Again, as I said earlier, it's speculation, but it's hard for me to believe that Jerusalem in particular would be an "Open City" as it is today, were it not for the Nation of Israel.
Strange isn't it, that Christian churches have been there for millennia and pilgrims were allowed to visit the Holy City since the 3/4th centuries, until the Crusades and after, no doubt Keith you totally agree that the original state that was Israel in 1948 has expanded by at least 85% by them invading and occupying Palestinian land and in effect "ethnic cleansing" in the most horrific murderous ways, but then again, no doubt jews make up a large number of your clientele. On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 7:06 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > [email protected] > <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email#!forum/politicalforum/topics> > Google > Groups > <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email/#!overview> > <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email/#!overview> > Topic digest > View all topics > <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email#!forum/politicalforum/topics> > > - Disarming America <#m_2620929623644363974_group_thread_0> - 1 Update > - Gay Porn Kingpin: 'Islam Vomits ... > <#m_2620929623644363974_group_thread_1> - 2 Updates > - [grendelreport] Trump's Unanswerable Questions About Immigration > <#m_2620929623644363974_group_thread_2> - 14 Updates > - The First One <#m_2620929623644363974_group_thread_3> - 1 Update > - the Humorous Hypocrisy of Conservatives > <#m_2620929623644363974_group_thread_4> - 1 Update > - Democrats’ War on Due Process and Terrorist Fearmongering Long > Predate Orlando <#m_2620929623644363974_group_thread_5> - 1 Update > - [No Subject] <#m_2620929623644363974_group_thread_6> - 3 Updates > - Clinton Gets Trump To Finally Snap: In A Fit Of Rage, He Admits He’s > Little More Than A Con Artist <#m_2620929623644363974_group_thread_7> > - 2 Updates > > Disarming America > <http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/t/e8efc08658019a8b?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > Travis <[email protected]>: Jun 22 07:59AM -0500 > > > http://netrightdaily.com/2016/06/cartoon-disarming-america/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NetrightDaily+%28NetRight+Daily%29 > Back to top <#m_2620929623644363974_digest_top> > Gay Porn Kingpin: 'Islam Vomits ... > <http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/t/303f8e51c6711b39?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > [email protected]: Jun 22 04:47AM -0400 > > Personally I find his movies boring. But he is a name in the gay rights > movement. > > > It's nice to hear people waking up and speaking out. > > > > > > EXCLUSIVE – Gay Porn Kingpin: ‘Islam Vomits on Gays, Women’ > > > > ( > http://api.addthis.com/oexchange/0.8/forward/facebook/offer?url=http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2016/06/19/gay-porn-kingpin-islam-vomits-gays > -women/&pubid=ra-536db77a775cf072&text=EXCLUSIVE+–+Gay+Porn+Kingpin:+‘ > Islam+Vomits+on+Gays,+Women’) > > _4_ > ( > http://api.addthis.com/oexchange/0.8/forward/google_plusone_share/offer?url=http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2016/06/19/gay-porn-kingpin-islam-vo > mits-gays-women/&pubid=ra-536db77a775cf072&text=EXCLUSIVE+– > +Gay+Porn+Kingpin:+‘Islam+Vomits+on+Gays,+Women’) > > ( > http://api.addthis.com/oexchange/0.8/forward/twitter/offer?url=http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2016/06/19/gay-porn-kingpin-islam-vomits-gays-women/ > &pubid=ra-536db77a775cf072&text=EXCLUSIVE+–+Gay+Porn+Kingpin:+‘ > Islam+Vomits+on+Gays,+Women’&shortener=bitly) > > > > MichaelLucas.com > > by _AARON KLEIN_ (http://www.breitbart.com/author/aaron-klein/) 19 Jun > 2016_487_ > ( > http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2016/06/19/gay-porn-kingpin-islam-vomits-gays-women/#disqus_thread) > > > > > SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER > > > > * > > > > > > > The Democratic Party and liberal media are targeting U.S. gays with a “ > brainwashing campaign,” deliberately removing the issue of radical Islam > from > the conversation, Michael Lucas, a gay pornographic film actor and > director, charged in a radio interview. > Lucas is founder and CEO of Lucas Entertainment, New York’s largest gay > adult film company and one of the biggest gay porn production companies in > the world. > Lucas said, “Islam hates women, it vomits on women, it vomits on gays, on > anything that is different.” Asked to clarify his remarks, Lucas said that > “radical Islam kills gays. Islam vomits on them.” > The porn star stated that liberal opinion makers from President Obama on > down are skewing the national conversation following the Orlando terrorist > massacre to focus on gun control and the shooter’s own _reported_ > ( > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3642784/If-gay-definitely-type-Former-classmat > > e-reveals-Orlando-shooter-came-drag-queen-says-club-regular-shooter-s-father > -insists-isn-t-homosexual.html) gay background “and completely take the > conversation about radical Islam off the table.” > This campaign, Lucas stated, is “feeding them (gays) this liberal > propaganda so that God forbid they will not change their political > affiliation. So > that historically they will remain voting for (the) Democratic Party.” > Lucas made the comments in an interview set to run in full on this reporter > ’s Sunday night talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio,” > broadcast on New York’s AM 970 The Answer and Philadelphia’s NewsTalk 990 > AM. > Listen to the audio of the interview below: > Lucas told me he found it “interesting and frustrating to see how the > liberal media is rallying gays to keep them at the liberal base and God > forbid > to change their thinking to move it away from the party line, which is > that > all the religions are bad and Islam has its homophobes just like > Christianity … and Judaism.” > Continued Lucas: > > You