to rail against welfare, but they know that if they really campaigned on abolishing SS they would lose a massive voter base) No and the reason for that, is that they are extremely popular, and they are not fools!. ****** * Nobody talks about him. He was quite a letdown after Bobby was killed. But expanded Health Care was his baby.

"Carried approvingly"? Again, you've provided a Cohen group link and there's no connection between your Maurice Greenberg quote and the Cohen Group. Provide the connection, and show your readers that the article was"carried approvingly " by the Cohen group. If you can't provide the connection, and since you've already told us 3 times about Cohen. Maybe you should have innovated and broken new ground and made the article about Greenberg. That might have been more interesting. but of course that would have involved more research on Greenberg. What a drag! But then, you probably don't know this but Greenburg has a political affiliation with Marco Rubio who goes on Fox all the time as an anti Chinese trade guy. I'm a little miffed at that, actually having read his article. Did you?

W. -What makes this even stranger is that Ben has said he's contributed 50 years into the Social Security system as a U.S. citizen, but ignores all the bread and butter issues he has the most personal interest in to pursue some fixation in foreign policy that the Democrats who are fighting for his interests, are like the Republicans, and not isolationists in World Trade. Obviously nobody's going to stop world trade, and this has no effect at all on Ben living in Thailand. This is what I mean when I say the average Joe may not know to vote in his own personal interest, and sometimes for the kookiest reasons. *** On a more substantive note, Congratulations! to my fellow Cesspudlians as we tread on to our inevitable millennial page thread, which will be a truly fab moment indeed!!!

Ben I know you've been down on William Cohen a few times before for an article back in 2015. But your commentary link didn't open to a new article by William Cohen. "We Want to Rebuild U.S. Relations With China" And i checked this quote from the WSJ, and it lead to an a July article by Maurice Greenberg, not William Cohen. A 97 year old former AIG exec who does have political ties to Mitt Romney and Marco Rubio but not William Cohen and the Cohen group. You have to be more accurate and not just throw a lazy combination of things together when your points are being challenged.

Wow! interesting stuff Doug! You get the impression from Taylor that neither Mongoose or Lansdale really got off the ground! Re: Mongoose HACKMAN: Can you remember any dissatisfaction on Robert Kennedy's part in terms of the Mongoose Com- mittee with the kinds of things that were being suggested either by Lansdale or by the CIA people who were working with Lansdale? TAYLOR: Well, yes, I would. I think we all were critical in a sense. Many times it didn't seem to make much sense to try something in Cuba which ~ould endanger the lives of some of the Cubans who were involved in the thi~g. I think ±hat that sense of responsibility he [RFK] had very, very deeply. "Why lose lives if the return isn't clearly clearly worth it?" he would ask. And so many of these little tasks were just annoyances to Castro and of very questionable v.alue. RE:Lansdale: HACKMAN: TAYLOR: HACKMAN: ~l5- Do you know why at some point fira.lly the Lansdale thing on Cuba, the Mongoose operation, was sort of shifted to State? Is this just because he runs out of things to do? I didn't know that it had •. so, I'd forgotten. Finally, yes , it was. . it was. If TAYLOR: See, Lansdale was really chosen on the grounds of being a reputed Cold Warrior who had won his spurs in various places in the Far East. So it was really his personal background that got him his job rather than what he happened to be--a general in the Air Force. HACKMAN: Had his appointment on that been primarilyat Robert Kennedy's suggestion, or was it your suggestion, or can you remember how that was made? TAYLOR: I can't recall. I can't recall how it became Lansdale. I would say that the general feeling was that he disappointed us because he didn't come up with programs which, even if successful, would be very . effective. And there always seemed to be a wordiness about his proposals; they were not concise effective plans which offered some hope of progress ****** TAYLOR: Well, since the Bay of Pigs , we really had the choice of ejecting Castro by military means, which nobody proposed after the Bay of Pigs, of simply doing nothing and taking a philosophical point of view, "Well, time will take care of Castro," or doing something in between which would make his life gs unpleasant as possible, · make it just as hard as possible, and so to facilitate time, to be a helper to time . Well, the latter was really what we were doing, but little by little we saw that Castro was not getting weaker. If anything, ·he was getting stronger. And as I recall, the Mongoose effort just gradually died down. I don't ever recall it being called off. Now I've never consulted the record. As a matter of fact , you see, in October '52 I went over, and I became Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and gave up the Chair- man of the Mongoose Committee ***** I always like insights like these. Re: RFK TAYLOR: I don't think that he did, although I would say it seemed to me that Bob had a sense for organization as a device, as a useful tool of government, beyond what the President had. Duri?g the Bay of Pigs we had a lot of discussions on what kind of adjust- ments of the federal relationshii:swould be necessary to permit the kind of .focusing of inter-departmental power that we thought was necessary. And it seemed to me that he under- stood organization and was for it, whereas I never felt that ' President Kennedy ever eared about it--he talked in terms of people. When I started to work for him, one of the things Bob told me was, "Now, you'll have to remember my brother doesn't think the way you do," referring to my old military past, which he was always throwing up to me. "He thinks <bout issues and people, and he likes to talk things out." And I soon found that the most carefully prepared fact sheet would rarely get read. Bob had been a great help to me in pointing out the P~esident's foibles, but it always seemed to me Bobby talked my language to a very great degree and sensed the need for order around the President, which he realized was not present in that first year, a very disorderly year. ****** Re: RFK HACKMAN: Did he ever have any problems in understanding any of either the written materials that you gave him or the discussion that was going on? TAYLOR: No. We had many military debates during t h e Bay of Pigs, and, of course, I'd accuse him of becoming a field marshal after the first week. But we'd get on and argue the tactics of the 1anding and what was reasonable and what was unreasonable . And ever y now and then in later years he'd say whenever I would : ..;26- criticize his position on Viet Nam, "Well, you're the man responsible. You taught me all these things about not taking armies into Asia." Of course, he was a very quick intellect, and he was very perceptive, also he was a good listener during a period of time that he wasn't sure of him- self. Then after when he knew what he was talking about, he didn't hesitate to make his views known. He also had a good sense of humor and an ability to laugh about himself which I've never heard commented on. He could kid himself in an awfully nice way--a very, very appealing way.

