Jump to content
The Education Forum

The inevitable end result of our last 56 years


Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

To that I answered

Have you even put in the effort to know who you're Republican heroes are outside of that one Libertarian complete pariah, Massey? 

Then I pointed out , Ben always seems to side with Libertarians while claiming he's a champion to the "employee middle class"  while favoring candidates whose policies marginalize the middle class.. But the only person in government I've ever heard him gush praise on besides Trump was this Congressman Thomas Massey.

Just the other day, we had a  high school student murdering four of his classmates in Michigan. So it comes off as incredibly horrible timing that Ben's one hero Republican he can name comes up today with this Christmas greeting.

This is not unlike many other U.S. superficially researched conclusions or  recommendations from Ben. IMO

Maybe Ben should get involved in the politics of his own people in the U.K. for a change, and bring his freedom and liberty sermon back home to encourage his citizenry to adapt much more liberal gun policies like they have in the U.S. Judging from posts here from Brits , It looks like it may be an idea whose time has come!

Just a thought

 

Image

 

 

 

Edited by Ron Bulman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 10.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

18 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

This is just total BS. Why are you posting such nonsensical propaganda like this?

On February 22, 2014 the following things happened in Kiev, Ukraine:

1) a far-right mob stormed the parliament building

2) inside, the legislators were voting on the acceptance of an EU mediated plan to resolve the political impasse associated with the Maidan protests

3) the mob prevented the vote. legislators were chased from the building. politicians allied with the far right mob declared a new government.

4) within a few hours, the Obama administration recognized the new government as “legitimate”

If you can establish even one of the above points as being incorrect / mistaken then you can assert that I am sharing “nonsensical propaganda”.  But you won’t be able to.

 

W. Niederhut - Can you give us some examples of "principled" politicians and media supporting violent right wing mobs?

I did. Again, it’s not to make a “gotcha” point. It’s to emphasize that we should try to understand the world as it is, not as we wish it to be. The Obama administration also supported and “legitimized” a right wing coup in Honduras, and advisors from the Obama Justice Department, it is now known, were key to initiating the Lava Jato “anti-corruption” witch hunt in Brazil - which hobbled the left-leaning democratically elected government, led to its leaders being jailed, and ultimately resulted in the election of proto-fascist Bolsanaro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff: The coup in Kiev in 2014 was virtually an exact mirror event, with far-right “protesters” storming the legislature, chasing away the constitutionally elected legislators who were voting on an important bill,

Exact mirror event Jeff? Wasn't the important bill  in essence a decision for Ukraine to ally with Putin and the Russian Federation who Yanukovych had previously accepted aid from and the "far right" (at least you're not using the "F" word, which was commonly used here a while back) were protesting their decision to suspend the signing of an associative agreement with the EU?

Though Jeff is right, It was the overthrow of a duly elected government, and the west's response was situational, which has never surprised me, on either side.  Though polling did show the Euromaidan  had an edge as far as public support for merging with the EU, but it wasn't an impressive majority. Eventually the establishment leader Yanukovych in early 2014 fled the country to Russia and to join his fellow kleptocrat Vladimir Putin after  bilking his native country for  billions with his own crime syndicate, leaving behind an opulent estate that everyday people finally got a chance to see on his departure below. Any good public will that the pro  Russian Yanukovych  backed agreement had had eventually was to sour later in 2015 when Putin invaded Crimea.

Oliver Stone depicted the "right wing"Maidan as "Fascists", and embraced Yanukovch in exile in Russia and .gave him a big interview although he pilfered his country of billions. Stone's characterization, as I recall,  was because the Maidan party had a faction that held up a WW2  historical nationalistic political  figure named  Bandera,  who at one point when Ukrainians were victims to atrocities at the hands of both the Soviets and the Nazis sided with the Nazis against Stalin's collectivist economic rape of Ukraine and did commit some atrocities. But they were only a faction within the greater pro EU movement and later became a minority party in the new government..

However dangerous this splinter group was reputed to be. Obviously Stone's greatest fears never materialized, and 4 years later,there was enough stability for the Ukrainian public to elect a comedian Alexander Zelensky to office with 73% of the vote with what I remember was some astonishing figure in the 80% range turnover in their legislature. Wouldn't we all like something like that?  I hope we don't get some spin from Stone that a new Putin invasion was justified, like as I recall he did with Putin's invasion of Crimea..

