Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Yamato

Challenging U.S. Foreign Policy

515 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Yamato

that's not true. an honest dollar made is honest. no matter how much is made, good for them.

It should follow then that there are plenty of good people in the top 1% who earned their dollars honestly. Wealth isn't the problem. America isn't somehow guilty for being the wealthiest nation in the world, or in the top 1% of the world. Dividing our country up again into us vs. them. If we can't even name who "them" is, and what in the world they're doing wrong, we have no reason to make strangers into enemies. How much should Bill Gates cough up, and what are you going to do with that money?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
President-Elect Acidhead

I have a question for everybody: How many more Muslims does the West have to kill before it's a holocaust?

The argument I get when questioning how many jews died in their holocaust is: Why do the numbers matter?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

The argument I get when questioning how many jews died in their holocaust is: Why do the numbers matter?

If you asked me, I would say six million. Yep definitely six.

Recently there were finally imported a population of six million Jews in Israel and the perpetual nonsense about destroying Israel and thereby repeating the Holocaust became quite the fashionable rhetoric in Israeli politics. Well no American would want to get caught taking the chance that that might happen. So we endorse and enable criminal syndicates posing as states from Israel to Afghanistan, from Pakistan to Libya. Nevermind that ISIS never attacks Israel, if we don't think these chickens are coming home to roost in Israel too, I'd like to hear the explanation why not.

Edited by Yamato
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Israel creates Hamas, so they can use this constant fear mongering with a shred of an actual basis in fact. Hamas wrote a charter which basically says the same thing Likud's does. One state can't tolerate the existence of the other. And so what happens? They can strangle the entire Gaza Strip by land, sea and air while they practice the most heinous apartheid and illegal occupation in the West Bank. The US creates the Mujahideen (deliberate), Al Qaeda (unintentional) and ISIS in kind. It's long past the point where it's difficult to believe we're this stupid that we can't stop making the same mistakes over and over again. This is no mistake. This is a deeply deliberated and well camouflaged hegemony that thinks it's above the law.

Without an "Enemy" this "capitalism" won't work over there. Meanwhile the most common of sense, "The first thing I'd do is stop arming our enemies" doesn't even resonate with voters. Ron Paul cured my apathy and it's officially back with a vengeance.

20 million Russians died from the Bolshevik scourge, so let's not care and sanction Russia. Tell me master, who to have a heart for, and who not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

How about the Slavs? How many Slavic people were exterminated? Where's my soup line? I visited my ancestral homeland in Poland, it was gorgeous. We picked ourselves up and we moved the hell on. So have Jews in the United States, so why do they need Israel? I think I can find six million Jews in the world that would make better Americans than Israelis. When there's a refugee crisis in Israel some day, and we're asking for it, we're going to let the Israelis in, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

It should follow then that there are plenty of good people in the top 1% who earned their dollars honestly. Wealth isn't the problem. America isn't somehow guilty for being the wealthiest nation in the world, or in the top 1% of the world. Dividing our country up again into us vs. them. If we can't even name who "them" is, and what in the world they're doing wrong, we have no reason to make strangers into enemies. How much should Bill Gates cough up, and what are you going to do with that money?

are you saying that the same people you complain about too , have gotten where they have honestly? that they don't rob us all along the way? when is enough enough for them?

.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

are you saying that the same people you complain about too , have gotten where they have honestly? that they don't rob us all along the way? when is enough enough for them?

.

I'm saying it's the tentacles between the super rich and the government that should be severed. Not to attack wealth for wealth's sake. If you want to punish the 1%, I'll need each of their names and your reasons. But I'm not going to punish people for their wealth, that is bonafide class warfare. I'm not going to punish the innocent, I'm going to punish bad behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

Yes.... Christian and Jewish Zionists. Its pretty obvious once you dig into the so-called written record of military and political history in the past hundred yrs or so. Studying the jewish holocaust is a great place to start because there are many holes in the official story that are confusing and its this particular part of human history that is used to justify just about every single western military intervention today. And without the private Federal Reserve none of it would be possible.

Oh, but I don't understand you or Yamato right now. You both seem to be defending people like the ones you're complaining about.

Edited by Ellapennella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
President-Elect Acidhead

Thanks for that video Yamato. I've read and heard about these claims many times. It's great to see them in original print.

A few things I'll say about the newspaper articles that are on my mind at the moment:

- Russian involvement..... actually..... massive Soviet Union involvement. This is the part of WW2 history I find very confusing and so interesting at the same time.

