US Politics Thread

[Moxie]

Talk about taking it personally. You go back to your experience, which is fine, but that's not about the US elections. And I didn't make a comment about the impact on the world. And it's not that I think no one else matters. But these are our elections. Try to separate your personal experience from my sovereign country and the choices we have to make. It insults me how harshly you speak about Clinton, and, to be honest, it frightens me that you find common ground with Trump. But neither of those things matters, to me. You can't vote in our elections. Say what you will about our candidates and their policies, but can you try to do it without being so nasty and insulting? That would go down easier. I'm really just asking as a favor. And by "you," I also mean Britbox.

 

[teddytennisfan]

why should i waste time on educating you ''how"?

figure it out yourself. you have a brain - USE IT.

I have been skipping the posts I don't like. That's my position with Teddy. I never told her not to post. And you have your right to your opinion, as do others, as it is an open forum, but I do get a bit irritated about the rest of you telling us how terrible our candidates are. You can understand that, right? It becomes a bit insulting. These are, in fact, OUR elections, not yours. And our candidates. I just think you're all a bit cavalier about how badly you insult them. And therefore, us. Personally, I wish those of you who are not from the States would stand back a bit before you decide to be so harsh and rude. This is a weird and complicated election cycle for us, and I agree that it's fraught with opportunity for lampooning, but I do get irritated when those from abroad feel quite free to just lay our choices and our candidates low. It is our process. You might observe it, but if you think you know better than we do, you can go fuck yourselves. Sorry to be blunt, but I am getting a bit sick of it. I never told any of the Brits what to do about Brexit, even though I offered a few mild opinions and observations. There is a way to comment on our politics without being high-handed and insulting. Folks might respect the notion that perhaps we know more about our own internal struggles than the rest of you do.

you are absolutely funny MOXIE.

''spurious claims" comes from YOU that actually declares

" i will NOT read these articles" -- therefore HAVE NO IDEA what yhoua re talking about with YOUR claims of THE ''DEMOCRACY OF AMERICA WORKS. IT'S FINE" and other such NONSENSE! THAT THE WORLD already knows is all pure HOKUM

but then you wouldn't know THAT - precisely BECAUSE as explained by YOU in your own words...you are funny.

-------------------------------meanwhile...the WORLD MOVES ON...although again of course -- my ''comments are just spurious claims" based on information YOU ARE TOO LAZY , by your own admission couched as being TOO SURE of yourself , to BOTHER reading about -- such as HILLARY AND BILLIE responsible for the destruction of yugoslavia -(not one of your ''spurius claims " claimed about ME -- based on REAL INFORMATION AND HISTORY YOU DON'T BOTHER to KNOW ABOUT -- IN THE globally famous american penchant for \
WILLFUL IGNORANCE AND BEING PROUD OF IT!!

LOL

 

[teddytennisfan]

I have been skipping the posts I don't like. That's my position with Teddy. I never told her not to post. And you have your right to your opinion, as do others, as it is an open forum, but I do get a bit irritated about the rest of you telling us how terrible our candidates are. You can understand that, right? It becomes a bit insulting. These are, in fact, OUR elections, not yours. And our candidates. I just think you're all a bit cavalier about how badly you insult them. And therefore, us. Personally, I wish those of you who are not from the States would stand back a bit before you decide to be so harsh and rude. This is a weird and complicated election cycle for us, and I agree that it's fraught with opportunity for lampooning, but I do get irritated when those from abroad feel quite free to just lay our choices and our candidates low. It is our process. You might observe it, but if you think you know better than we do, you can go fuck yourselves. Sorry to be blunt, but I am getting a bit sick of it. I never told any of the Brits what to do about Brexit, even though I offered a few mild opinions and observations. There is a way to comment on our politics without being high-handed and insulting. Folks might respect the notion that perhaps we know more about our own internal struggles than the rest of you do.

THIS IS why you are doubly STRANGE to say the least Moxie.

YOUR depiction of me and anyone whose ''opinion" irritates YOU -- as ''spurious" is based on your OWN ADMITTED SKIPPING of not just the opinion -- which you SUBSTITUTE by ATTACKING the person --

and the information itself . therefore yhou are the CLASSIC case of a person who has an OPINION and judgment of things, people and those who BRING information which YOU REFUSE to look at (which says a LOT abotu you) --

who has an opinion on things THEY KNOW NOTHING ABOUT!

 

[teddytennisfan]

meanwhile -- HOW DARE EUROPE ASK THE USA corporations to PAY BACK TAXES? how dare they?!!!! dont they KNOW the USA SHOWERS EUROPE WITH BLESSINGS?

LOL
======================

Download the application RT News
QUESTION MORE
live

• search
• Menu mobile

HomeOp-Edge
US exceptionalism: How dare the EU demand US companies pay more tax!

Neil Clark is a journalist, writer, broadcaster and blogger. He has written for many newspapers and magazines in the UK and other countries including The Guardian, Morning Star, Daily and Sunday Express, Mail on Sunday, Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, New Statesman, The Spectator, The Week, and The American Conservative. He is a regular pundit on RT and has also appeared on BBC TV and radio, Sky News, Press TV and the Voice of Russia. He is the co-founder of the Campaign For Public Ownership @PublicOwnership. His award winning blog can be found at www.neilclark66.blogspot.com. He tweets on politics and world affairs @NeilClark66
Published time: 1 Sep, 2016 17:27

© Mike Segar / Reuters
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to Facebook342Share to TwitterShare to RedditShare to StumbleUponShare to Google+Share to Tumblr
The most revealing thing about the European Commission's ruling that Apple should pay Ireland up to €13 billion in back taxes has been the indignant reaction from the US.


Charles Schumer, described by the BBC as ‘a senior Democratic senator’, said: "This is a cheap money grab by the European Commission, targeting US businesses and the US tax base."

Paul Ryan, Speaker of the House of Representatives thundered: “This decision is awful. Slamming a company with a giant tax bill — years after the fact — sends exactly the wrong message to job creators on both sides of the Atlantic.”

The US Treasury slammed the decision as “unfair”. The White House said it was “concerned” about what it described as a “unilateral approach”. Orrin Hatch, chair of the Senate Finance Committee, called the ruling “an extraordinary decision that targets US business by rewriting already existing tax policies.”

Read more
'Unfair' Apple fine sparks angry reaction in Washington
Boy - what a load of anger. How dare these Europeans expect US multinationals to pay corporation tax at the same rate as everyone else! Don’t they know that US multinationals are different!