know, it is all so very, very frustrating to me the double standard. > If this would be done by a Christian or by a Jew it would immediately be > called (a) Christian extremist attack by a Christian extremist or by a > Jewish > extremist. > Yet when it comes to Islam, it cannot be called this way. Because it was > done by a Muslim in the name of Islam. It is right away the conversation > is > about the internal struggle of this man who is gay and who had this > internal struggle and that is why and that is the reason. > Or just because he was a loner and had mental issues and that’s why he was > beating up his wife and because it had to do with gun control because he > could go and buy guns. And that all might be true. But Muslim extremism is > at the root of all of that. > Lucas further charged that Obama has failed to spotlight mainstream Islam’ > s treatment of gays. He said he believes homophobia is part of Islam and > that the religion “vomits on women, it vomits on gays, on anything that is > different.” > It’s not that Obama does not care about murderers of gay people. It is > that Obama himself, as the liberal that he is, he doesn’t understand that > homophobia is a part of Islam. Just like Islam hates women, it vomits on > women, it vomits on gays, on anything that is different. And this is > something > that Obama either does not understand or does not want to understand. > Liberals are always looking at Muslims as underdogs. Even now that we see… > in this particular incident, we see that Muslims are aggressors and > murderers. Radical Islam is a murderer of gay men and women. Yet again, > the > president doesn’t want to see it. Not only he doesn’t want to see it this > way. > He doesn’t want anyone to see it this way. That is the problem. > Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative > reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular > weekend talk radio program, “_Aaron Klein Investigative Radio_ > (https://www.connectpal.com/aaronklein) .” Follow him on _Twitter > @AaronKleinShow._ > (https://twitter.com/AaronKleinShow) Follow him on _Facebook._ > (https://www.facebook.com/aaronkleinshow) > http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2016/06/19/gay-porn-kingpin-islam-vomits > - > gays-women/ > > > > -- > -- > Thanks for participating in the Google Group, Historical Pictorial, which > is the premiere men's forum on the web; focusing on historical media, and > discussions of contemporary issues as well as our chronicled past! > > For options and help, please visit the group at: > http://groups.google.com/group/Historical-Pictoral > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Historical Pictorial" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]_ > (mailto:[email protected]) . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > > -- > -- > Thanks for participating in the Google Group, Historical Pictorial, which > is the premiere men's forum on the web; focusing on historical media, and > discussions of contemporary issues as well as our chronicled past! > > For options and help, please visit the group at: > http://groups.google.com/group/Historical-Pictoral > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Historical Pictorial" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]_ > (mailto:[email protected]) . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > Bruce Majors <[email protected]>: Jun 22 04:55AM -0400 > > So your screen name really is "Hot for Asian Top"? > > On Wednesday, June 22, 2016, Hot4azintop via PoliticalForum < > Back to top <#m_2620929623644363974_digest_top> > [grendelreport] Trump's Unanswerable Questions About Immigration > <http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/t/8d4729cd1fe64c9?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > plainolamerican <[email protected]>: Jun 21 01:06PM -0700 > > That’s how they think. Diversity is our strength! > < > https://www.google.com/search?q=Diversity+is+our+strength!+site:www.vdare.com&gws_rd=ssl> > That’s > the state ideology; it’s the air we breathe. > < > http://www.vdare.com/posts/is-this-the-most-2016ish-thing-of-2016-mateen-didnt-want-to-look-racist > > > > It’s also a big fat lie. > > --- > > http://educate-yourself.org/cn/israelcastesystem13dec13.shtml > > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 10:01:31 AM UTC-5, Travis wrote: > Brian Bednarek <[email protected]>: Jun 21 05:52PM -0400 > > We all know Israel is an apartheid state that has violated dozens of UN > resolutions ... I think we ALL agree on that!!! > > I personally don't buy the shit that they are our ally, but others do ... > would they ever go back to '68 borders??? > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 4:06 PM, plainolamerican < > [email protected]> > wrote: > > > -- > brine > http://brineb.blogspot.com/ > Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>: Jun 21 05:57PM -0400 > > Hey Brine! > > Can you try to imagine what the region would be like today, in particular > Jerusalem, "IF" Israel was not in existence? > > Brian Bednarek <[email protected]>: Jun 21 06:00PM -0400 > > Probably similar to the way it was for 700 years ... people just living > there and not killing each other as they have been since the 1948 land > grab!!! > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 5:57 PM, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > -- > brine > http://brineb.blogspot.com/ > Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>: Jun 21 06:04PM -0400 > > Off course we're both speculating.....I tend to believe that it would be > much like Syria, and other regions where ISIL/IS/ISIS currently occupies. > No Jews allowed; No Christians allowed; no historical remnants of Jews > or Christians allowed..... > > Of course, we do all know that each and every Islamic State and theocracy > is currently just a downright paradise with folks flocking to get in and > for admittance! Meanwhile, Israel is just a flat out Hell Hole1 > > Brian Bednarek <[email protected]>: Jun 21 06:33PM -0400 > > It was VERY different before 