.......................... The Bolsheviks . .... These guys, Lenin, Trotsky, et al were jews. They killed millions of people..... Holomoder.... mainly Christians but also jews. (dog eat dog)

- the second to last newspaper article which mentioned "Great Britain should throw open the gates of Palestine to help the suffering jews"....

................ this article in particular interested me because its my understanding the great majority of european jews did not want to immigrate to Palestine pre-WW2. Who would at the time? Most of it was desert. It would have been very discouraging to think of traveling there to live when living conditions were worse than where you left.

Edited by acidhead
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Oh, but I don't understand you or Yamato right now. You both seem to be defending people like the ones you're complaining about.

I'm complaining about irresponsible and bad behavior, and the people and institutions responsible for that behavior. If it's The Rich, it's incidental. If some poor guy engineered a God printing press and printed so many perfectly printed counterfeit bills he could start a war in the Middle East with it, the scales of justice ought to weigh for him too. If it's Jewish it's incidental. What difference does it matter to you whether a Zionist crook is Jewish or not? I don't care if he's purple, or even British! Just as well, Islam is incidental. The Qu'ran in places reads like a manual on self-defense in the desert against the invaders. We wonder why our brilliant foreign policy doesn't work. Our prophet is a pacifist! What's our excuse? Oh we just ignore our religion! Jesus! So why is our irreligion not as deadly and dangerous and evil as their religion is? It could be Buddhists, it could be Hawaiians or the good people of East Bangladesh. Incidental just like wealth.

Where Bernie Sanders says stuff like "This government is by the wealthy for the wealthy" he gets my attention. Making them pay punitive taxes is not the solution. This is government's fault! They're the ones with the power. And the solution is to give the government even more money? That makes no sense.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
President-Elect Acidhead

Oh, but I don't understand you or Yamato right now. You both seem to be defending people like the ones you're complaining about.

No. Its quite the opposite. We keep advocating for more freedom.... less GOV intervention. Gov intervention is what created this so-called 1%... enemy of humanity. Take the bank bailouts for instance. Some will argue it was more freedom which led to the almost collapse of the financial sector because of bad loans/bets..... a failure of freedom or non-interference/regulations. But the end result was they were bailed out anyhow.......... but not all the banks were bailed out nor average folk who "bought too much home than they could afford" ---GWB Only select banks, friends of the Fed, were bailed out and they in turn bought out their competition. No lesson was learned. It was the largest bank heist in history and it continues to this day. Now Bernie talks tough... "I as president would break up the big banks!"............ geee okay........ kind of the same idea how big oil breaks into subsidiaries all under the same regulated umbrella........ thanks Bernie............ great solution bud. Way to solidify their complete control over the free market through GOV regulations.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

I'm saying it's the tentacles between the super rich and the government that should be severed. Not to attack wealth for wealth's sake. If you want to punish the 1%, I'll need each of their names and your reasons. But I'm not going to punish people for their wealth, that is bonafide class warfare. I'm not going to punish the innocent, I'm going to punish bad behavior.

I'm not against wealth like you said for the sake of it. I do oppose major corporations who don't invest it back into the country . tax breaks, bailouts & wall street's rigged market . I don't see it as being fair when average people have to work longer hrs. and for lesser pay. Some are over qualified working minimum wages , sometimes holding down 2 or 3 jobs, because there's no work for them anywhere else or full time . Canada has free healthcare and I think college for their people. Other countries around the world seem to have more moral value in family and the importance of education and healthcare , but not America. It's all about insurance agencies and banks profiting.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

I'm not against wealth like you said for the sake of it. I do oppose major corporations who don't invest it back into the country . tax breaks, bailouts & wall street's rigged market . I don't see it as being fair when average people have to work longer hrs. and for lesser pay. Some are over qualified working minimum wages , sometimes holding down 2 or 3 jobs, because there's no work for them anywhere else or full time . Canada has free healthcare and I think college for their people. Other countries around the world seem to have more moral value in family and the importance of education and healthcare , but not America. It's all about insurance agencies and banks profiting.

We have the same values, I've known that for a long time. Where we differ is policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Nobody ever wants to pay attention to the policy, and I don't know why that is? Why shouldn't we care about the policy enough to be prepared to defend it when it's challenged?

Adam Kokesh challenges US foreign policy. This time, against a military bully using threats of violence. Skip to 1:45 or so, you can begin to hear what's being said. Kokesh'd! I swear I could almost turn gay for Adam after watching this.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
President-Elect Acidhead

I'm not against wealth like you said for the sake of it. I do oppose major corporations who don't invest it back into the country . tax breaks, bailouts & wall street's rigged market . I don't see it as being fair when average people have to work longer hrs. and for lesser pay. Some are over qualified working minimum wages , sometimes holding down 2 or 3 jobs, because there's no work for them anywhere else or full time . Canada has free healthcare and I think college for their people. Other countries around the world seem to have more moral value in family and the importance of education and healthcare , but not America. It's all about insurance agencies and banks profiting.