What we're seeing here is another aspect of US exceptionalism in the neoliberal/neocon era. The same exceptionalism which decrees the US has the right to bomb/invade countries at will, in blatant contravention of international law - also decrees that its right and proper giant US corporations should be given preferential treatment by foreign tax authorities.

It's not just Apple which has been getting off very lightly in this regard. There's a number of US corporate giants who haven’t been paying much, or indeed any tax, in European countries in which they operate. Almost all the big companies revealed to be paying only small levels of tax - despite enormous profits - have been American. In 2012, it was revealed Starbucks, Amazon, Facebook and Google UK had paid just £30 million tax in the previous four years despite generating sales of over £3.1 billion. Starbucks we learned had paid only £8.6 million on £3 billion sales since 1998.

We are of course expected to be grateful that these fantastic cutting edge companies from across the pond have come to little old Europe to provide jobs for the impoverished locals. And we’re not supposed to press them too hard about little things like paying their fair share of tax on profits they generate from European sales.

If you read the response of Apple CEO Tim Cook to the European Commission's decision, entitled ‘A Message to the Apple Community in Europe’, you’d think that Ireland had no economy at all before the US computer giant condescended to locate there, and that the country would sink into the sea if Apple left.

“Don’t tell us to pay more taxes in Ireland - you should be happy that we’re here to help the country,” seems to be Apple’s message. But while it employs 6,000 people (out of a country of 4.7 million), it’s worth noting what the company’s €13 billion in back taxes is equal to. It’s the sum of Ireland’s total health budget and 66 percent of its social welfare bill.

The figures would be mind-boggling at the best of times, but what makes this whole affair even more scandalous is what’s been going on in the Irish Republic these last few years.

Think of the extreme austerity measures have been imposed on the Irish people - and then think of the revenues lost because of Apple is only paying corporation tax at one percent - and the company‘s estimated $215 billion cash mountain.

Shamefully, and rather obscenely, given the enormous sum involved, Ireland’s Fine Gael party- who lead the present government is in favor of appealing the EU Commission’s verdict. Yes - that’s right, the Irish government is to appeal against a judgment ordering a multinational with an estimated $215 billion cash mountain - to pay it €13 billion. Is that the sound of James Connolly I can hear, turning in his grave?

Thankfully, Fine Gael’s craven line is being challenged. In the Irish Times, Fintan O’Toole says the government should collect the €13 billion from Apple and ‘change Ireland’. “We should not be railroaded into lodging an appeal against the ruling that will define us, for the rest of the world, as the tax-avoider’s crazy little sidekick,” O’Toole argues.

It has been reported that independent ministers in the Irish coalition government do not support Fine Gael’s stance, meaning that there‘s a very real prospect of the Irish government falling on this issue.

It’s not just Ireland that has reached a watershed in regard to the relationship it has with US multinationals.

The Apple judgment comes as the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations between the EU and the US are once again in the news. Earlier this week French President Francois Hollande said that there would be no deal this year between the EU and US. French and German ministers have cited American unwillingness to compromise as the main stumbling block.

“The Americans give nothing or just crumbs… That is not how negotiations are done between allies...We need a clear and definitive halt to these negotiations in order to restart on a good foundation,” said France’s Foreign Trade Minister Matthias Fekl.


Fekl also tweeted that France “demands a halt to TAFTA [Transatlantic Free Trade Area] and TTIP [Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership].”

Overall three million people have signed a petition against TTIP. Although the European Commission has said that negotiations will continue - there must be a good chance now that TTIP will be ditched. If so, it would be a moment for real rejoicing.

TTIP- make no mistake- would mark the final step in the US corporate takeover of Europe. “TTIP threatened to bring to Europe one of the worst aspects of American life; a voracious legal industry,” wrote Ross Clark in this week’s Daily Express.

“It is rather easy to imagine US corporations steamrollering their way through courts in order to gain the right to run a hospital in Britain - it’s rather harder to imagine a British vehicle manufacturer using the courts to help win a contract to supply the US Army.”

TTIP would be a disaster for Europe, but even without it, the dominance of aggressively expanding US multinationals remains a major problem.

In Britain, the last twenty-five years or so has seen US corporations and the giants of US finance capital gain a foothold in areas of the economy that were previously a no-go zone for foreign capital. Privatization and outsourcing carried out by US-friendly politicians, has provided a rich bonanza for Wall Street.

Read more
Apple boss calls EU tax ruling ‘total political crap’
In 2007, a group of investment funds led by JP Morgan bought Southern Water - a utility which has over four million customers in the south of England.

One of the UK’s leading refuse collection companies, Biffa, which has contracts with 36 local authorities- is owned by US investment firms Angelo Gordon, Avenue Capital and Sankaty Advisors.

Biffa saw its operating profits rise by 27 percent in the year to March 2016 - and is now heading for a potential £1 billion stock market flotation.

My wife and I rang the company recently to ask for a replacement food waste bin after they had missed a collection- and failed to collect the original for several hot days, leading it to become infested with maggots. But Biffa, the self-described ‘Can Do‘ company whose service is apparently, ‘streets ahead’ refused.

In 2013, the British government sold state-owned Plasma Resources UK, the company that supplies blood to the National Health Service, to Bain Capital, a private equity firm set up by the neocon Presidential candidate Mitt Romney. As I said at the time, this sell-off gave a whole new meaning to the phrase ‘vampire capitalism’.

Earlier in 2013, David Cameron’s ‘patriotic’ Conservative-led coalition awarded a £1.6 billion contract to US firm Bristow to run search and rescue services which had been carried out brilliantly, for over fifty years, by the RAF and Royal Navy.

Some of Britain’s most familiar High Street names and brands are now under American ownership. Boots the Chemist, founded in Nottingham in 1849, has been bought by the US pharmaceutical giant Walgreens - under the holding company ‘Walgreens Boots Alliance’. In 2014, the Guardian reported how Walgreens shareholders Goldman Sachs and a ‘group of hedge funds’ had urged the company to relocate to Switzerland to reduce its tax bill.

Back in the 1970s the idea of US companies owning our water supplies, collecting our rubbish - and supplying blood services to the NHS, would have seemed totally ludicrous. So too would be the idea that we’d allow US corporations to make enormous profits in our countries without ensuring that they’d pay tax at the same rates as everyone else.

Thankfully, Europe seems to be waking up to the problem of US economic exceptionalism and the attempted takeover by US corporations and Wall Street financial institutions of European economies.