Sometimes one side or or the other just gets lucky, but as we can see now, we can never presuppose that there can be lasting stability with an unstable country in an unstable region.

 

 

 

iting

Edited by Kirk Gallaway
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Jeff: The coup in Kiev in 2014 was virtually an exact mirror event, with far-right “protesters” storming the legislature, chasing away the constitutionally elected legislators who were voting on an important bill,

Exact mirror event Jeff? Wasn't the important bill  in essence a decision for Ukraine to ally with Putin and the Russian Federation who Yanukovych had previously accepted aid from and the "far right" (at least you're not using the "F" word, which was commonly used here a while back) were protesting their decision to suspend the signing of an associative agreement with the EU?

Though Jeff is right, It was the overthrow of a duly elected government, and the west's response was situational, which has never surprised me, on either side.  Though polling did show the Euromaidan  had an edge as far as public support for merging with the EU, but it wasn't an impressive majority. Eventually the establishment leader Yanukovych in early 2014 fled the country to Russia and to join his fellow kleptocrat Vladimir Putin after  bilking his native country for  billions with his own crime syndicate, leaving behind an opulent estate that everyday people finally got a chance to see on his departure below. Any good public will that the pro  Russian Yanukovych  backed agreement had had eventually was to sour later in 2015 when Putin invaded Crimea.

Oliver Stone depicted the "right wing"Maidan as "Fascists", and embraced Yanukovch in exile in Russia and .gave him a big interview although he pilfered his country of billions. Stone's characterization, as I recall,  was because the Maidan party had a faction that held up a WW2  historical nationalistic political  figure named  Bandera,  who at one point when Ukrainians were victims to atrocities at the hands of both the Soviets and the Nazis sided with the Nazis against Stalin's collectivist economic rape of Ukraine and did commit some atrocities. But they were only a faction within the greater pro EU movement and later became a minority party in the new government..

However dangerous this splinter group was reputed to be. Obviously Stone's greatest fears never materialized, and 4 years later,there was enough stability for the Ukrainian public to elect a comedian Alexander Zelensky to office with 73% of the vote with what I remember was some astonishing figure in the 80% range turnover in their legislature. Wouldn't we all like something like that?  I hope we don't get some spin from Stone that a new Putin invasion was justified, like as I recall he did with Putin's invasion of Crimea..

Sometimes one side or or the other just gets lucky, but as we can see now, we can never presuppose that there can be lasting stability with an unstable country in an unstable region.

 

 

 

iting

Hi Kirk. The voting in Kiev on Feb 22, 2014 was about accepting an internationally mediated agreement arrived at the previous evening, which set out a political compromise to resolve the political crisis which the Maidan protests sparked. This compromise included moving up the date of the next presidential election to the December 2014. The ”far-right protesters” stormed the parliament to specifically prevent the mediated compromise from receiving official approval. The Maidan protests were not initially about the EU association deal, they reflected a more generalized frustration with a corrupt political culture.  The EU Association agreement, which Yanukovych supported and negotiated, became controversial months previously after the fine print of the deal was revealed, featuring several problematic issues such as clauses demanding exclusivity and the requirement of a harsh austerity program regulating government spending. Holding a presidential election later in the year would have allowed ample time for a proper public debate on the pros and cons of the deal, but the coup forestalled this process. The hasty recognition of a “new government” as somehow ”legitimate”(by USA, UK, and Canada) ruined any chance to reverse the outcome.

Protesters against the unconstitutional change of government soon came under violent attack (most gruesome in Odessa where dozens of persons were literally burned to death), and a flurry of repressive legislation aimed at Russian speaking persons within the country was enacted. This led to the controversial referendum in Crimea, and the refusal of the Donest-Lugansk regions to recognize the new regime. Those events were portrayed by the NATO military alliance as a “Russian invasion”.