We, Canada, doesn't have free healthcare. Where do you get that idea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
President-Elect Acidhead

Nobody ever wants to pay attention to the policy, and I don't know why that is? Why shouldn't we care about the policy enough to be prepared to defend it when it's challenged?

Adam Kokesh challenges US foreign policy. This time, against a military bully using threats of violence. Skip to 1:45 or so, you can begin to hear what's being said. Kokesh'd! I swear I could almost turn gay for Adam after watching this.

I saw this vid when Adam published it.... "You want a sticker?"

haha

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

I saw this vid when Adam published it.... "You want a sticker?"

haha

Adam really lead the discussion on the path of non-violence to arrive at a peaceful end. I think the big guy will agree with everything he reads in his free book. Good thing Adam clinched him with "We were lied to." It's telling I think how they both strongly agreed on that, and from that point they agreed on many other major points that were made. I think if they had more time to talk they would become friends. Adam noted in the comments not to hate on this guy, I agree it was one of the most awesome exhibits of a flexible mind changing ever recorded live. I wouldn't be surprised if they're in touch with each other now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

Okay? So there shouldn't be any other banks people can choose in the free market that provide a different business model and a different investment ideology for their customers? Why? Why would you support the banks by decrying their competition?

Give me one real reason to oppose Peter Schiff.

I can't believe that you'd be against Peter Schiff, one the greatest opponents of Federal Reserve policy on the planet. For what? Are you suggesting mentally retarded people can't work? Are you suggesting minimum price fixing schemes from Washington and paying them $15/hr too? Are you suggesting forcing companies to hire them for $15/hr? What's the problem here exactly? Why would we engage in political attacks on people like this just for thinking differently? Maybe we should watch the whole interview first instead of only being fed soundbytes from TYT who only seeks to find the dirt in the cloth.

The Young Turks? The Young Turks politicize everything and slandered Ron Paul the minute after he was #1 in the polls in some of the dirtiest attacks anywhere in the media. I don't get my marching orders from Cenk and even my crush on Ana Kasparian has its limits.

"What job are you going to hire them to do for $2/hr? " Really Cenk? How much are YOU going to pay them? What jobs are YOU going to hire them for? Why don't you stop playing your smarmy PC word games from behind a desk and offer some actual ideas on the righteous thing to do with (insert politically correct language here) when you're dumping personal attacks on the next libertarian. The point is, and this goes straight to Bernie Sanders central planning model, if there was no minimum wage, retarded people could get jobs.

But what??? They can't collect wages? They can't do anything that makes them feel fulfilled? Can't do anything that makes them productive citizens? How dare you, Cenk? We have to control their wages too, to tell them how much they're valued, how other people besides the ones cutting the damned paycheck value them? Are you kidding me? Put your money where your mouth is, Cenk. Then I'll listen. Until then I have no reason to believe that Peter Schiff's thinking is worse for handicapped people than Cenk Uygur's.

They pay the retarded guy $2/hr, they value him exactly $2/hr more than you do, Jenk. Jerk. When he puts his money where his mouth is, and shows the world how much to pay retarded people and for what work by actually doing it, or at the very least deferring to someone else who he thinks Peter Schiff should be exactly like, then I'll take this latest TYT smear job of Peter Schiff seriously.

Laughing about Peter Schiff's politically incorrect language. Are the liberal word police going to come after me now for using the word retarded? I do support Peter Schiff, and Ron Paul too, Cenk, but if anyone here wants to have a love-off as if they love handicapped people more than I do because I support Peter Schiff, bring it. I used to subscribe to TYT back before they spent more energy attacking free market capitalism than neoconservatism. When they went after Ron Paul, that crossed the line.

Should I post a new thread attacking Cenk Uygur personally for all his stupid bs? It wouldn't be difficult and it would be deserved. I don't think that's very gentlemanly quite frankly, and it's not gentlemanly when it's done to Peter Schiff or Ron Paul either.

we don't really watch them , TYT . seen them maybe a handful of times. It was comedy centrals the dailyshow that was the blame for that not tyt . Yamato, I'm not defending Peter Schiff. But , I've been reading about him tonight. he doesn't seem like a bad guy ,but I don't care who he is, for him to judge people seeking min. wage increase was wrong of him.. would it really hurt him if min. wage was increased. Nope. But he's crying about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

we don't really watch them , TYT . seen them maybe a handful of times. It was comedy centrals the dailyshow that was the blame for that not tyt . Yamato, I'm not defending Peter Schiff. But , I've been reading about him tonight. he doesn't seem like a bad guy ,but I don't care who he is, for him to judge people seeking min. wage increase was wrong of him.. would it really hurt him if min. wage was increased. Nope. But he's crying about it.