1948 and all the western interference in the > area!!! > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > -- > brine > http://brineb.blogspot.com/ > Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>: Jun 21 08:03PM -0400 > > Hey Brine! > > Agreed. > > Again, as I said earlier, it's speculation, but it's hard for me to believe > that Jerusalem in particular would be an "Open City" as it is today, were > it not for the Nation of Israel. > > > > geoffrey theist <[email protected]>: Jun 21 07:46PM -0500 > > The state of Israel regardless of your feelings toward it has been the > catalyst of this awakening of the jihadist. And their survival hinges on > the policy of apartheid Brian wrote about. But that's history. It can't be > changed. But we do have to deal with our Islamic problem. Trump is a > business man he sees the problem and cuts to the chase and offers > a workable solution. It comes down to willingness to proceed. Yes these > questions have answers but not easy ones. > Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>: Jun 21 09:19PM -0400 > > I'm no big fan of Israel, but to suggest that Israel is the cause of > "Jihadism" is utter bull hockey Geoffrey! > > No one need be an expert to know and understand the concept of the Islamic > Ideology! Islam's roots originated with a supernatural experience in a > cave that left a young Mohammad with the belief that the archangel Gabriel > had summoned him to be God's messenger on Earth. Shortly thereafter, > demonstrating that the whole concept of Islam is in and of itself born in > violence; Gabriel allegedly try to choke Mohammad to death and later so > did Mohammad's tribe, the "Quraysh". > > According to Aiesha, Mohammad's nine year old bride, Mohammad's whole > purpose was a fight to survive. Mohammad called this principle "Jihad"; > the First Jihad, "*Jihad al Akbar*", was the struggle to perfect oneself; > the struggle to be a better Muslim under Sharia in the eyes of Allah; and > I opine more importantly according to Mohammad, was the lesser jihad, > "*Jihad > al Asghar*"; the struggle to defeat infidels, non-believers and opponents > who threaten the faith. > > There are many within the Islamic "Community" (I surmise the majority of > Muslims); who wish to see a theocratic governing body presided over by a > supreme religious authority (*e.g*.; a Sunni Grand Mufti; and/or a Shia > Ayatollah); and his council of religious leaders. This Grand > Mufti/Ayatollah will not only set the moral agenda for the > "Nation/State/Caliphate"; but under Sharia, determine what actions of the > "State/Caliphate" are/were approved by Mohammad. Today there are those in > Islam; who want to win back the world they once owned and create a New > Caliphate; *e.g.*; *Dar-al-Islam*. Absent powerful armies, as in the days > of yore, they will in fact resort to terror; the warfare of the stateless. > > Anything less than this and you're kidding yourself...... > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 8:46 PM, geoffrey theist <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>: Jun 21 09:36PM -0400 > > As a side note, ya'll do know and realize that NO ONE wants the > Palestinians? The Jordanians have booted them; the Egyptians have tossed > them out; Lebanon: "NO WAY"! The Royal House of Saud laughs in their > faces! > > It's also bull hockey that there were no Palestinians before 1948; which a > number of Israelis seem to prevaricately focus upon and float hundreds of > thousands of Facebook posts, e-mails and Tweets each and every time they > get ready to reduce the Palestinian region or do a land grab. > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>: Jun 21 10:27PM -0400 > > (And Geoffrey! I surely hope I didn't offend ya! I like these > discussions! With most everyone in this group!) > > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 9:36 PM, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> > wrote: > > geoffrey theist <[email protected]>: Jun 21 09:56PM -0500 > > No not at all if we all sang the same tune we'd be a choir I will say that > in recent history that western policy in the middle east, > the formation of the Jewish state being one of them has been a big > contributing factor to the radicalization of Islam. We had a workable > policy in the region in that we didn't allow any one country to be the most > powerful and the Bush administration royally screwed that up > Taking out saddam hussein who by being a better gangster than a Muslim kept > the fundamentalist in line. > Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>: Jun 21 11:00PM -0400 > > We agree here. > > At one point, I supported the invasion of Iraq.....I genuinely believed > that there were weapons off mass destruction. > > Obviously it was a mistake; and a severe one. > > > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 10:56 PM, geoffrey theist <[email protected]> > wrote: > > geoffrey theist <[email protected]>: Jun 21 10:13PM -0500 > > The best face that I could put on that was to establish another base of > operations in the region so as not to have to rely on our always dubious > Saudi allies. To secure our source of oil since China and Russia could > drive there. I find it hard think that they thought the Iraqis would be > waving American flags cheering us on like the French as we entered Paris > after ww2. How do you occupy a country with a troop density of 1 or 2 per > square mile? > Back to top <#m_2620929623644363974_digest_top> > The First One > <http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/t/860e902d868298d9?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > Bruce Majors <[email protected]>: Jun 21 09:41PM -0400 > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Donald J. Trump <[email protected]> > Date: Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 10:41 AM > Subject: The First One > To: [email protected] > > > > > With your help we can set a HISTORIC RECORD. I'll match you $1 for $1. > [image: Donald J Trump] > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117kliQzw91pBiGTZH8eLtn9V> > > Bruce, > > This is the first fundraising email I have ever sent on behalf of my > campaign. That's right. *The FIRST ONE*. > > And, I'm going to help make it the most successful introductory fundraising > email in modern political history by *personally matching every dollar that > comes in WITHIN THE NEXT 48 HOURS, up to $2 million!* > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117kpibUWSmUzhr5RgwAurZfw> > > Bruce, this means any donation you make between $1 and $2,700 (the maximum > allowable contribution) will be matched, dollar-for-dollar. > > Help make history by giving one of the amounts below: > > *$10 DONATION [$20 WITH MATCH] > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117kxgSBOl3UveVtApjhWpdqI>* > > > *$20 DONATION [$40 WITH MATCH] > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117kBgdXf4pptdFFrYHDFnPwj>* > > > *$25 DONATION [$50 WITH MATCH] > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117kFfziFNKUrcpRjy5ZomrBU>* > > > *$50 DONATION [$100 WITH MATCH] > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117kJeUE6x6ppba3b7ul7l3Hv>* > > > *$100 DONATION [$200 WITH MATCH] > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117kNefZxgrUn9Uf2GSGQjFN6>* > > > *ANOTHER AMOUNT TO MATCH > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117kRdBkXZNpl8EqUgh2zihSH>* > > > *Even without this match, this initial effort would have been the most > successful first fundraising email in history*. I am certain of this. But > let me tell you why I decided to match your donations. > > The Democrats are desperate, and they're throwing everything they have at > me. They just keep failing and losing. > > *Now they've sent out a very nasty email attacking me, all to raise a > measly $250,000*. They even promise that a group of "all-star Democrats" > will match every dollar raised. > > They will say and do anything to elect Hillary Clinton, but I am standing > in the way. > > *I'm fighting back against Crooked Hillary and her pathetic cronies, as > well as the dishonest liberal media, and I need your help* > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117kVcWGoJ8Uj7oCLPFoigTYi>. > > We can't let her back into the White House *ever* again. > > The bottom line – Crooked Hillary has been a DISASTER for our country, and > we must win against her this fall, Bruce. > > *Let's make history again, and keep winning, by making this the most > successful first fundraising email ever*. > > *Double your impact by donating today* > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117kZci1Psuph68ODp3K1fw3T>. > > Let's show the liberals, the professional pundits, and the Washington > establishment that this campaign IS NOT ABOUT ME. It's a movement of > hardworking, patriotic people who want to *MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN*. > > Best Wishes, > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117l3bDngbPUf4T0uYs5Ke89u> > Donald J. Trump > Candidate for President of the United States > > P.S. Help me make my first ever fundraising email the most successful > fundraising email ever sent in the history of modern politics. *Remember, I > will PERSONALLY match your donation, but we must receive it WITHIN THE NEXT > 48 HOURS*. > > *Please stand with me today* > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117l7aYIGVbpd3DcmxQrtcKf5>. > *DONATE NOW <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117lf9FpynSp917A5GD8V9Yqh>* > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > TEXT *TRUMP* TO *88022* TO GET EXCLUSIVE UPDATES > ***By participating, you consent to receiving automated text messages from > the campaign. Standard messaging rates apply.*** > Click Here <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117lj90KZ7dU6ZRLXg1uE8AvS> To > Stand With Donald Trump and > MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! > If you would like to purchase official campaign gear, click here. > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117ln8m6pQzp4YBXOPpQn7cBt> > <#m_3769703518874688281_soc_tw> <#m_3769703518874688281_soc_fb> > <#m_3769703518874688281_soc_ig> <#m_3769703518874688281_soc_yt> > www.DonaldJTrump.com > <http://mail.donaldjtrump.com/c/117lr7HrQzUU2Xm9GoOc65OH4> > 725 5th Avenue New York, NY 10022 > Paid for by Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. > > > > This email was sent > Back to top <#m_2620929623644363974_digest_top> > the Humorous Hypocrisy of Conservatives > <http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/t/a3d6598f5868a0c?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > MJ <[email protected]>: Jun 21 07:53PM -0400 > > June 21, 2016 > > THE HUMOROUS HYPOCRISY OF CONSERVATIVES > > by Jacob G. Hornberger > > Peter Wehner, who works at a conservative organization called the Ethics > and Public Policy Center and who worked in the last three Republican > administrations, recently had an op-ed entitled “ The Indelible Stain of > Donald Trump” in the New York Times, a piece that would cause any > libertarian to bust a gut in laughter. That's not to say that Wehner meant > his piece to be funny. It just turned out that way given the longtime > inability of Wehner and other conservatives and Republicans to recognize > their own faults and foibles. > > The point of Wehner's op-ed was to skewer Donald Trump by suggesting that > he isn't a genuine conservative or Republican but instead an aberration an > outlier “a malicious, malignant figure on the American political landscape.” > > What makes Wehner's piece so humorous is his inability to recognize that > Trump is the absolutely perfect embodiment of conservativism and the modern > Republican Party. Like other conservatives and Republicans, Wehner is > living the life of the lie and the life that denies reality. He's got this > sweet, pure concept of conservatism and the Republican Party in his head > that doesn't comport with reality in the least. > > Consider what he writes: “Modern conservatism has three elements: a > commitment to limited government and economic liberty that enables > prosperity; moral traditionalism that conserves our capacity for liberty by > producing responsible citizens; and a belief that America, confidently and > carefully engaged in international affairs, can be a force for good in the > world.” > > He then goes on to point out that “Trump rejects all three. He has shown > no real desire to limit the size, cost, or reach of the federal government. > He has no interest in economic liberty as it has been understood since Adam > Smith. He wants an economy in which trade and immigration are tightly > restricted and the government makes mercantilist deals on behalf of > domestic producers.” > > Consider the welfare state. Don't most conservatives and Republicans > express an unwavering allegiance to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, > public schooling, education grants, farm subsidies, and most other > welfare-state programs? Don't they embrace these socialist programs as > fervently as people on the left? I will guarantee you: You'll never see > Wehner or any other conservative or Republican calling for the immediate > repeal of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, farm subsidies, education > grants, and certainly not the income tax that funds them all. > > Yet, how can the welfare state be reconciled with principles of “limited > government and economic liberty that enables prosperity”? It can't be. > > Indeed, how can the federal income tax and the IRS be reconciled with > Wehner's mantra? The IRS has unlimited powers to seize people's property > without first having to go to court. Our American ancestors, who genuinely > believed in free enterprise and limited government, lived without a federal > income tax and an IRS for more than 100 years. But you certainly won't > calling for that way of life. They are too wedded to the progressive income > tax, which, by the way, was a plank in the Communist Manifesto. > > What about the national-security state, commonly known as the warfare > state, or what President Eisenhower called the military-industrial complex? > That old Cold War-era totalitarian apparatus that was grafted onto our > federal governmental system after WWII is what passes for “limited > government” in Wehner's quaint conservative mind. > > Thanks largely to conservatives and Republicans, the national-security > state now wields the omnipotent power to round up Americans and put them > into concentration camps indefinitely, torture them, and even assassinate > them. > > That's what passes for “limited government” in Wehner's mind. > > And what about that other phrase that Wehner employs: “confidently and > carefully engaged in international affairs … a force for good in the world.” > > Is he kidding? Oh for sure, the “confidently” fits the US > national-security state's foreign policy. Some might even call it arrogant. > But “carefully”? Come on! Were the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan done > “carefully.” How about the invasion of Vietnam? The intervention in Korea? > Is waging war without the constitutionally required congressional > declaration of war considered “careful” in Wehman's conservative, > Republican mind? How about the assassination attempts on Castro and other > foreign leaders? The regime change operations against Chile, Guatemala, > Iran, Cuba, Indonesia, and other countries? Were all those imperial > military bases around the world selected and constructed “carefully.” > > And a “force for good”? Don't make me laugh. The national-security state > has killed, tortured, and maimed countless people in its foreign incursions > and foreign wars. Iraq and Afghanistan are only the most recent examples. > It's those interventions and the death and destruction that have come with > them that have given rise to civil wars raging across the Middle East and > Afghanistan, the massive refugee crisis across Europe, the creation of > ISIS, and the constant threat of terrorist blowback against Americans. All > that has then been used as the excuse for suspending our rights and > freedoms here at home, including the Patriot Act, felony privacy violations > by the telecom industry, and the NSA's massive, secret, totalitarian-like > surveillance schemes. > > What's good about any of that? > > Of course, I'm sure that Wehner would, like any good progressive, say, > “Jacob, please judge us conservatives and Republicans by our good > intentions, not by the actual consequences of the statist programs that we > endorse and embrace.” But good intentions mean nothing. All that matters is > the death, destruction, and loss of liberty and privacy that have > accompanied conservative and Republican programs. > > Oh, and let's not forget the drug war, a federal program that goes to the > heart of the conservative/Republican “free enterprise” paradigm. I'd love > to see how Wehner reconciles that evil, immoral, and destructive government > program with his understanding of economic liberty and limited government. > > If the conservative-Republican paradigm produces responsible citizens, > then how come so many Americans must still be jailed for ingesting the > wrong substances? How come Americans must be forced to be good and caring > through Social Security and other welfare-state programs? > > While he's at it, maybe Wehner could explain how the conservative and > Republican support of the decades-long war on immigrants, and the police > state that immigration controls have brought to the American Southwest, can > possibly be reconciled with the principles of economic liberty and limited > government. > > Or about the decades-old system of economic embargoes and sanctions that > are imposed on foreign regimes, which entail the criminal prosecution of > Americans for doing what they want with their own money? How is that > reconciled with Wehner's understanding of economic liberty? > > The fact is that conservatives threw in the towel of freedom and free > markets decades ago, when becoming “respectable” and “credible” became > important to them than devotion to principle. Since then, they have > embraced the welfare-warfare state way of life as arduously as the most > committed progressive. All that they have left is their mantras, to which > they continue to hue religiously, as Wehner demonstrates. > > Donald Trump takes ad hoc positions on the various issues of the day, has > no sense of principle, mouths empty mantras, and tacks left, middle, and > right depending on how the political winds are blowing. Humorously, what > Wehner can't bring himself to see is that that is precisely what makes > Trump a model conservative and a model Republican. > > http://fff.org/2016/06/21/humorous-hypocrisy-conservatives-republicans/ > Back to top <#m_2620929623644363974_digest_top> > Democrats’ War on Due Process and Terrorist Fearmongering Long Predate > Orlando > <http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/t/6f4e634f644e7f87?