The “historical nationalist” faction to which you refer have a power base within the Ukraine government centered on the state security apparatus, which the Zelensky government does not control or influence. The negotiated Minsk accords, which was meant to find a political way forward between Kiev and the regions which refused to accept the coup, has never been carried through. The “historical nationalist” faction believes adamantly that the breakaway regions must be brought to heel through military force. The Russian Federation has said that they will not permit such to happen, and that has been portrayed by NATO as “Russian aggression”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Matt Allison said:

It wasn't a "far-right" group, and the President at the time was a hilariously corrupt convicted felon that the citizenry gave the boot to.

 

There is a historical documented record of the events in Ukraine, and my account accurately matches that record. Your arrogant dismissal of the facts is therefore rather amusing. Further, Yanukovych - whatever one may feel about him - was not ever “convicted” and no finding regarding his personal corruption, or lack thereof, was ever established or even really investigated, and, most pertinently, in constitutional democracies, there are set procedures for the impeachment of elected officials. In other words, an angry mob “kicking him out” has no legal basis - which you seem to understand re: the 1/6 events, but in this instance you seem to believe otherwise. 

As well, the presence and influence of "far-right", or "historical nationalist", agitators in Ukraine is well documented, and the denial of such is truly an example of "nonsensical propaganda".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Madison Cawthorn -

Children are… "Eternal souls woven into earthen vessels sanctified by almighty God and endowed with the miracle of life...”

 

- Madison Cawthorn -

“But my friends, they are trying to de-masculate the young men in our country because they don’t want people who are going to stand up,”

“If you are raising a young man, please raise them to be a monster,”

 

Ummm...

Steve Thomas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff, Thanks for filling in some details. Feb 22th was the very day Yanukovych fled in a hurry. This couldn't be said to be a particularly  "bloody revolution" as apparently only 62 people died between the beginning of the protests in Nov. 2013 through Feb. 22nd. Though I'm sure intimidation was a factor. Still , he had the power of the state, he chose not to fight it

Sort of similar to Marcos and the Shah in that they all chose to leave probably to keep as much of their assets in tact, rather than face trial and prison.

Jeff: Yanukovych - whatever one may feel about him - was not ever “convicted” and no finding regarding his personal corruption, or lack thereof, was ever established or even really investigated,

I'm not sure that's a good defense Jeff. As you said yourself, "The Maidan protests were not initially about the EU association deal, they reflected a more generalized frustration with a corrupt political culture."  Besides he has quite a rap sheet, from Matt's Wiki, including being a thug when he was young and Including murder of protestors!

"A warrant for Yanukovych's arrest was issued on 24 February 2014 by the interim government, accusing him of mass murder of protesters.[21] Acting Ukrainian Interior Minister Arsen Avakov declared that Yanukovych has been placed on Ukraine's most wanted list and that a criminal case on mass killings of civilians has been opened against him.[2"

He's certainly been investigated in some detail. regarding corruption, and there's no doubt his people want him.

Ukrtelekom case

"On 30 September 2014, the General Prosecutor of Ukraine opened a new case against Yanukovych for using 220 million hryvnia of state money to establish his own private communication company based on Ukrtelekom.[256] The prosecutor's office also considered that Yanukovych was helped by the former government officials Mykola Azarov (prime minister), Yuriy Kolobov (finance minister), Anatoliy Markovsky (first deputy minister of finance), Hennadiy Reznikov (director of Derzhspetszviazok), and Dzenyk (Ukrtelekom board of directors).[256]"

 

 

 

 

Edited by Kirk Gallaway
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Matt Allison said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych#Former_criminal_convictions_and_new_criminal_cases

 

You and your buddy's ceaseless demonizing of the United States and propagandizing on behalf of Putin is incredibly tiresome.

You’re the one calling people names for posting information you don’t like. Accurately presenting events does not add up to  “ceaseless demonization” or even “propagandizing”. You still have yet to offer factual information discounting anything I have said other than Yanukovych’s single conviction, for robbery and assault when he was 17, which was later designated “unlawful” by Ukraine’s Prosecutor General. It had nothing to do with “corruption”, and did not impede his political career. The other charges directed at Yanukovych all followed the Feb coup, were filed by his political enemies and have never been tested in a court. Again, in democracies there is both legal due process and established constitutional procedures to handle the removal from office of corrupt officials, (angry mobs storming the legislature are not included in those).