It's rather selfless to go down and warn the people in the park when it hurts them even more. Prices will rise based on what people can afford to pay. If they're making more they're expected to spend more. The evil capitalists providing products and services to people who demand them will get the added wages back eventually anyway. Min. wage is fixing prices so the whole market suffers. Prices going higher go even higher faster. If you don't think higher prices -the natural consequences of inflating a money supply- are a problem then what are you afraid of? Lower prices? Lower prices => higher wages because everyone's wages have more purchasing power. The free market tends to affordability. If you can afford it, you might buy it, right? Controlling things requires a lot of waste and red tape. There's a better and affordable way. Let you control yourself. Legalize freedom. As long as you don't hurt or endanger others you can do whatever you like! Who is the govt to control you, Ella?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
robinrenee

U.S. and Israeli foreign policy is the same as NWO foreign policy.

Syrian Girl explains "Why the NWO Hates Syria."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

U.S. and Israeli foreign policy is the same as NWO foreign policy.

Syrian Girl explains "Why the NWO Hates Syria."

That was heartbreaking, robin. My heart bleeds for these people.

Paraphrasing Syrian Girl said in an interview with Paul Watson: "ISIS is backed by the United States and allies like Saudi Arabia." "We're being killed by groups who have US support." "If the US was serious about defeating ISIS, it wouldn't be destabilizing Syria it would be strengthening it." I believe that. Which circles back around to the OP video. Putin is enjoying the fruits of his folly, the blowback from his intervention too. Our policy of meat grinding stalemate with the ultimate grand prize of regime change can't possibly succeed now.

We will have to negotiate the future of Syria with the Russians, and of course with their unwelcome political influence in Syria now it's not going to be to our liking, whatever the hell that is. Other than Wahhabism and Zionism of course.

ISIS creates fear of terrorists. The US media digs in with both hands and serves it to us! Fear's the main commodity of this war and our side plays it like a fiddle.

I totally get President Obama on the Syrian refugees issue. It's consistent with the rest of his foreign policy. What are these neocons and zionists crying about now? Do they care about Syrians or not? If he's going to bomb them (and is), as if he's supposed to care about what's happening to Syria, he's going to accept Syrian refugees into the US like he cares as well.

But the people who say "Oh yes, bomb them, bomb them!" combined with "Oh no, don't let them come over here!"? These people don't care about Syria. So why do they care about Syria?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
robinrenee

That was heartbreaking, robin. My heart bleeds for these people.

I agree.

Paraphrasing Syrian Girl said in an interview with Paul Watson: "ISIS is backed by the United States and allies like Saudi Arabia." "We're being killed by groups who have US support." "If the US was serious about defeating ISIS, it wouldn't be destabilizing Syria it would be strengthening it." I believe that. Which circles back around to the OP video. Putin is enjoying the fruits of his folly, the blowback from his intervention too. Our policy of meat grinding stalemate with the ultimate grand prize of regime change can't possibly succeed now.

I'm totally confused about what is happening right now. I've been reading "The Perestroika Deception" by Anatoliy Golitsyn. I'm finding bits and pieces of it online because it's out-of-print and costs about $200 on Amazon. Uh... I'm not THAT interested. :no: There are also some good lectures about it on youtube.

We will have to negotiate the future of Syria with the Russians, and of course with their unwelcome political influence in Syria now it's not going to be to our liking, whatever the hell that is. Other than Wahhabism and Zionism of course.

Negotiate would be nice, but there is so much dishonesty between the U.S. and Russian... I don't know. The Perestroika Deception says that Russia's perestroika (restructuring) was a sham, and it's still a powerful Communist nation. Apparently Putin is a ......... Zionist. Now that I think about that, Russia DOES have a Rothschild bank (since 1990). The Soviet Union collapsed in Dec. 1991.

Putin (what a lovable, charismatic guy) came out of nowhere like a rock-star in the late 1990's. If you google his genealogy, you get nothing past his mother and father.......... unless, you jump over to the (Ras)putin genealogy. Who knows? Rasputin was the champion of the oppressed, including the Jews. There's nothing inherently wrong with any of this, but it changes the way I think about Russia's intentions in Syria.