Let’s just hope it’s not too late.

Follow Neil Clark on Twitter @NeilClark66

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

 

[teddytennisfan]

WHAT WAS it SIGMUND FREUD said of the USA after his visit for a lecture tenure?

he reported to his colleagues and friends like ALBERT JUNG ETC...
======================

"i came to america meeting a generation of neurotic paranoids...and people grasping at every advantage they could reach....i left america seeing a generation of Violent Lunatics...

"america is gigantic yes,; but an accident and a mistake, nonetheless..a GIGANTIC MISTAKE...

"IS it NOT strange that WE in europe have ALLOWED ourselves to be so materially dependent on a country consisting of people who are nothing more than wealthy SAVAGES?"

 

[teddytennisfan]

Talk about taking it personally. You go back to your experience, which is fine, but that's not about the US elections. And I didn't make a comment about the impact on the world. And it's not that I think no one else matters. But these are our elections. Try to separate your personal experience from my sovereign country and the choices we have to make. It insults me how harshly you speak about Clinton, and, to be honest, it frightens me that you find common ground with Trump. But neither of those things matters, to me. You can't vote in our elections. Say what you will about our candidates and their policies, but can you try to do it without being so nasty and insulting? That would go down easier. I'm really just asking as a favor. And by "you," I also mean Britbox.

OH MY GOD \\""these are our elections" and ? ..........


the people of the world or anyone that DON'T bow to YOUR notions of 'our elections'' CAN'T SAY A THING ABOUT it in A FORUM?

YOU are going to lay down teh LAW about US you don't agree with about american matters on what WE can say about it?

talk about concern for ''american national matters and sovereignty"

when YOUR AMERICA INVADES COUNTRIES AND MEDDLES IN THEIR ELECTIONS AND AFFAIRS!!

how dare you Moxie, how dare you.

 

[teddytennisfan]

MOXIE SAYS ''THIS IS OUR ELECTIONS -- "

DON'T get involved YA? don't talk about it if ''we are not americans" ya?

well DUH....

the MOSCOW MAYORALTY ELECTIONS had a ''candidate" that NO ONE WANTED -- in fact LAUGHED at by russians for his OBVIOUS servility to his AMERICAN patrons --

that in order to try and convince Muscovites to 'vote for democracy" (american style of course which is to PILLAGE countries) -

your DEAR AMERICAN AMBASSADOR PYATT -- MC CAIN , NULAND OF STATE DEPARTMENT LITERALLY

CAME UP with BUTTONS AND BANNERS AND MARCHED IN THE STREETS OF MOSCOW CAMPAIGNING for ''uncle sam's candidate" !!! lol.

they dozens and dozens of THESE in russia, DEAR MOXIE...

and GIVEN platforms in tv debates to PROVE their worth in front of russian audiences (watched it myself on tv for the upcoming september elections there - when i was in st petersburg)

and SHOWN TO BE SO BAD in their arguments - they are politely IGNORED if not LAUGHED AT!

the BRITISH PEOPLE sick and tired of paying MONEY TO UNELECTED BUREAUCRATS IN BRUSSELS of eu -- Who are nothing more than AGENTS of the USA corporatocracy to force EUROPE to SIGN ''deals" that SELL OUT european citizens to YOUR american corporations


PROMOTED by the LIKES OF OBAMA with TIPP done in SECRET AWAY from the public --

voted in their referendum to LEAVE EU --

AND your obama MADE his special TRIP TO CAJOLE AND literally THREATEN the people of the BRITISH ISLES if they voted YES TO BREXIT

by a THINLY veiled THREAT tha t'' britian might suffer because there will be no continuation of the same relationship with america -- britain will just have to fall in line at the back like everyone else"...

and when the BRITISH PEOPLE -- in THEIR sovereign wisdom of leaving the EU -- which ALL europeans KNOW is a n ARM of the USA created BY the CIA IN THE 1950'S - documents have proven it in the EXACT decision making by the EXACT american officials under TRUMAN -- For AMERICAN control ...along with NATO ...

YOUR KERRY made a special trip to the NEW BRITISH PRIME MINISTER THERESA MAY to give HER marching orders on ''this brexit vote -- we can WALK IT BACK" -- as IF? roflmao!!

in COMPLETE DISREGARD for the WILL of the SOVEREIGN CITIZENS OF THE BRITISH ISLES!

(AND no - dear -- i won't be your librarian ) -

AS IF AMERICA were some GOD doling out favors!! lol

THAT IS MEDDLING in the ''elections" OF A sovereign PEOPLE - dear moxie ..

so you have NO POSITION WHATSOEVER to complain about people in a FORUM talking about ''our american elections" !!!

AND YOU are going to talk about the SANCTITY OF 'our american elections??"

no country on earth - dear MOXIE -- meddles in the affairs and ELECTIONS of countries MORE than YOUR DEAR OLD SANCTIMONIOUS AMERICA!

so -- DON'T PRESUME to lecture billie or I or anyone WHAT to talk about in politics and ''american politics forum"!

roflmao!!!

 

[teddytennisfan]

He said, she said...Clinton must be obsessed with Putin. He wasn't even there but she had to mention him.

she is ...it all starts FROM BILL CLINTON DAYS -- b ut even b efore that of which HE and today are just continuations from EVEN OLDER ''teachers' of theirs -- such as the ''POLISH NOBLE BORN"

Zbigniew Brzezinski -- whose HATRED for RUSSIA Comes from a VERY deep resentment of POLISH FAILURE to conquer russia in repeated attempts since centuries ago!

and HE insinuated himself (madeleine albright is another one - and BOTH these are MENTORS of the clintons and today's neo-cons) -

inamerican power to get it to do its' ''encirclement of russia as the way tfor america to have complete control over the entirety of Eurasia and therfore the world" -- HTAT IS NOT making it up - that is in BOOKS he wrote that are the BIBLE of american policy!~

and these MOXIES and american ''voters" actually think they even KNOW what their 'elections are about" !!!

as CHURCHILL FAMOUSLY SAID :

"you can never lose a penny betting on american stupidity".

lol!!

 

[Moxie]

Oh, I do dare, Teddy. Not to put too fine a point on it, but these are "our" elections. You have no problem expressing your opinions, and even posting rather random internet palaver, so I've expressed mine. I have no intention of squelching others' opinions, but I'm a bit tired of being told how crap our candidates are, particularly Mrs. Clinton. That's my opinion. Obviously, it doesn't matter a hill of beans what's said on this thread, and if people want to vent on it, have at it. But some don't really have any skin in the game, and don't deal with the same issues on the ground that we do. Nor would they have to deal with the consequences of a Trump presidency in the same way we would.