The situation in Ukraine fortunately was not entirely mirrored on 1/6. The constitutional government was not chased out of office, and a new government under Trump was not proclaimed let alone recognized as “legitimate” by other nations. As thought experiment, if such an event had occurred, it is not implausible to imagine, say, the state of California refusing to recognize or obey an unconstitutional Trump regime. To mirror Ukraine, the Trump regime would then move military assets to Oregon and Nevada and proceed to attack L.A. and San Francisco with heavy artillery. That’s what happened in eastern Ukraine - the people refused to obey or recognize the “new government” and they were attacked. The position of US and NATO, then and now, is that those people “have to” accept the coup and the following governments that they never voted for, otherwise the Ukraine government is fully justified in forcing them to do so through the application of military violence. The US and NATO are even providing the weaponry and training to help that process along.  This is not widely understood due to relentless information management which has produced a false consciousness on this issue, and a full scale shooting war with the Russian Federation may yet occur due to these misrepresentations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Jeff, Thanks for filling in some details. Feb 22th was the very day Yanukovych fled in a hurry. This couldn't be said to be a particularly  "bloody revolution" as apparently only 62 people died between the beginning of the protests in Nov. 2013 through Feb. 22nd. Though I'm sure intimidation was a factor. Still , he had the power of the state, he chose not to fight it

Sort of similar to Marcos and the Shah in that they all chose to leave probably to keep as much of their assets in tact, rather than face trial and prison.

Jeff: Yanukovych - whatever one may feel about him - was not ever “convicted” and no finding regarding his personal corruption, or lack thereof, was ever established or even really investigated,

I'm not sure that's a good defense Jeff. As you said yourself, "The Maidan protests were not initially about the EU association deal, they reflected a more generalized frustration with a corrupt political culture."  Besides he has quite a rap sheet, from Matt's Wiki, including being a thug when he was young and Including murder of protestors!

"A warrant for Yanukovych's arrest was issued on 24 February 2014 by the interim government, accusing him of mass murder of protesters.[21] Acting Ukrainian Interior Minister Arsen Avakov declared that Yanukovych has been placed on Ukraine's most wanted list and that a criminal case on mass killings of civilians has been opened against him.[2"

He's certainly been investigated in some detail. regarding corruption, and there's no doubt his people want him.

Ukrtelekom case

"On 30 September 2014, the General Prosecutor of Ukraine opened a new case against Yanukovych for using 220 million hryvnia of state money to establish his own private communication company based on Ukrtelekom.[256] The prosecutor's office also considered that Yanukovych was helped by the former government officials Mykola Azarov (prime minister), Yuriy Kolobov (finance minister), Anatoliy Markovsky (first deputy minister of finance), Hennadiy Reznikov (director of Derzhspetszviazok), and Dzenyk (Ukrtelekom board of directors).[256]"

 

 

 

 

Kirk - the persons who stormed the Kiev legislature were not expressing dismay over Ukraine’s corrupt political culture, they were specifically acting to prevent a vote accepting the internationally mediated agreement to resolve the political crisis sparked by the Maidan protests. The mediated compromise would have moved up Ukraine’s next scheduled election to December 2014, which would have allowed a full debate over the actual terms of the EU Association Agreement, which were not presented to the negotiators until September 2013. That is when Yanukovych started to have doubts, because of language dealing with exclusivity (the EU would become Ukraine’s primary trading partner by law) and the requirement of severe austerity measures which would eliminate fuel subsidies and other social programs. That is why I became interested in this issue (in December 2013), when the Maidan started to shift from generalized corruption concerns towards support for the EU agreement, because I couldn’t fathom how a citizen-based protest movement could be advocating an austerity program - I wasn’t aware of that ever happening before. The coup not only removed the constitutionally elected government, it forestalled any public debate on the Association Agreement, which was signed by the new unelected government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff it was you who said:"The Maidan protests were not initially about the EU association deal, they reflected a more generalized frustration with a corrupt political culture."

I'm not equivocating  the earlier protests with  overthrow in February. But you're defending Yanukovych and yet you say there was a "general frustration with a corrupt political culture" but who was in charge?,  Who was President?