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > MJ <[email protected]>: Jun 21 07:37PM -0400 > > June 21 2016 > > Democrats' War on Due Process and Terrorist Fearmongering Long Predate > Orlando > > Glenn Greenwald > > Before the bodies were removed from the Pulse nightclub in Orlando last > week, Democrats began eagerly exploiting that atrocity to demand a new, > secret “terrorist watchlist”: something that was once the domestic > centerpiece of the Bush/Cheney war-on-terror mentality. Led by their > propaganda outlet, Center for American Progress (CAP), Democrats now want > to empower the Justice Department without any judicial adjudication to > unilaterally bar citizens who have not been charged with (let alone > convicted of) any crime from purchasing guns. > > Worse than the measure itself is the rancid rhetoric they are using. To > justify this new list, Democrats, in unison, are actually arguing that the > US government must constrain people whom they are now calling “potential > terrorists.” Just spend a moment pondering how creepy and Orwellian that > phrase is in the context of government designations. > > [] > > What is a “potential terrorist”? Isn't everyone that? And who wants the US > government empowered to unilaterally restrict what citizens can do based on > predictions or guesses about what they might become or do in the future? > Does anyone have any doubt that this will fall disproportionately on > certain groups and types of people? > > The Democrats' most extreme attack on due process comes, unsurprisingly, > from that party's supremely authoritarian Terror Warrior, Sen. Dianne > Feinstein, whose bill would “give the attorney general the discretion to > block a sale to a given individual suspected of involvement of some kind in > terrorism.” In their effort to exploit Orlando and other recent mass > shootings, Feinstein and the Democrats encountered a serious problem: > Neither Omar Mateen, nor the racist Charleston killer Dylann Roof, nor > numerous other mass shooters, were on any terrorist watchlist (Mateen was > investigated by the FBI, which rightly closed its file on him in 2014 after > it found no evidence of wrongdoing). So Feinstein wrote a special provision > in her bill to obviate this objection, one empowering the attorney general > to put anyone on the banned list “who has been investigated in the last > five years for 'conduct related to a Federal crime of terrorism'” even if > they were ultimately found to have done nothing wrong. > > After Feinstein's bill was rejected last night on a largely party-line > vote by the Senate, the Democrats unleashed a fearmongering messaging > campaign so exploitative and deceitful that it would have made Karl Rove > blush with embarrassment, or at least seethe with envy. > > [] > > So now, in the lexicon of the leading liberal lights of the Democratic > Party, someone deemed by the US government to be suspicious placed in > secret on a list, with no evidence presented and no court process is the > equivalent of “ISIS.” And to demand due process be accorded says this > Harvard Law Professor is to arm ISIS. > > To see how deep down the authoritarian hole Democrats reside, consider > this 1987 New York Times editorial raging against Reagan Attorney General > Ed Meese for arguing that criminal suspects don't deserve Miranda warnings. > Meese's rationale: “You don't have many suspects who are innocent of crime. > That's contradictory. If a person is innocent of a crime, then he is not a > suspect.” Said the NYT editors in response: “In other words, guilty until > proven guilty.” That's exactly what Elizabeth Warren and Chris Murphy > believe: If the US government views you as suspicious, that is proof of > your guilt. Thus, a “suspect” is the same as “ISIS.” > > Even worse was the messaging that came from an operative with CAP, who has > become a little Twitter star among the Democratic faithful for his endless > Cheneyite exploitation of terrorism fears to attack Republicans and justify > gun watchlists. This is how he described Feinstein's bill: > > [] > > It's hard to put into words how appalling that is. This CAP official is > not only outright lying about Feinstein's bill: pretending that it bars > “terrorists” rather than people placed on a suspicion watchlist from buying > guns. Worse than rank dishonesty, he is literally, explicitly equating > people who will be deemed suspicious by the US government overwhelmingly > Muslim, needless to say with “terrorists.” As Sam Adler-Bell put it about > this tweet, “Referring to all people on the DOJ's watchlist as 'terrorists' > is legally incorrect and ethically ugly.” In Volsky's mind, or at least in > his propaganda, anyone deemed by the government to be suspicious is now a > “terrorist” no evidence needed, no trial held, no due process accorded. > > For eight years, this mentality was the driving force behind the worst > Bush/Cheney war-on-terror abuses. No matter what the extremist policy was > indefinite detention, warrantless eavesdropping, torture, no-fly lists, > Guantánamo, rendition, CIA black sites Republicans would justify it by > saying it was merely being done to “terrorists” and would accuse