 

[britbox]

Talk about taking it personally. You go back to your experience, which is fine, but that's not about the US elections. And I didn't make a comment about the impact on the world. And it's not that I think no one else matters. But these are our elections. Try to separate your personal experience from my sovereign country and the choices we have to make. It insults me how harshly you speak about Clinton, and, to be honest, it frightens me that you find common ground with Trump. But neither of those things matters, to me. You can't vote in our elections. Say what you will about our candidates and their policies, but can you try to do it without being so nasty and insulting? That would go down easier. I'm really just asking as a favor. And by "you," I also mean Britbox.

Is anybody really finding common ground or championing Trump? So really, it boils down to the issue that you don't like Hillary Clinton being talked about in less than glowing terms. Sorry, but there are plenty of people with severe reservations about Mrs Clinton... and no it doesn't just affect US Citizens... with the international role the US plays , it affects people all over the world. So, anyone or everyone is entitled to an opinion. You're welcome to post anything you like about Brexit whether I agree with it or not.

As for your comments about Farage "inserting himself into US politics" - he made it clear he was not going to endorse Trump or tell Americans how to vote. He was invited by Trump to speak at the conference, admitted in the interview that he squirmed at some of Trump's comments in earlier campaigning... Farage probably turned up to stick two fingers up to Obama and the Democrats, who most certainly did "insert themselves into UK politics" prior to the Brexit vote. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

 

[Moxie]

I don't need people to speak of Clinton in only glowing terms, but I do object to some of the bald mischaracterizations (not by you). I think the Trump bandwagon has quieted since he's been basically imploding, but there was a lot of tolerance for him, early doors. I've made no secret of my political leanings, so, yes, I have a clear bias. And I do understand why everyone likes to weigh in on the US elections. Forgive me if I don't think all of those opinions are well-considered or have the best interest of the US in mind.

 

[teddytennisfan]

Oh, I do dare, Teddy. Not to put too fine a point on it, but these are "our" elections. You have no problem expressing your opinions, and even posting rather random internet palaver, so I've expressed mine. I have no intention of squelching others' opinions, but I'm a bit tired of being told how crap our candidates are, particularly Mrs. Clinton. That's my opinion. Obviously, it doesn't matter a hill of beans what's said on this thread, and if people want to vent on it, have at it. But some don't really have any skin in the game, and don't deal with the same issues on the ground that we do. Nor would they have to deal with the consequences of a Trump presidency in the same way we would.

fine -- DO dare....but that's not going to stop people of the WORLD making their opinion KNOWN of YOUR precious elections.

yet -- there you go again -- talking about palaver this and that ..ll opinion on YOUR part as much as anyone has opinion -- YET as i pointed out abotu other's views on what you consider as sacrosanct when it's other's opinions you either do not consider supportive or agreeable about YOUR precious american-isms as palaver -- based on REFUSAL to even be BOTHERED about information ...which therefore only shows YOU ''do dare" to make judgments about matters you know little about...

so where DOES that place you or americans like that?

1) you are offended when others talk about your precious america and elections because there are views that bring information which YOU ignore or refuse to learn about!
2) it shows you are capable of making decisions about others (not unlkke americans do) and judgments b ased on VERY demon strated lack of correct information
3) that is the evidence of being ignorant about matters and willfully so - YET abrogates to oneself the authority to state an opinion without proper facts.

you also now state you have no problem with people stating opinion ==

and yet you keep enumerating reasons for why they are somehow not worthing stating....and BENEATH YOU that you ignore or ''skip over them" -- meaning? you don't even KNOW what you are talking about...or is it because they might contain facts the whole world knows - HAS BEEN AND IS verifiable as such -- as compared to the ACCUSATIONS that come from your politicians WITHOUT A SNIFF of evidence and then TEACHING americans to EQUATE accusation AS evidence? such as WMD'S of IRAQ ...''russia did it" etc. etc.?

if your hillary broaches such LYING as the meat of ''your precious elections" -- those are MATTERS that the rest of the world have BUSINESS to talk about

because it means YOU americans are involving YOURSELVES in the affairs of the world WITH PALAVER AND BASELESS claims and bragging and threatening.

you - without your understanding it -- shown by the kind of your own refusal and clinging to MYTHICAL simpleminded statements about ''our america -- my senator, MY hillary, MY obama -- hands off everyone" ....

don't have information tht is correct about matters THEY TELL YOU to believe -- not by a mile!

and THAT IS DANGEROUS to the rest of the world.

YOU -- willfully ignorant AMERICANS (and i don't mean that to mean denigratingly as a matter of natural trait -= but a WILLFUL trait) --

- THAT WAY - with your politicans and LIAR warmonger LIKE hillary ARE A DANGER to the rest of the world.


BUT you are too ignorant to recognize it.

 

[teddytennisfan]

I don't need people to speak of Clinton in only glowing terms, but I do object to some of the bald mischaracterizations (not by you). I think the Trump bandwagon has quieted since he's been basically imploding, but there was a lot of tolerance for him, early doors. I've made no secret of my political leanings, so, yes, I have a clear bias. And I do understand why everyone likes to weigh in on the US elections. Forgive me if I don't think all of those opinions are well-considered or have the best interest of the US in mind.

MOXIE -- i will say as short a thing as possible and then just try to pipe down in my wy of responding to you.

I CARE about you - americans -- and i am saying that in as sincerel felt a way i could.

YOU are in danger FROM hillary -- same as from trump really but in a different , somewht, way, but also less ''imminent" way -- for one and one reason only...

the woman is not just a liar of such magnitude -- the kinds of lies she makes - like her husband's that created conditions to destroy entire countries tht have CONSEQUENCES such AS terrorism...you see today -- and the economic implosion --

her WISH is literally dripping off her skin -- and that IS GLOBAL WAR..

it is impossibe to explain this to you not because there are no facts leading to that - but because YOU refuse to LEARN of them with a cold mind.

RIGHT NOW -- in asia -- there are disagreements between china and the philippines (among other OVERLAPPING claimants) on the south china sea...

countries around it claim and counter claim - overlapping -- about ''sovereignty" china claims almost all of it except for the close shores to othe countries -- but other countries ALSO claim bigger than close to their shores...

the USA pushes behind the philippines to oppose china, and as EXCUSE to increase american warships there

to ''guarantee freedom of navigation" -- which justifies american PRESENCE in south china sea...

none of which is american WATERS.

