Jump to content
The Education Forum

Kamala Harris and the RFK assassination


Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

I saw an old Western where they hanged a varmint for trifling with the Pony Express.  Where are our darling old traditions now?

There were probably ballots for Rutherford B. Hayes  in them thar saddlebags.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 296
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On 8/14/2020 at 4:45 AM, Cliff Varnell said:

 

3)  The proven collusion between the Trump campaign, Russian military intelligence, and Wikileaks in the well-timed release of the DNC and Podesta e-mails.

 

There is no "proven collusion" and this continues to stand as a pathetic smear. Assange is being slowly killed in prison because he helped reveal serious war crimes during his practice of an admittedly radical journalistic practice. Other senior Wikileaks personnel are now also being targeted. Any pretence to progressive or enlightened standing by CV has been cancelled due to his repeated citation of this key Russiagate lie.

A primary purpose of the Russiagate hoax was to steer domestic opposition towards exactly the sort of lame centrist Democrat ticket seen today. This after Trump’s election kicked open the biggest opportunity for true progressive change in the Party seen in decades. An opportunity completely squandered after the energies were redirected into a phoney “meddling” and “collusion” narrative.

Next up will be an intensification of censorship and surveillance directed at true progressives and other political opposition, based on false or exaggerated allegations, as proposed in the UK but reflecting the stance of Congressional Democrats and supported by the legacy media in the US.

“It calls expressly and repeatedly for the security services to be actively involved in “policing the democratic space” and castigates the security services for their unwillingness to interfere in democratic process. It calls for tough government action against social media companies who refuse to censor and remove from the internet material it believes to be inspired by foreign states.”

The Russian Interference Report, Without Laughing

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/08/the-russian-interference-report-without-laughing/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:

There is no "proven collusion" and this continues to stand as a pathetic smear. Assange is being slowly killed in prison because he helped reveal serious war crimes during his practice of an admittedly radical journalistic practice. Other senior Wikileaks personnel are now also being targeted. Any pretence to progressive or enlightened standing by CV has been cancelled due to his repeated citation of this key Russiagate lie.

A primary purpose of the Russiagate hoax was to steer domestic opposition towards exactly the sort of lame centrist Democrat ticket seen today. This after Trump’s election kicked open the biggest opportunity for true progressive change in the Party seen in decades. An opportunity completely squandered after the energies were redirected into a phoney “meddling” and “collusion” narrative.

Next up will be an intensification of censorship and surveillance directed at true progressives and other political opposition, based on false or exaggerated allegations, as proposed in the UK but reflecting the stance of Congressional Democrats and supported by the legacy media in the US.

“It calls expressly and repeatedly for the security services to be actively involved in “policing the democratic space” and castigates the security services for their unwillingness to interfere in democratic process. It calls for tough government action against social media companies who refuse to censor and remove from the internet material it believes to be inspired by foreign states.”

The Russian Interference Report, Without Laughing

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/08/the-russian-interference-report-without-laughing/ 

I agree that we the public are being manipulated, and that the Biden ticket, predictable as it as to progressives, is proof of that. But did we need Russiagate to accomplish that? Can’t both be true? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:

There is no "proven collusion" and this continues to stand as a pathetic smear. Assange is being slowly killed in prison because he helped reveal serious war crimes during his practice of an admittedly radical journalistic practice. Other senior Wikileaks personnel are now also being targeted. Any pretence to progressive or enlightened standing by CV has been cancelled due to his repeated citation of this key Russiagate lie.

My progressive bona fides don’t require confirmation by apologists for Trumpian fascism like Jeff Carter.

Quote

A primary purpose of the Russiagate hoax was to steer domestic opposition towards exactly the sort of lame centrist Democrat ticket seen today.

If that were true why did the Russia-hacked-the DNC story occupy only two cable news cycles during the 2016 campaign— June 14/15 and July 25/25?  There was nothing over the last 70 days even when the Obama Administration publicly accused the Russians of meddling— that story was buried by the Access Hollywood tape.