their due > process-advocating critics of wanting to “protect terrorists.” What they > actually meant was that all of this was being done to people accused by the > US government of involvement in terrorism. But in their mind, “government > accusations of terrorism” were synonymous with “proof of guilt.” > > That is exactly the warped, Orwellian formulation Democrats embrace: As is > extremely obvious, the Democrats' definition of “terrorist” is “anyone whom > the US government suspects of being a terrorist.” Just as was true of all > those GOP abuses, what makes these Democratic proposals so dangerous is > that they constitute a war on the most basic right of due process. As Vox's > Dara Lind explained, “If you give the government more power to ban > terrorists from having guns, you're reinforcing the power it has to define > who counts as a terrorist.” That's why the ACLU yesterday wrote to the > Senate and denounced Feinstein's bill: > > [] > > [] > > It's tempting for some Democratic faithful to believe that their party > leaders do not really believe in this blatant attack on due process, but > instead are just doing this as a political tactic, a form of trolling to > place Republicans in an uncomfortable position on gun control. Though > believing that might make Democrats feel better, it is pure fantasy, > utterly unsustainable by looking at the naked reality of the Democratic > Party. > > That theory might have some viability if Democrats had spent the last > eight years fighting against the Bush/Cheney no-fly list and other forms of > due process-free “terrorism” punishments. But the opposite is true: They > have aggressively defended and expanded those policies. As The Intercept's > Jeremy Scahill and Ryan Devereaux reported in 2014 after they obtained (and > published) the US government's 166-page secret watchlist guidelines, “The > Obama administration has quietly approved a substantial expansion of the > terrorist watchlist system” ushering in massive increases in both the > number of people on those lists and the ease of placing them on it. > > [] > > It's not just that there are huge numbers of people on the watchlist who > have done nothing wrong. It's much worse than that: People who are > acquitted of the charges against them can and do remain on the watchlist if > the FBI wants them to. As an ACLU report this year documented: > > [] > > So it's not that the Democrats have tried but were thwarted by the Big, > Bad Republicans to get rid of secret watchlists, and are now using that > against the GOP as some sort of genius rhetorical move. Just like George > Bush and Dick Cheney did, Democrats love secret, due process-free terror > watchlists. They have aggressively expanded their usage overwhelmingly > against American Muslims and are now seeking to create a whole new list for > an entirely different purpose. They're doing this because they believe in > it, and because they do not believe in due process. > > But none of this should be surprising. This is who the Democratic Party > is. They have proven over and over that they believe that the definition of > “terrorist” is “someone whom the US government suggests, in secret, might > be a terrorist.” > > Thus they have cheered all sorts of attacks on due process in the name of > fearmongering over terrorism. Obama presided over a significant increase in > mass surveillance. He has gone around the world, in at least seven > predominantly Muslim countries, killing people with bombs and missiles shot > by drones, then justifying it on the ground that the people he wanted to > kill were terrorists. Democrats even stood and cheered as the Obama > administration asserted (and exercised) the right to target US citizens for > execution via drone, based on nothing more than suspicion and government > accusations; they even went to court to deny a father the right to have his > American son have his day in court before being killed by the US government. > > [It should go without saying that Republicans here are no better. They > watched approvingly for years as Bush and Cheney implemented this due > process-free system of watchlists and secret punishments for terror > suspects because it was predominantly affecting Muslims, and only began > caring this year when their system (predictably) expanded, now to include > gun rights. As I discussed last night with the ACLU's Hina Shamsi: > > [] > > Indeed, this is the 2003 document that created these secret, due > process-free watchlists that Democrats have embraced and are now seeking to > expand: > > [] > > Moreover, for years, fearmongering about terrorism and accusing due > process-advocating liberals of loving al Qaeda were staples of the GOP's > rhetoric. And GOP leaders still have not lost their touch when it comes to > exploiting terror fears; just this week, Mitch McConnell plans to introduce > a bill to expand secret, warrantless domestic surveillance by invoking > Orlando.] > > The Fifth Amendment's guarantee of “due process” is really not that > complicated: It provides that “no person shall be … deprived of life, > liberty, or property, without due process of law.” This is not some > ancillary luxury; it's one of the few genuine safeguards against tyranny. > If you want to ban someone from buying a gun because you believe they're a > Terrorist or otherwise a Bad Person, then go create a procedure where the > government must go to an actual court, present evidence, the accused can > respond, and then a judicial ruling is issued. What kind of a person > opposes that? > > > https://theintercept.com/2016/06/21/democrats-war-on-due-process-and-terrorist-fear-mongering-long-pre-dates-orlando/ > Back to top <#m_2620929623644363974_digest_top> > [No Subject] > <http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/t/d0b5f047ff91644c?