FOR DECADES that is has been a quiet, peaceful area with all parties just ignoring these OLD claims and counterclaims KNOWING they all use the same route for trade --

the MAJORITY of that trade of 4-5 trillion dollars a year TIED to china's economic engine...

WHAT IS THE USA doing there? which NOW suddenly threatens to be a global war site?

THAT is a matter of concern to people -- BILLIONS about YOUR american MEDDLING in regions it does NOT belong to.

the countries actually PREFER to NOT talkg about it -- as they always NEVER did - silently cknowledging tht it was INDEED china that had originally mapped and occupied and used the tiny islands there...and for matters of pride make THEIR claims with the EGGING of

yes -- 'sincerely yours USA" -- with AMERICAN lawyers ''speaking FOR the philippines" IN the last 3 years --

WHERE IN that picture is america in ANY role there?

now -- america has quite OPENLY THREATENED AUSTRALIA for ''consequences" UNLESS australia ''chooses the usa" without further ado in YOUR OBAMA'S AND HILLARY'S attempt to try and make CHINA kneel.

that is WAR - moxie.

and here you are talking about ''our american elections?"

your ''american elections" are about the QUESTION of america MEDDLING in affairs elsewhere

which YOU think is about YOUR welfare....
it is a question between TRUMP saying "we don't need to waste money on these wars" which YOUR country created for decades as your EMPIRE...

or HILLARY'S EXHORTING people to have "no caps" -- meaning No limits -- on ''MILITARY SPENDING" FOR MORE garrisoning of the planet which does NOT BELONG TO YOU!

and THAT means trillions of WASTE of YOUR tax payer money that can be used for FREE health care, FREE education for generations, FREE housing if you want, WHICH AMERICANS DESERVE TO HAVE...instead of the WAR PROFITEERS AND BANKERS and WALL STREET that HILLARY LOVES SO MUCH!

you want to state about ''the intrest of the american people?"

THE LAST PERSON to have YOUR interest is HILLARY, dear moxie.

she fairly drips DISDAIN for all of you..and you don't even notice it........

 

[teddytennisfan]

Is anybody really finding common ground or championing Trump? So really, it boils down to the issue that you don't like Hillary Clinton being talked about in less than glowing terms. Sorry, but there are plenty of people with severe reservations about Mrs Clinton... and no it doesn't just affect US Citizens... with the international role the US plays , it affects people all over the world. So, anyone or everyone is entitled to an opinion. You're welcome to post anything you like about Brexit whether I agree with it or not.

As for your comments about Farage "inserting himself into US politics" - he made it clear he was not going to endorse Trump or tell Americans how to vote. He was invited by Trump to speak at the conference, admitted in the interview that he squirmed at some of Trump's comments in earlier campaigning... Farage probably turned up to stick two fingers up to Obama and the Democrats, who most certainly did "insert themselves into UK politics" prior to the Brexit vote. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

as for ''FOREIGNERS" OPINING about the domestic conversations of a country -- --

i will tell all of you -- in russia when i was in st petersburg -- i had my room TV on all the time -- just to have in my ears the language and sort of get a ''hang of it" -- but after a while you DO get the gist of what theya re talking about (or maybe i just somehow have a knack for it, anyway) -

but they have national debate shows - like there are in tlak shows anywhere ...

and they have panels of very opposing views..this is a regular feature there...

and they regularly invite foreigners to come and debate..including for example a german politician with views tht REFLECT AMERICAN policies -- and he is then challenged by his russian counterparts and has to prove and try to convince them by the strength of his arguments....

MY point is that you will NEVER see that kind of free exchange in the USA -- farage MERELY being INVITED to just give a speech or an interview opining about wht he might think about american election -- is considered "HOW DARE HE MEDDLE IN OUR AFFAIRS?"

while you - americans -- have - LITERALLY -- ambassadors, state secretary kerry , clinton in HER turn before that, NULAND

literally CAMPAIGNING on the streets with ''democratic opposition" in COUNTRIES whose governments YOUR america WISHES TO REPLACE with a more obedient and amenable one...

they are NOW DRAGGING THEIR FEET about finishing up the CLOSING OF BRITISH participation in EU obligations -

so somehow it can be ''WALKED BACK" -- by JOHN KERRY statements...THAT IS MEDDLING in the affairs of the BRITISH PEOPLE...SO they can RIG UP reasons why ''it can't be done" ....which is LITERALLY tying down the british people with ''technicalities" to REMAIN strapped to the EU

even IF the british people had MADE THEIR WILL KNOWN -- to LEAVE! DESPITE the MASSIVE, MASSIVE media and political pressure to FRIGHTEN the british people FROM leaving EU...

 

[teddytennisfan]

Oh, I do dare, Teddy. Not to put too fine a point on it, but these are "our" elections. You have no problem expressing your opinions, and even posting rather random internet palaver, so I've expressed mine. I have no intention of squelching others' opinions, but I'm a bit tired of being told how crap our candidates are, particularly Mrs. Clinton. That's my opinion. Obviously, it doesn't matter a hill of beans what's said on this thread, and if people want to vent on it, have at it. But some don't really have any skin in the game, and don't deal with the same issues on the ground that we do. Nor would they have to deal with the consequences of a Trump presidency in the same way we would.

IT IS world known -- everyone BUT many of you americans -- that the people -- those tragically sad people -- of what was ONCE LIBYA -- the most stable and prosperous nation in africa --

are living with the CONSEQUENCES of what YOUR HILLARY AND OBAMA DID to them - and that is DESTROY their country - so it LOST the ONLY thing that held it together = the government of gadaffi --

HIS REAL SIN was in trying to realize the alternative system of using HIS country's THEN massive SAVINGS and profits from oil and gas to begin moving ALL trading OUTSIDE of the american dollar by attaching the libyan dinar to GOLD of which his country had increased holdings ...and begin to help african countries to do the same -- INDEPENDENCE from american and western currencies in trading .

GONE are the free healthcare, free education and housing.ALL RUINED BY YOUR CACKLING HIDEOUS hillary laughing as the TERRORISTS who were UNLEASHED by HER scheme and obama's murdered the dictator in public using a sword to kill him by inserting it in his anus...

and THAT has consequences in the SPREAD of ISIL to the rest of the world - right up to the RESULTING HOMELESSNESS in countries that SPREAD the MISERY right up to norway...