 

Jeff:The other charges directed at Yanukovych all followed the Feb coup, were filed by his political enemies

The same could be spun about Trump. It's hard to prosecute a President when he's in office. Ok you're assuming any charge against  Yanukovych is just BS. So any charge involving death to protestors falls in that category. But you asserted there's no investigation and yet there was a detailed investigation involving the Urktelelecom case. It obviously involve actions while he was in office and has other government officials involved as well.

I would say believe your own eyes and  look at the film of his estate and and I can show you much more film of the opulence of his 350 acre estate. Do you have an idea of how poor a country the Ukraine was? The average person made about 300 Euros a month! 

I know there's a lot of common people there who would disagree with you, but I guess you're privileged enough to tell them the extent that their grievances  are justified?

You also didn't answer to the fact that it was kind of a puny revolution that you would have thought any President with any sense of conviction could have probably resisted if he had one iota of national support. But of course, he fled.

Edited by Kirk Gallaway
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ukraine is a murky topic, no? Maybe no white hats and black hats, but like Mexico, all wearing a uneven grey. 

Ukraine? Can we get clues from Wikipedia? 

BTW, here is how Wikipedia treats LHO:

Lee Harvey Oswald (October 18, 1939 – November 24, 1963) was a former U.S. Marine who assassinated United States president John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963.

Oswald was placed in juvenile detention at the age of 12 for truancy, during which time he was assessed by a psychiatrist as "emotionally disturbed", due to a lack of normal family life. After attending 22 schools in his youth, he quit repeatedly, and finally when he was 17, joined the Marines. Oswald was court-martialed twice while in the Marines, and jailed. "

---30---

The above is the opening paragraphs on LHO in Wikipedia.  

Many suspect Wikipedia is a CIA-influenced mouthpiece. 

Here is how Wikipedia treats the Ukraine Joe Biden-Hunter Biden laptop miasma: 

"The Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory is a series of unevidenced claims centered on the false allegation that while Joe Biden was vice president of the United States, he engaged in corrupt activities relating to the employment of his son Hunter Biden by the Ukrainian gas company Burisma.[1]"

...

 In October 2020, during the last weeks of the presidential campaign, the New York Post published an article, with the involvement of Donald Trump's personal attorney Giuliani and former chief strategist Steve Bannon, about a found laptop allegedly belonging to Hunter Biden. The laptop contained an email, the authenticity of which was not verified, which showed what the New York Post characterized as a "meeting" between Joe Biden and a Burisma advisor in 2015, though that characterization was disputed by witnesses.[5] The article's veracity was strongly questioned by most mainstream media outlets, analysts and intelligence officials, due to the questionable provenance of the laptop and its contents, and the suspicion it may have been part of a disinformation campaign.[8][9][10] It was later confirmed that at least some of the laptop materials were genuine and Hunter Biden himself said that the laptop could be his.[11]"

---30---

The whole thing about Veep Joe Biden holding back $1 billion in US aid unless the prosecution of Burisma was halted (on which board Hunter Biden sat) smells fishy. 

Well, the Donks, the national security state, and Wikipedia have one version on Ukraine. But of course, we have the Donk-national security state-Wikipedia version on LHO too. 

You see how Donk-centric Rolling Stone treated JFK Revisited

The upshot? 

Do not hold sacred narratives you have read in the M$M or in Wikipedia. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Jeff it was you who said:"The Maidan protests were not initially about the EU association deal, they reflected a more generalized frustration with a corrupt political culture."

I'm not equivocating  the earlier protests with  overthrow in February. But you're defending Yanukovych and yet you say there was a "general frustration with a corrupt political culture" but who was in charge?,  Who was President?

 

Jeff:The other charges directed at Yanukovych all followed the Feb coup, were filed by his political enemies

The same could be spun about Trump. It's hard to prosecute a President when he's in office. Ok you're assuming any charge against  Yanukovych is just BS. So any charge involving death to protestors falls in that category. But you asserted there's no investigation and yet there was a detailed investigation involving the Urktelelecom case. It obviously involve actions while he was in office and has other government officials involved as well.

I would say believe your own eyes and  look at the film of his estate and and I can show you much more film of the opulence of his 350 acre estate. Do you have an idea of how poor a country the Ukraine was? The average person made about 300 Euros a month! 