ISIS creates fear of terrorists. The US media digs in with both hands and serves it to us! Fear's the main commodity of this war and our side plays it like a fiddle.

Absolutely true!

I totally get President Obama on the Syrian refugees issue. It's consistent with the rest of his foreign policy. What are these neocons and zionists crying about now? Do they care about Syrians or not? If he's going to bomb them (and is), as if he's supposed to care about what's happening to Syria, he's going to accept Syrian refugees into the US like he cares as well.

But the people who say "Oh yes, bomb them, bomb them!" combined with "Oh no, don't let them come over here!"? These people don't care about Syria. So why do they care about Syria?

I think the purpose of the Syrian, Libyan, Iraqi, etc. refugees is to destabilize Europe, to overwhelm their economies, and to destroy their individual nationalism (France, German, Italian, etc.) Destroying their economies will be fairly quick. Destroying their nationalism will take a few decades. Then it will truly be a European Union with one currency and one federal government.

I believe the refugees and migrants will have the same effect on the U.S.

Edited by robinrenee
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

I think only if they're terrorists, and only if they come here, and only if they attack us could they destabilize an economy the size of ours. The Syrian asylum seekers are the last people on Earth I will blame for this. The policyholders are why it's a security risk to take Syrian refugees, not the refugees. These inconsistencies and hypocrisies in policy positions on an issue expose the lies and liars alike. Their policy positions taken in combination with each other are admissions of guilt in and of themselves. If the refugees aren't ISIS terrorists there will never be enough of them to destabilize larger national economies. A million Syrians would be 1/300th of our nation's population. What is so particularly unstable about 0.33%-Syrian that the 99.67% non-Syrian gets destabilized? Terrorists who kill us are able to cause such instability and I don't believe it's humanly possible for our govts to vet the asylum seekers properly. But if they are to come here I'd like to help them, meet them, befriend them. They all deserve some friends in this country they can turn to. If they're already here we should, no we must, give trust a chance. Of course it'll be our fault when "nobody could have seen it coming" and one of them decides to take off their innocent mask and put on their suicide belt. We'll be getting interrogated by govt for what our relationships with these people were exactly, instead of us interrogating govt for letting them come here in the first place. We're the ones who are going to get kicked in the face for it whatever the unintended consequence may be.

Syrians should get relocated to countries who are not bombing them. But agreeing with such a sensible safeguard would make us look guilty and stupid. Our politicians don't want to be smart and look stupid, they're all into looking smart and causing problems to spend someone else's money on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
robinrenee

I think only if they're terrorists, and only if they come here, and only if they attack us could they destabilize an economy the size of ours. The Syrian asylum seekers are the last people on Earth I will blame for this. The policyholders are why it's a security risk to take Syrian refugees, not the refugees. These inconsistencies and hypocrisies in policy positions on an issue expose the lies and liars alike. Their policy positions taken in combination with each other are admissions of guilt in and of themselves. If the refugees aren't ISIS terrorists there will never be enough of them to destabilize larger national economies. A million Syrians would be 1/300th of our nation's population. What is so particularly unstable about 0.33%-Syrian that the 99.67% non-Syrian gets destabilized? Terrorists who kill us are able to cause such instability and I don't believe it's humanly possible for our govts to vet the asylum seekers properly. But if they are to come here I'd like to help them, meet them, befriend them. They all deserve some friends in this country they can turn to. If they're already here we should, no we must, give trust a chance. Of course it'll be our fault when "nobody could have seen it coming" and one of them decides to take off their innocent mask and put on their suicide belt. We'll be getting interrogated by govt for what our relationships with these people were exactly, instead of us interrogating govt for letting them come here in the first place. We're the ones who are going to get kicked in the face for it whatever the unintended consequence may be.

Syrians should get relocated to countries who are not bombing them. But agreeing with such a sensible safeguard would make us look guilty and stupid. Our politicians don't want to be smart and look stupid, they're all into looking smart and causing problems to spend someone else's money on.

I was referring to the Cloward-Piven Strategy of overwhelming a country's social net... medicare, medicaid, health care, education.... In the U.S. by an influx of refugees (Syrian) and migrants from Mexico... added to our economic problems.

https://en.wikipedia..."Piven_strategy

It's a stepping stone to communism that I think the NWO is promoting.

I am in favor of our accepting the refugees and the migrants. I'm a globalist. I already see porous borders, a North American Union, and "green" communism.

I'm just saying that I think "the owners" are using this to bring about the North American Union and the European Union.

Edited by robinrenee
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Well it would certainly be a step in that direction, Robin. Good points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.