How many cable news cycles did the Steele Dossier make?  Zero.

The apologists of Trumpism fascism would have us believe that “the Deep State” ginned up the Russian-hack story only to bury it over the last 2+ months of the campaign.

The Useful Idiot Brigade would have us believe that Julian Assange outed Seth Rich as a source.

Quote

This after Trump’s election kicked open the biggest opportunity for true progressive change in the Party seen in decades. An opportunity completely squandered after the energies were redirected into a phoney “meddling” and “collusion” narrative.

At a moment in history when Donald Trump is making his big push for dictatorial one man rule the Useful Idiot Brigade is out in force attacking Democrats.

 

Quote

Next up will be an intensification of censorship and surveillance directed at true progressives and other political opposition, based on false or exaggerated allegations, as proposed in the UK but reflecting the stance of Congressional Democrats and supported by the legacy media in the US.

What censorship?  YOU are the one proposing that my progressive standing be “cancelled.”

How do you propose to enact this cancellation, Carter?

Quote

“It calls expressly and repeatedly for the security services to be actively involved in “policing the democratic space” and castigates the security services for their unwillingness to interfere in democratic process. It calls for tough government action against social media companies who refuse to censor and remove from the internet material it believes to be inspired by foreign states.”

These issues need to be addressed on a case-by-case basis.

Quote

 

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, David Andrews said:

I saw an old Western where they hanged a varmint for trifling with the Pony Express.  Where are our darling old traditions now?

There were probably ballots for Rutherford B. Hayes  in them thar saddlebags.

Actually, the ballots were probably for Samuel J. Tilden, since he lost.

That's what happens when you entrust the USPS with US elections.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_J._Tilden

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Are you sure about that?
 
The attacks on Obama in this thread — especially in light of the current crisis — are absurd.

Cliff,

       The thread of the discussion about Obama in relation to the Iraq War got lost in the flurry of topics here.

       My critical comments about Obama in relation to Syria and the Bush-Cheney/Neocon establishment were more nuanced than you realize.   I've always been an Obama supporter, and I think he was a first rate POTUS.

      But, to return to my original question, (above) "What was Obama's relationship with the Neocon" strategists behind the Bush/Wolfowitz "War on Terror?"

      My point is that Obama, clearly, did not end the war in Afghanistan or put the kibosh on the grand Neocon/PNAC plan to destabilize Libya, Syria, and Yemen.   It was my only major disappointment with Obama's presidency.  Instead, he signed off on many of the ongoing, mostly covert, military ops in the Middle East.  (See, for example, Jeremy Scahill's Dirty Wars.)  I was surprised.   The man was no JFK.

     I do believe that Obama, at least, tried to drag his feet while participating in the CIA/NATO/Saudi "War on Terror," and he, certainly, tried to minimize civilian casualties, (especially compared to Donald Trump!)

      But, for example, CIA Operation Timber Sycamore in Syria was launched during Obama's tenure in the White House.  To his credit, Obama resisted the more strident proposals of John McCain and others at the time to aggressively arm Sunni proxy militias (Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, et.al.) funded by the Saudis, the CIA, and NATO to overthrow the Assad regime.  

      As I said, (above) there were limits to what Obama could have done, realistically, to stop the CIA/NATO/Saudi/Israeli military interventions in the Middle East.  It's a point that Putin made in his interviews with Oliver Stone about the limitations imposed on any POTUS by the U.S. military-industrial complex.  JFK got shot for trying to put the kibosh on the CIA and the Joint Chiefs.

     Here's a good historical review article by Daniel Lazare at Consortium News about U.S. Syrian policy since WWII.*  (Italics mine.)