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>: Jun 21 05:53PM -0400 > > For most thinking Americans, you've already seen this. I post this only > for the Secular Progressive crowd who still don't have a clue: > > Obviously there are a few interpretations possible for what this data > < > http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/chart-of-the-day-people-on-presidential-campaign-payrolls-by-month/ > > > signifies. > However, two of the more obvious points would be: > > - Two of the three candidates represented have never held executive > management responsibility in the private sector where they needed to worry > about labor efficiency. > - Two of the three candidates have never needed to make a payroll, or be > personally accountable for the financial viability of their endeavors. > Their only budget familiarity is spending other peoples money. > > > https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/06/20/comparative-presidential-campaigns-efficiency-and-effectiveness/ > ===== > The Last Refuge <https://theconservativetreehouse.com/> > Rag Tag Bunch of Conservative Misfits – Contact Info: > [email protected] > <https://theconservativetreehouse.com/> > Skip to content > < > https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/06/20/comparative-presidential-campaigns-efficiency-and-effectiveness/#content > > > > - Home <https://theconservativetreehouse.com/> > - About Us <https://theconservativetreehouse.com/about/> > - E-Mail Guidelines > <https://theconservativetreehouse.com/e-mail-request-guidelines/> > - Guidelines For Comments > <https://theconservativetreehouse.com/guidelines-for-comments/> > > ← June 20th – 2016 Presidential Election – Open Discussion > < > https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/06/20/june-20th-2016-presidential-election-open-discussion/ > > > Incredible Manipulation – Obama Administration Replaces “Allah” with “God” > On Released Orlando Terrorist Transcripts… → > < > https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/06/20/incredible-manipulation-obama-administration-replaces-allah-with-god-on-released-orlando-terrorist-transcripts/ > > > Comparative Presidential Campaigns – Efficiency and Effectiveness… > < > https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/06/20/comparative-presidential-campaigns-efficiency-and-effectiveness/ > > > Posted on June 20, 2016 > < > https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/06/20/comparative-presidential-campaigns-efficiency-and-effectiveness/ > > > by sundance <https://theconservativetreehouse.com/author/sundancecracker/> > > [image: 3 candidate bernie hillary trump 3] > > Listed below is a comparative graph, > < > http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/chart-of-the-day-people-on-presidential-campaign-payrolls-by-month/ > > > (from > FEC records), showing the number of people on the campaign payrolls of: > Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump over the past thirteen > months: > > [image: payrolls] > > Obviously there are a few interpretations possible for what this data > < > http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/chart-of-the-day-people-on-presidential-campaign-payrolls-by-month/ > > > signifies. > However, two of the more obvious points would be: > > - Two of the three candidates represented have never held executive > management responsibility in the private sector where they needed to worry > about labor efficiency. > - Two of the three candidates have never needed to make a payroll, or be > personally accountable for the financial viability of their endeavors. > Their only budget familiarity is spending other peoples money. > > It is not too challenging to identify which two candidates would be > unfamiliar with labor costs, budgeting and efficiency. In addition which > candidate do you think would be more apt to focus on the elimination of > bloated bureaucratic government, and waste? > > [image: trump lion] > Brian Bednarek <[email protected]>: Jun 21 05:58PM -0400 > > Is trump now a third party using the symbol of Britain??? > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > -- > brine > http://brineb.blogspot.com/ > Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>: Jun 21 06:05PM -0400 > > No.....I am not sure that's even official.....I've seen it for months, and > I don't think it's related to his campaign, but as stated, I don't know for > sure. > > Back to top <#m_2620929623644363974_digest_top> > Clinton Gets Trump To Finally Snap: In A Fit Of Rage, He Admits He’s > Little More Than A Con Artist > <http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/t/808272468e09a622?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > Brian Bednarek <[email protected]>: Jun 21 05:45PM -0400 > > I saw a clip of Hillary saying the bit about all his books ending with > Chapter 11, the staff writer who came up with that should get a bonus!!! > It's gonna be a dirty, messy few months until November!!! > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:21 PM, plainolamerican < > [email protected]> > wrote: > > > -- > brine > http://brineb.blogspot.com/ > Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>: Jun 21 06:01PM -0400 > > I really don't think that there's much to worry about......I saw Hil > Clinton's speech, and most of fit was untruthful....Blatantly lying, (Which > as we know, just based on the group Political Forum; is a tendency and > habit that all Secular Progressives seem to share!) > > The truth is that with the exception of one of the corporate bankruptcies, > EVERYONE came out smelling like a rose....There was no "loss" as Hil > Clinton tried to portray; and Trump (in one of the Protections) was the > only one who did lose actual money and capital. > > Watching the speech, it didn't seem as though the crowd was buying it. No > one was at all moved or supportive! > > > > Back to top <#m_2620929623644363974_digest_top> > You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this > group. You can change your settings on the group membership page > <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email#!forum/politicalforum/join> > . > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an > email to [email protected]. > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