WHOSE POLITICS CREATED THAT/ ?

YOUR AMERICAN POLITICS, - HILLARY;S , OBAMA'S dear moxie.

you -- the american ''people" in your WILLFUL IGNORANCE ARE A DANGER to the rest of us in the world.

 

[teddytennisfan]

the CLINTON E MAILS -- are of import . they show what clinton's ''inside' talk is - how they are related to her ''clinton foundation" - which donors gain access to her and billie -- what that has to do with america's welfare for HER PEOPLE nad NOT THE CLINTONS....which ''democratic'' states have nice chats with the cltinons....who gains from ACCESS to them through the clinton foundation -- to gain influence in american POLICIES ...and what that has got to do with WAGES of ordinary americans and what's good for thme...


discuss:

=========================

• ENG
• RUS

RSS
Add to favorites

• About
• Contact Us

• Home
• Columns
• Locations
• Contributors
• Search

03.09.2016 Author: Jean Perier

Saudi Arabia – The Bloody Wonderland
Column: Politics
Region: Middle East
Country: Saudi Arabia




The fact that one of the principle allies of the “self-proclaimed champions of democracy” is routinely beheading people makes one feel like they’re living in Lewis Carroll’s surreal “Wonderland.” According to Amnesty International, Saudi Arabia violently executed 79 people in 2013, more than 150 in 2015, and at the beginning of this year a total of 47 people were beheaded in just one day in Saudi Arabia. The horrific results of this year are yet to be assessed, but it is now becoming clear that the norms of international law are being blatantly disregarded in this country.

It is also important to note that while the entire Islamic world strictly adheres to the norms of Islam, Riyadh puts itself above the Righteous Caliphs, the Prophet and the word of the Quaran. This is because it has been violently punishing and killing people and seeks for a way to justify it religiously.

Lately, Saudi Arabia has been beheading and publicly beating offenders. It’s true that according to interpretations of Islamic law, some offenses can be punished by death, especially those violating the boundaries set by Allah. The so-called Hudud crimes include adultery, fornication, false accusations, consuming intoxicants, rebellion against the lawful Caliph, as well as robbery and theft. For each crimes there’s a predefined punishment. It should be noted that at the end of the tenth century, Sharia law formally ceased to evolve. But today the Muslim World has been actively discussing the need to bring Sharia regulations in line with modern day realities. It’s curious that Osama bin Laden criticized the Saudi regime for disallowing the “free believer” and imposing harsh restrictions on the practice of Islam.

Most offenses that are being strictly punished in Saudi Arabia are those that fall under the Hudud category, however Riyadh is acting well beyond the scope of actual Sharia law. If Islam remains intolerant to apostasy, adultery, rebellion in the form of treason, the use of alcohol, for example, even though it is condemned implies the punishment of a more educational nature, since Muslims believe that after drinking alcoholic beverages a person loses his identity. Thus, the Quran strongly condemns the use of alcohol: in verse 5:90 it states:

O you who have believed, indeed, intoxicants, gambling, [sacrificing on] stone alters [to other than Allah ], and divining arrows are but defilement from the work of Satan, so avoid it that you may be successful.

However, it doesn’t set a penalty for this sin. The measure of punishment that a person must get for this offence is established in the Sunnah, for example:

Anas b. Malik reported that a person who had drink wine was brought to Allah’s Apostle (Peace be upon him). He gave him forty stripes with two lashes. Abu Bakr also did that, but when Umar (assumed the responsibilities) of the Caliphate, he consulted people and Abd al-Rahman said: The mildest punishment (for drinking) is eighty (stripes) and ‘Umar their prescribed this punishment.

Later sources, like the book written by Islamic scholar Nuh Ha Mim Keller, published under the title Reliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, would clarify it further:

The following criteria must be obtained before imposing the punishment of forty to eighty stripes: (a) he drinks; (b) he has reached puberty; (c) he is sane; (d) he is a Muslim; (e) he does so voluntarily; (f) and he knows it is unlawful.

Thus, an adult Muslim can be brought to justice according to the norms of Sharia law if he has been drinking alcohol and he knows that it’s a sin. But since 1978 Saudi Arabia has been using harsh punishments for non-Muslims, changing the rules of Sharia law for its own purposes.

In 1978, Saudi Arabia sentenced nine Britons to flogging for drinking alcohol. In 2003 an Australian, Robert Thomas was sentenced to 16 months in prison and 300 lashes. Finally, in 2014, 73-year-old Karl Andree faced 378 lashes for having wine in Saudi Arabia.

Similar concerns can be voiced about the mass execution that occurred in Saudi Arabia on January 2, 2016. It must be noted that in recent years, dissatisfaction with the rule of Saudi Arabia is gaining great momentum, but Saudi authorities monitor those dissatisfied with their rule to bring them to their version of justice. However, the degree of responsibility is not dependent on the degree of dissatisfaction of a person, instead its depends on his ability to lead others. Thus, Saudi Arabia violated one of the fundamental principles of law – the principle of equality.

In the last three years, Riyadh has been sentencing those who were dissatisfied with the regime. Raif Badawi, a Saudi blogger, was sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes for allegedly “insulting Islam through electronic channels”. Human rights activists Mikhlif bin Daham al-Shammari and Omar al-Saed were sentenced to 200 and 300 lashes respectively. Then, finally the Shia scholar Sheikh Nimr Baqir al-Nimr Amin who was executed at the beginning of this year on the day of the mass execution of 47 people, was accused of having ties with terrorists. All of these people called for political reforms, for the recognition of and respect for human rights, but none of them called for regime change, no one tried to undermine the lawful authorities or betray their homeland. Therefore, the concept of rebellion, used in within the context of Sharia law cannot be applied to those individuals, and thus the punishment was out of the scope of Sharia law.

The list of Riyadh’s crimes and human rights violations through cruel and disproportionate punishment is extensive. We haven’t even discussed the cruelty of punishment for adultery. It is important to note that a person who was sexually abused will get no protection from the Saudi state, instead they will be punished for adultery as well, since the fact that a person filed a complaint is regarded as an admission of committing this offense. Therefore, official statistics in Saudi Arabia for sexual assault is close to zero, because the victims are unable to defend themselves in any way.

Thus, today, Saudi Arabia, proclaiming itself as the center of the Sunni community, violates the very founding principles of Islam. So where could Riyadh bring the Islamic World, and in what way does it differs from ISIS, where executions have become a common practice as well?