Trump Submits to Neocon Orthodoxy

    * https://consortiumnews.com/2017/05/28/trump-submits-to-neocon-orthodoxy/

          "Ronald Reagan relied on the Saudis to finance arms to the Nicaraguan Contras and to Jonas Savimbi’s pro-apartheid guerrillas in Angola. George H.W. Bush launched a major war to save the Saudis from the evil Saddam Hussein. George W. Bush and Barack Obama covered up the Saudi role in 9/11, while Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton encouraged them and other Gulf monarchies to fund anti-government rebels in Libya and Syria during the Arab Spring. Both Libya and Syria fell to ruin as a consequence as hundreds of millions of dollars flowed to pro-Al Qaeda forces and the flames of Wahhabist terrorism spread ever wider."

 

 

     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

 

     I do believe that Obama, at least, tried to drag his feet while participating in the CIA/NATO/Saudi "War on Terror," and he, certainly, tried to minimize civilian casualties, (especially compared to Donald Trump!)

      But, for example, CIA Operation Timber Sycamore in Syria was launched during Obama's tenure in the White House.  To his credit, Obama resisted the more strident proposals of John McCain and others at the time to aggressively arm Sunni proxy militias (Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, et.al.) funded by the Saudis, the CIA, and NATO to overthrow the Assad regime.            

William, this is exactly what I was driving at.

Obama’s record on Libya was a disaster but he avoided another such disaster in Syria when he tamped down on the regime change hawkishness of Clinton, Patraeus and Panetta.

The negotiated removal of 93% of Syrian chemical weapon stockpiles deserves recognition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/15/2020 at 11:20 AM, Chris Barnard said:

That looks a hell of a thread. Thanks. 

Hi Chris, you're learning the hard way. It's probably  just one guy's theory  that  lasted all of a couple of  pages here that Wheeler thought worth posting without any sort of fact checking. It is confusing.  In the thread, they never once mention  Stalin's sons name, do they? What immediately struck me as phony is that Doug isn't 110 years old!  Wheeler misstated that Doug knew the man who smuggled  Stalin's son  but in the blog Doug responds that he attended school with him when Doug was between 18-22 and Doug said Clendenin Ryan  ll died by the time he was 30. So it would have had to have been his Father, Clendenin Ryan  l, except Doug showed me a blog that says that there was never any account of Stalin's only remaining son being smuggled anywhere and he died in 1962, which I could probably have looked up for myself. Though I suppose it's not absolutely for sure.

Vasily Iosifovich Stalin (Russian: Васи́лий Ио́сифович Ста́лин; né Dzhugashvili; Russian: Джугашви́ли; 21 March 1921 – 19 March 1962) was the son of Joseph Stalin by his second wife, Nadezhda Alliluyeva. Vasily's mother committed suicide when he was 11 years old, so he was mainly raised by his father. He joined the Air Force when Nazi Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of the Soviet Union, in 1941. While he saw limited active service, he managed to rise to the rank of general. After the war he held a few command posts. After Joseph Stalin's death in 1953, Vasily lost his authority, developed a severe alcohol problem, and was ultimately arrested and sentenced to prison. Despite being given clemency, he proved unable to clean up his life, and he spent the remainder of his life between imprisonment and hospitalization until he died in 1962.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Hi Chris, you're learning the hard way. It's probably  just one guy's theory  that  lasted all of a couple of  pages here that Wheeler thought worth posting without any sort of fact checking. It is confusing.  In the thread, they never once mention  Stalin's sons name, do they? What immediately struck me as phony is that Doug isn't 110 years old!  Wheeler misstated that Doug knew the man who smuggled  Stalin's son  but in the blog Doug responds that he attended school with him when Doug was between 18-22 and Doug said Clendenin Ryan  ll died by the time he was 30. So it would have had to have been his Father, Clendenin Ryan  l, except Doug showed me a blog that says that there was never any account of Stalin's only remaining son being smuggled anywhere and he died in 1962, which I could probably have looked up for myself. Though I suppose it's not absolutely for sure.