For the first time I can remember, Ben admits he was wrong, I think we're all appreciative. I also mentioned to you a number of times that the vast majority of arrests on 1/6 were not at the Capitol. We have figures that over 95% of the arrests made were not at the Capitol., We can probably agree that most of the people arrested at the Capitol were caught at least allegedly committing illegal acts. If you were armed, you'd be a fool to commit illegal acts. This completely shoots to hell any of your declarations over the last year and a half of how harmless this group was. You've also seemed to discount the harmfulness of any weapons outside of firearms. Your claims haven't been disputed greatly, other than to tell you, that most of the arrests happened off the Capitol grounds because we were aware that there was no way we could positively know how many rioters were carrying weapons.

Yeah, and stay skeptical!! heh heh heh heh heh heh ....ho! On another front, word has it that Billionaires are shaking in their boots in fear of the prospect of hearing Ben's next Biden Globalist tirade because it hurts so bad! And Republicans are marching on Wall Street against the 1%, to hear Ben tell it! **** On a substantive level, Thanks Doug!, That's really quite remarkable that Monroe, Madison, Hamilton,Burr and Marshall were under 25 at the signing of the Declaration of independence! Some more older guys, Washington was 44 and Franklin was the senior at 70!

Here we go again, huh? It's just as I remembered of Conally's account. He heard a shot, and said he turned to his left, (though he meant to his right) to look at the President ("who said nothing") "and almost simultaneously as I turned I was hit". That seems very consistent with Dave's clip. . To think he was hit by the same bullet, you have to assume a good lapse of time before Connally was hit and cognitive of being hit, as he has the presence of mind to turn around and be concerned for the President, but then on top of that, as Bob points out, that lapse of time is even greater because if Connally was struck by the same bullet. He still was most likely struck before he even heard the shot. 0n 1:20.