Jean Périer is an independent researcher and analyst and a renowned expert on the Near and Middle East, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”


4

Popular Articles
Washington Plays Nuclear Chicken Now W...
by F. William Engdahl
It seems it's not enough that US Defense Secretary...
12345
Newsfeed from our colleagues
U.S. killing more civilians in Iraq, Syria than it acknowledges

Paul Wood and Richard Hall
Featured Content

Vladimir Odintsov The Global De-dollarization and the US Polici...

Janet Phelan MIT States That Half of All Children May be A...

Konrad Stachnio Ukraine: ‘Bangladesh’ is Investing in Bandera...

Tony Cartalucci With Aleppo Encircled, West Seeks Wildcard to...

F. William Engdahl Russia and China: Watch Out Moody’s, Here We ...
NEO in social networks
Facebook Twitter
Video

• 
  As Libya Burns, Remember Who Lit the Fires

Partners



Blogroll

Activist Post

Antiwar

Agora Vox

Boiling Frogs Post

Blacklisted News

Counter Punch

Foreign Policy Journal

Global Research

Information Clearing House

Moon of Alabama

Modern Tokyo Times

NSNBC

OpEdNews

Tom Dispatch

The Excavator

Voltaire Net

• Home
• Locations
• Contributors
• Search

E-mail:
info@journal-neo.org

Electronic analytical journal New Eastern Outlook 2010-2016
Republishing of the articles is welcomed with reference to NEO.
The views of the authors do not necessarily coincide with the opinion of the editorial board.

 

[teddytennisfan]

advertisement
Tuesday, Aug 30, 2016 05:58 AM EST
Rights group blasts U.S. “hypocrisy” in “vast flood of weapons” to Saudi Arabia, despite war crimes
Ben Norton

• Share 1K
• 
  

• 0

Barack Obama (Credit: Getty/Brendan Smialowski)
Amnesty International has accused the U.S. of “deadly hypocrisy” for its massive arms deals with Middle East governments that have carried out war crimes and other violations of international law.

“One of the unspoken legacies of the Obama administration is the extraordinary uptake in the amount of U.S. weapons and military aid that are provided to major U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia, Israel and Egypt that have terrible records when it comes to human rights,” explained Sunjeev Bery in an interview with Salon.

Bery, the advocacy director for Middle East and North Africa issues at Amnesty International USA, called on the Obama administration to “do an about-face on its current policy of providing vast arms sales and military aid to repressive allies in the Middle East.”

Israel has for decades been the largest recipient of U.S. military aid. It averages more than $3 billion a year, although this figure may soon increase. Egypt comes in second, with $1.5 billion. In 2014, these two countries received about three-fourths of U.S. foreign military aid.

In the past few years, however, one of the most repressive countries in the world has become a key customer for U.S. weapons: Saudi Arabia.

Since President Obama took office, the U.S. government has done a staggering $110 billion in arms sales with the Saudi monarchy — amounting to an unprecedented increase. Like Israel and Egypt, Saudi Arabia has long been a close U.S. ally, but the U.S.-Saudi military alliance has grown dramatically since 2009.

Throughout the past year U.S. weapons have kept flowing to Saudi Arabia, even while the United Nations and human rights groups have documented a slew of Saudi war crimes in Yemen.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have condemned the U.S. and U.K. governments for providing weapons, military intelligence and support to the Saudi-led coalition that has since March 2015 launched thousands of air strikes in Yemen, warning that they may be complicit in war crimes.

The bombing campaign has ravaged Yemen, the poorest country in the Middle East. Nearly 4,000 civilians have been killed and thousands more have been injured, with an average of 13 civilian casualties a day, according to the U.N. The violence has displaced millions, incited mass hunger, fueled extremism and pushed more than 80 percent of the population into what the U.N. has for more than a year called a “humanitarian catastrophe.”

Bery told Salon, “The bottom line is that the U.S. government considers to arm the government of Saudi Arabia with precisely the kinds of weapons that Saudi Arabia and its coalition have used to attack civilian communities in Yemen. That’s the fundamental problem,” he added.

“Nobody should be putting more bombs or weapons in the hands of the Saudi Arabia-led coalition,” he stressed.

A report released in February by a U.N. panel of experts documented coalition attacks on a dizzying array of civilian targets, including refugee camps, weddings, hospitals, schools, homes, vehicles, markets and factories. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have also documented Saudi-led coalition use of widely banned U.S.-made cluster bombs in civilian areas.

On Aug. 25, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein called for “an international, independent body to carry out comprehensive investigations in Yemen.” The U.N. Human Rights Council, at the high commissioner for human right’s recommendation, had previously tried to create such an international probe, but it was derailed by the U.S. and Saudi Arabia’s European allies.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have since urged the U.N. General Assembly to suspend Saudi Arabia from the Human Rights Council, citing its “gross and systematic violations of human rights abroad and at home.”

For several months these leading human rights groups, pointing to the mass atrocities, have called for an embargo on all weapons transfers to Saudi Arabia. The U.S. and other Western countries, however, have ignored them.

On Aug. 8, the U.S. State Department told Congress it had approved yet another arms deal: a $1.15 billion sale of tanks, machine guns and more. This reinvigorated a bipartisan campaign by lawmakers — including Chris Murphy and Rand Paul in the Senate and Ted Lieu and Ted Yoho in the House — to pass legislation barring U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia

 

[teddytennisfan]

QUESTION MORE
live

HomeOp-Edge
Clinton email scandal: ‘Whole world should know about her crimes & what she’d like to do’
Published time: 3 Sep, 2016 14:27

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. © Aaron P. Bernstein / Reuters
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to Facebook84Share to TwitterShare to RedditShare to StumbleUponShare to Google+Share to Tumblr
How was it possible that the FBI could not find several devices used by Hillary Clinton to send emails? Was her “could not recall” defense an attempt to avoid responsibility? Will Clinton be charged after she failed to protect top-secret information?
TrendsUS Elections 2016
Experts spoke to RT and answered these and other questions.

All the information about incidents where she was involved, like the one in Benghazi, should be revealed to the public, said Lew Rockwell, who is chairman of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. People should know why she “doesn’t recall” the key details, while having perfect health, he added.

RT: How is it that the FBI was not able to find any of the 13 devices used by Hillary Clinton to send her emails?