I know there's a lot of common people there who would disagree with you, but I guess you're privileged enough to tell them the extent that their grievances  are justified?

You also didn't answer to the fact that it was kind of a puny revolution that you would have thought any President with any sense of conviction could have probably resisted if he had one iota of national support. But of course, he fled.

Kirk - establishing the factual record is not the same as “defending” a corrupt politician. And again, constitutional democracies have established procedures for the lawful removal of elected officials - procedures which do not include angry mobs storming legislatures and declaring new governments.

The record shows that Yanukovych’s  corruption problems did not provide the agency for the coup. It was the mediated agreement made the day before:

New York Times February 21, 2014:

A deal aimed at ending a lethal spiral of violence in Ukraine began to show serious strains late Friday just hours after it had been signed, with angry protesters shouting down opposition members of Parliament who negotiated the accord and a militant leader threatening armed attacks if President Viktor F. Yanukovych did not step down by morning…

Dmytro Yarosh, the leader of Right Sector, a coalition of hard-line nationalist groups, reacted defiantly to news of the settlement, drawing more cheers from the crowd. “The agreements that were reached do not correspond to our aspirations,” he said…

New York Times February 22, 2014:

“Gone on Saturday, along with President Viktor F. Yanukovych, who had fled to eastern Ukraine, was any trace of a Friday peace deal that had sought to freeze the country’s tumult by trimming the powers of the president while allowing him to stay in office until the end of the year…

With protesters now in control of the presidential compound in Mezhgorye and the government district of Kiev, the (mediated agreement) lies in ruins…”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Ukraine is a murky topic, no? Maybe no white hats and black hats, but like Mexico, all wearing a uneven grey. 

Ukraine? Can we get clues from Wikipedia? 

BTW, here is how Wikipedia treats LHO:

Lee Harvey Oswald (October 18, 1939 – November 24, 1963) was a former U.S. Marine who assassinated United States president John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963.

Oswald was placed in juvenile detention at the age of 12 for truancy, during which time he was assessed by a psychiatrist as "emotionally disturbed", due to a lack of normal family life. After attending 22 schools in his youth, he quit repeatedly, and finally when he was 17, joined the Marines. Oswald was court-martialed twice while in the Marines, and jailed. "

---30---

The above is the opening paragraphs on LHO in Wikipedia.  

Many suspect Wikipedia is a CIA-influenced mouthpiece. 

Here is how Wikipedia treats the Ukraine Joe Biden-Hunter Biden laptop miasma: 

"The Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory is a series of unevidenced claims centered on the false allegation that while Joe Biden was vice president of the United States, he engaged in corrupt activities relating to the employment of his son Hunter Biden by the Ukrainian gas company Burisma.[1]"

...

 In October 2020, during the last weeks of the presidential campaign, the New York Post published an article, with the involvement of Donald Trump's personal attorney Giuliani and former chief strategist Steve Bannon, about a found laptop allegedly belonging to Hunter Biden. The laptop contained an email, the authenticity of which was not verified, which showed what the New York Post characterized as a "meeting" between Joe Biden and a Burisma advisor in 2015, though that characterization was disputed by witnesses.[5] The article's veracity was strongly questioned by most mainstream media outlets, analysts and intelligence officials, due to the questionable provenance of the laptop and its contents, and the suspicion it may have been part of a disinformation campaign.[8][9][10] It was later confirmed that at least some of the laptop materials were genuine and Hunter Biden himself said that the laptop could be his.[11]"

---30---

The whole thing about Veep Joe Biden holding back $1 billion in US aid unless the prosecution of Burisma was halted (on which board Hunter Biden sat) smells fishy. 

Well, the Donks, the national security state, and Wikipedia have one version on Ukraine. But of course, we have the Donk-national security state-Wikipedia version on LHO too. 

You see how Donk-centric Rolling Stone treated JFK Revisited

The upshot? 

Do not hold sacred narratives you have read in the M$M or in Wikipedia. 

 

 

Ben, you keep referring to the donks in a derogatory manner.  JFK was a Donk.  If your impartial why do you never refer to his opponents in such fashion?  Makes me wonder if you work for the coches.

Edited by Ron Bulman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...