Yes, Mark I think we're largely in agreement. I was surprised when I looked the word "oligarchy" up. Oligarchy is a form of government in which a small group of people hold most or all political power. But then more elaborately, "Oligarchy is a form of power structure in which power rests with a small number of people. These people may or may not be distinguished by one or several characteristics, such as nobility, fame, wealth, education, or corporate, religious, political, or military control." I think a lot of times the term "Oligarchy" is associated in the U.S. with old wealth, that is multi generational wealth passed on down from generation to generation by the "elites". Though I assume your definition might also include "new money" or maybe the .1%? Where the Corporate State is an active force in controlling Congress and influencing decisions through their lobbyists and campaign contributions. The "old wealth" oligarchy may be part of that process in their ownership stake in corporations and their direct or indirect ability to effect action in their corporate boards to write and submit legislation to members of Congress. How active old wealth can be on the corporate boards may vary greatly. Through successive generations of old wealth ownership, the company founders, or their heirs may retain seats on the board and be more hands on, or be less hands on, or may choose to delegate their interests though trusted proxies. Though you have to also consider oligarchic rule through their foundations in effecting Public Policy. But I'm not sure to how great a degree. This is in no way to villainize the rank and file corporate people, who may have their own personal political agendas or none at all, and may not be aware of how their hierarchies pursue policies that are to the detriment of the majority of people, or they may rationalize it as keeping up with their competitors. The type of conspiracies posited here on the forum seem very similar to those posited in the JFKA, that is micromanaged "top down" conspiracies. Those type of conspiracies are good at feeding paranoia but I don't think the present day Corporate State or Oligarchy if you will, needs to take precipitate bold actions, as the gradual path of infiltrating the government to effect policy in their favor has been accomplished very successfully over the last 40 years without all but a handful being scarcely aware of it. So although they may pursue discreet resistance to forestall it, there's no need for the globalist interests to really freak out at more local, national control as Ben continually repetitively hammers home. There's no way the world will choose to wipe out global trade! But they do have to answer to public opinion, and that is why Biden was able to achieve a pulling out of multi national corporations in Russia after Putin's invasion of Ukraine to an extent many didn't think possible. That and a further judgment was made that in the ultimate ideological struggle , they can sustain less profits to show solidarity to further their propaganda war to the public to ensure their eventual goals of world free market capitalism. Even though the fact of their existence in Russia in the first place is already evidence that Russia isn't a heavy socialist state. Old public perceptions die hard! And similarly if the alliance were to fall apart during the winter because of Europe's dependence on Putin's oil, that would be a case of politicians succumbing to their constituent public opinion. And while we're discussing the prospect of the "powers that be" freaking out. There's damn sure no reason for a fourth generation present day group to greatly freak out if the truth of the Kennedy Assassination was revealed. If you really think there is such a group, what would they have to lose? Nobody could really be prosecuted anymore, and the greatest superpower in the history of mankind is hardly going to dismantle their Intelligence or Security State. There is no scrambling going on from the "Corporate State" or "Oligarchy". Most of the urgency was mitigated long ago, not from a battlefield, but from a perch.

Whew! Doug! The idea of using the key classified documents as a get out of jail scheme by threatening to give these to Putin if he were indicted is about is about as explosive as it can get! We can only hope that Michael Cohen is just speculating from what he knows in his decades in working for Trump. As it's been very apparent in his past interviews, that there's absolutely nothing he won't put beyond Trump! I looked for that segment in the interview and I'm able to find only the first half. I assume you haven't been able to find it either, or you would have posted it. We'll be looking for that.Though it's of much lesser magnitude, I thought Michael Cohen accounting his abuses at the hands of the Trump- William Barr DOJ is also worthy of comment. And I've posted it below. It's the Donald Trump -William Barr "Deep state shadow government" that prosecuted Michael Cohen for paying off Stormy Daniels to the fullest extent, to whitewash the fact that Donald Trump authorized those payments. Cohen was told even his wife would be threatened if he didn't sign a gag order immediately! Unfortunately there's a lot of misinformation from the JFKA era, that leads people to think that there's a monolithic agenda to a present government "deep state" or "shadow government" . That was more true 60 years ago, in the days of JFK. But now the government is more malleable to the will of the Chief Executive, though it has a number of different agendas, some at cross purposes throughout different localities and regions. This thinking of the government of a 60's style monolithic deep state (tailored to whatever political prejudices people may hold) is harmful, as it's being used in general by the Corporate State to turn public opinion to ultimately defund the government, and further disenfranchise the will of the great majority of people. In reality, your only shot to dismantle or lessen the power of the Corporate State over your government is through the government itself, and your right to vote! However well intentioned those that preach that there's a 60's monolithic government deep state may be, they have been duped into spreading the gospel of the Corporate Deep State.