Lew Rockwell: I think she is a criminal, so she attempted to hide what she was doing. She was at the very least selling favors from the government to get money for the Clinton Foundation for herself, her husband, and the rest of their crew. That is why she used the special program to prevent retrieval, or so she hoped, of the e-mails that she erased. We should see it all; we should see everything about Benghazi, about every other thing she was involved in. She is a warmonger; certainly the way she talks she’d like to bring back the Cold War times seven; she’s very dangerous. So the more we can find out, the more we see her funny excuses about why her health is perfect, but she can’t remember everything, she had such a fall and hit her head.

RT: What can we make of this Clinton “could not recall” defense? Is it an attempt to avoid responsibility?

LR: No, it is just typical. She is a lawyer herself. That would be the typical lawyer advice, because they feel you can’t be gotten for perjury if you can’t recall. Of course there must be some things you can’t recall. But it is interesting she can’t recall the really key stuff and she blames it on her fall, which was a serious brain injury. But again, is that having an effect today? Shouldn’t she have a neurological exam? Shouldn’t we hear about what is actually wrong with her? We know what is wrong with her in terms of criminality, or at least we know some of it, but we need to know much more about this, before she is allowed into the White House, not her and the rest of the Clinton crew.

RT: Doesn't it seem that the mainstream media, for example, is more interested in the fact that the leak occurred rather than the content of the documents that were leaked?

LR: You can tell, and the American media doesn’t even pretend anymore to be balanced, or to be fair. They are 100 percent in Hillary’s pocket. They are promoting Hillary; they hate her opponent; they hate anybody who says anything against her; they don’t want to say anything bad about her. When they are forced, when there is a huge story like this, they feel they have to cover it. But of course they don’t want to cover the meat of the story – they want just to talk about the extraneous material.

We shouldn’t pay any attention to that; we have to do our own reading, our own research. I hope there will be many more people weighing in on this – people who know far more than what we’ve been told so far. It is very encouraging [that] there is more to come, more about her crimes – both in terms of foreign policy and personal corruption with the very corrupt Clinton Foundation. This is all to the good, bring it all out, tell the American people; tell the whole world by the way – this woman threatens the whole world. The whole world should know what she’s done and what she’d like to do and all the crimes she’s committed.

Clinton’s ‘Don’t recall’ –phrase to legally protect something, someone
Hillary Clinton’s claim that she doesn’t remember some things indicates that something legally is being protected, as one doesn’t say this phrase unless a person wants to protect some information, Jack Rasmus, a professor at St. Mary’s College told RT.

The FBI released the findings of its investigation into Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's use of a personal email server to send classified information while she was US Secretary of State.

RT: The main question is still out there. Do you think Clinton could be charged after she failed to protect top-secret information?

Jack Rasmus: What is interesting in a report is that we have 39 instances of “don’t recall.” That usually indicates that something legally is being protected when you give depositions like that, you usually don’t make that phrase, unless there is a reason to protect someone, or something. So they would have to turn out some more information to prosecute her any further.

Another interesting thing is you don’t destroy mobile devices in these kinds of situation, unless there is something that needs to be destroyed. Also there is reference to emails being transferred to a laptop and a thumb drive. If there is any prosecution, they would have to find a laptop, a thumb drive, and an unnamed person that is associated with the transferring of that information to the laptop and the thumb drive.

RT: FBI documents indicate that “Clinton relied on the judgment of the people that worked for her to handle information appropriately.” Is this a case of shifting responsibility?

JR: It may, or may not be. In her role, people pretty much rely on their experts to tell them what they should, or shouldn’t do. I am sure they told her what she should, or shouldn’t do. Her answer is “I don’t recall.” Sounds like they are trying to protect some of the lower level people from having to testify or give depositions, which relates to what kind of deposition did she give. She really didn’t give a deposition. It was kind of a strange thing, where the FBI just took notes. There is nothing really verboten [forbidden] here and thus there’s no real record that she can prosecuted on.

RT: Large parts of the report have been redacted. Does this mean the case is much more serious than Clinton has tried to make people think?

JR: It depends on what was redacted and could very well be. You don’t redact information that is innocuous. You usually cut out something referring to a person, or something really important. It seems to imply that there was some cooperation between the interviewers and her.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT

 

[teddytennisfan]

REPORT in sputnik -- which reports BETTER ...

but in any case it will be verified in ny other way anwyay...

REUTERS based - yes THAT SAME ''dependable" us based news gathering agency -- says TRUMP - HAS EDGED OVER HILLARY

if only 1 point...

to 40 percent - over hillary's 39...that was NOT supposed to happen THIS close to an election in US HISTORY.

could moxie explain this? moxie mentioned elsehwere that TRUMP'S support is now behond salvation thereby implying it's useless - so just support hitlery...

but the question remains -- by monday we will know if this new results in polls are correct....

then what happens SHOULD it be true and trump continues to gain support from the electorate tht is SEEING THE WAR CRIMES AND INVETERATE HABITUAL LYING OF BRAIN -DAMAGED HILLARY WAR AND BLOOD THIRSTY HILLARY?

hillary of the clinton family money racket business selling ''access to washington policy to " the likes of saudi arabia HEAD CHOPPERS AND MEDIEVAL SADISTS? and financiers of the

AMERICAN ''weapon of choice" -- ISIL, AL QAEDA AND WAHHAB terrorism?

please explain this Moxie - it is ALL part of ''our american sovereign elections". after all..

 

[teddytennisfan]

pertinent questions about HILLARY:

1) WHY did the FBI exonerate HER? with what are CLEAR criminalities by ''poo-pooing" the results of their OWN investigation on benghazi that killed the american ambassador DUE to HILLARY'S ''WE CAME WE SAW HE DIED" project in libya?
2) why does the FBI say that the REASON HILLARY ''forgot" a lot of CRITICAL THINGS about why her e mails were missing or erased etc....are ''because of brain damage?" from her falls?
3) and what ARE those 'forgotten things?" why does the FBI EITHER NOT pursue them as a matter of national interest OR REDACTED them in making them '\public?" WHO ARE THEY REALLY COVERING UP FOR -- NATIONAL SECURITY or HILLARY;S CRIMINALITY?

4) WHY did hillary's aides USE HAMMERS TO DESTROY their cell phones?

THESE ARE QUESTIONS OF CENTRAL nature to whether hillary is to be TRUSTED with the RED BUTTON OF NUCLEAR WAR.

as she LITERALLY threatens RUSSIA AND CHINA!