Vasily Iosifovich Stalin (Russian: Васи́лий Ио́сифович Ста́лин; né Dzhugashvili; Russian: Джугашви́ли; 21 March 1921 – 19 March 1962) was the son of Joseph Stalin by his second wife, Nadezhda Alliluyeva. Vasily's mother committed suicide when he was 11 years old, so he was mainly raised by his father. He joined the Air Force when Nazi Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of the Soviet Union, in 1941. While he saw limited active service, he managed to rise to the rank of general. After the war he held a few command posts. After Joseph Stalin's death in 1953, Vasily lost his authority, developed a severe alcohol problem, and was ultimately arrested and sentenced to prison. Despite being given clemency, he proved unable to clean up his life, and he spent the remainder of his life between imprisonment and hospitalization until he died in 1962.

Cheers. I have a confession, I was in the mall having a bite to eat and didn't have time to read through it. It was more me being polite. Generally speaking you are spot on, I am learning the hard way. The perceived complexity of this whole subject is what makes it so fascinating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/15/2020 at 1:36 PM, Cliff Varnell said:

William, this is exactly what I was driving at.

Obama’s record on Libya was a disaster but he avoided another such disaster in Syria when he tamped down on the regime change hawkishness of Clinton, Patraeus and Panetta.

The negotiated removal of 93% of Syrian chemical weapon stockpiles deserves recognition.

And let's not lose sight of the last step in the grand, pre-9/11 Neocon/PNAC plan-- taking out Iran...

October surprise: Will war with Iran be Trump’s election eve shocker?

Could covert war with Iran become overt before November 3rd?

https://www.salon.com/2020/08/16/october-surprise-will-war-with-iran-be-trumps-election-eve-shocker_partner/

https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-we-re-going-to-take-out-seven-countries-in-5-years-starting-with-iraq-and-then-syria-wesley-clark-65-49-13.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/16/2020 at 3:55 AM, Chris Barnard said:

In the thread, they never once mention  Stalin's sons name, do they? What immediately struck me as phony is that Doug isn't 110 years old!  Wheeler misstated that Doug knew the man who smuggled  Stalin's son 

You missed any context from my post Kirk, which had zero to do with Stalin or any Clendenin, Sr., Jr., or the 3rd.

I mentioned Thomas Fortune Ryan. 

There is an existing thread on the Ryans. Doug Caddy knew one of the Ryans. You associated some sort of conspiracy theory about Ryan that you imagined I was trying to push.

I know how sensitive you can be about certain subjects.  Maybe you can complain to the moderators again.

Tell them I hurt your feelings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:

You missed any context from my post Kirk, which had zero to do with Stalin or any Clendenin, Sr., Jr., or the 3rd.

I mentioned Thomas Fortune Ryan. 

There is an existing thread on the Ryans. Doug Caddy knew one of the Ryans. You associated some sort of conspiracy theory about Ryan that you imagined I was trying to push.

I know how sensitive you can be about certain subjects.  Maybe you can complain to the moderators again.

Tell them I hurt your feelings.

I think this one was for Cliff, who I have on ‘ignore’.

Cheers 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/16/2020 at 11:45 PM, Chris Barnard said:

I think this one was for Cliff, who I have on ‘ignore’.

Cheers 

I have both Cliff and Kirk on ignore. Those are the only two. Both are ponderously thick.

When I see them mention my name in a response to another person here, sometimes I respond by quoting the post, which is why it went to you.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:

I have both Cliff and Kirk on ignore. Those are the only two. Both are ponderously thick.

When I see them mention my name in a response to another person here, sometimes I respond by quoting the post, which is why it went to you.

 

Ahh ok, makes sense Robert. I think i’ll just stay clear of democrat / republican debates, passions are running high and though I am fond of the USA and have read a lot about its history, it’s not my country and it looks very different from the outside. 
 

Cheers

 

Chris

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...