Bill Maher's pisses me off sometimes, but I think he struck the right balance of proportion and consequence here. FU Tribal America!, pos(s)! Silly False Equivalency

Ben: Trump seems like a grifter. Lets' the courts decide! Ben jumps for joy for a chance to defend Matt Gaetz, he's had it with the infringement of his liberties that's being taken away by the deep state in America,so much that it drove him to locate in Thailand where they don't thumb their nose at this "trafficking " sort of nonsense~right Ben? heh heh heh heh It's a joke, Ben! Ben knows emphatically over and over what he thinks about Biden. and bores his audience to tears leaping up to his soap box with his repetitive Biden diatribes.. And yet Mr. defiant Perpetual Deep State Ben's , JFKA honed super sleuthing abilities just become impotent, as if struck by Kryptonite and he freezes in his tracks, and just can't make up his mind, and becomes a complete fence sitter about the prospect about Trump actually being a crook! And despite all of his institutional deep state contempt, he has adopted an attitude of blind faith submission that the verdicts in the "deep state"courts will relieve him of any responsibility of delving any further into even thinking about Trump's possible guilt, and consigns that the courts will be the final arbiter on everything, and any acquittal of Donald Trump or Matt Gaetz will be like "thy will be done" ( as in the OJ case!) and will lead him to run to his computer and post to his lifeline in America that all this business about Donald Trump Matt Gaetz was just the "shadow government" aspect of the "deep state?"* persecuting poor Donald and Matt? * I'm confused. I'm sorry, I've been busy lately Ben.. Did the "shadow government" battle and overtake the "deep state?" All the sudden one day, Ben starts driving home the "shadow government". It's kind of like the early days, when I first started hearing about Isis. heh heh heh! Skeptical enough for ya?

I am friendly, you posted all this. Why do you take offense at someone showing you what you posted? You can check our responses by simply going back. Let's stick to facts. You were the lone voice of Uber Dullesite militarism here, the major Ukraine hawk who was continually pummeling Biden for not being tough enough. As I've shown to you. You've outhawked Biden and probably John Mc Cain if he were living. Fact, nobody in Congress could outhawk you, no matter what you say your intentions are now. Nobody's picking on you Ben. We just hold you accountable for what you say. Explain your statement here and how it could possibly support peace? Ben: I happen to be hawkish on Ukraine, and would prefer going to No Fly Zones. I now advocate a No Fly Zone for Ukraine, and possibly even NATO boots on the ground. Times change and so yes, I have moved to a more-hawkish position on Ukraine. Nato boots. Ben?, You're pretty courageous with the blood of younger generations, there Popps! You've said this before. I don't accept your dictatorial authority about what is to be discussed on this thread. Particularly when you violate your own rules and continually bring modern politics over to the JFKA side. Sometimes that can't be helped, but it's ok here. I've challenged your concept of the Deep State on a number of occasions and you've run away. If you want, i can give you examples that we can put up for discussion. To new people here I'd say concerning the modern Deep State . This isn't Grandpa Ben's 60's Deep State. heh heh I tell them the truth, and they think it's Hell! Harry Truman

Ben: I happen to be hawkish on Ukraine, and would prefer going to No Fly Zones. I now advocate a No Fly Zone for Ukraine, and possibly even NATO boots on the ground. Times change and so yes, I have moved to a more-hawkish position on Ukraine. We know Ben, we heard it many , many times. Watch your escalation! Biden is: flat footed a Moscow stooge and a Putin puppet! Biden shown no resourcefulness, any imagination, any capacity for warding off what now appears inevitable? The Biden Administration seems lost. Feeble. Directionless. Clueless. Biden has been underwhelming on Ukraine. Confused. You've certainly been overwhelming wrong, Ben Biden/NATO need to do a lot more on Ukraine. Biden has agreed to those terms of battle. Seems a bit muddleheaded, no? No new plans, no initiatives, no means to deliver some real losses to Russians. Biden and NATO have allowed Putin to dictate terms of battle. that really hit the nail on the head The Russians can fly jets over Ukraine, but Biden/NATO cannot. complete BS! Biden has been on his back foot all along on Ukraine, and the result is a horrible diplomatic, military and humanitarian catastrophe. certainly not as macho as you Ben. It's pretty obvious, sleepy Joe kept Ben up for a few nights in March! Is this the tortoise firebombing the hare? Next you'll be giving up in helplessness and calling for civil war! but the rest of us urged restraint, as did Biden and the U.S. government. For those who say you're an inpenetrable wall, we can say no!, there is some trickle some osmosis, we served as your better angels!. So it has a happy ending, at least until the next time!

Ben: Putin says a No Fly Zone over Ukraine is a provocation. Some US citizens, and Biden, echo that a No Fy Zone over Ukraine is a provocation. So...who are the Moscow stooges and Putin puppets? Hell no- we won't go!!!! Take your 60's "deep state" brinkmanship mentality and cram it up your ass, old man! heh heh