-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
The 2020 Presidential Election
- Thread starter Zeez
- Start date
- Status
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
At the time, I figured Hillary would get us into ww3 and quite quickly and that Trump would also get us into ww3, but not right away. Then in August 2018, I found out about this narrative that Trump is taking down, what I called at the time the 'New World Order.'
Situational awarness tells me that Trump is either going to save us or destroy us. I was 18yo when 9/11 happened. I have been very pessimistic toward what I viewed to be a rather short future. The idea that Trump is here to help is the only hope for the future I've experienced in my adult life. I am going to continue to hang on to hope because if Trump doesn't permanently erradicate and prosecute the 'deepstate' as I now call it, I believe we will have no hope. Hillary said herself that on day one, of her presidency, she would set up a no fly zone over Syria. That would have almost certainly been a huge problem and actually costed her a lot of votes.
Russia said they would violate any US no fly zones in Syria. A no fly zone means Russian planes would be shot down. The US had no international legal right to be in Syria.
Trump never heard of him either and got stumped by the reporter asking hard questions (stump the dummy).
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
My understanding was that Iran is a part of the financial money laundering sceme that helps support ISIS. Iran, like the US was playing both sides in the war. But, yes, Obama and his admin were supporting ISIS and the white helmets (ISIS).
remember the 'white helmets' ? and the media production of false reality for the masses ?
who owns/controls the media ?
Then it is only logical that any American who ever ordered anything resulting in civilian deaths should expect a drone strike on them. Its only fair.
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
I wonder if this guy is a dual citizen of US and Israel. If so, I could see that being a HUGE national security concern. He is, after all, one of the few people who is in charge of intelligence community oversight.
https://youtu.be/6OYyXv2l4-I
https://youtu.be/6OYyXv2l4-I
When he wakes up.
Secret tunnel between Mar a Lago and Moscow going home.
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
In case you missed it...
https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
Focussing on the positive: at least the majority of Americans are finally against war. Under Bush there was a lot of support for war. Under Obama, it was just 'groovy times' and nobody cared or payed attention to any of the wars. I guess people hate POTUS so much, that now they are worried about the consequences of war. To be fair, most on here are anti-war and I think that's great. But, sometimes to end a twenty year war, you have to take out key targets and that is bound to make people upset. But, this is war people. It is serious stuff and gets quite nasty. Also, in war there are covert operations that are not publicly disclosed. Good ones and bad ones. Not everything is perfectly clear or even easily proven. What is certain is that we are all connected to the war and each other. Let's hope for peace and for a bright future.
Absolem
Active member
Do you read the article links you post?
https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/
As editor of The Nation, my purpose in publishing Patrick Lawrence’s article was to make more widely known the VIPS critique of the January ICA assertions, the questions VIPS raised, and their counter-thesis that the disseminated DNC e-mails resulted from a leak, not a hack. Those questions remain vital.
Subsequently, Nation editors themselves raised questions about the editorial process that preceded the publication of the article. The article was indeed fact-checked to ensure that Patrick Lawrence, a regular Nation contributor, accurately reported the VIPS analysis and conclusions, which he did. As part of the editing process, however, we should have made certain that several of the article’s conclusions were presented as possibilities, not as certainties. And given the technical complexity of the material, we would have benefited from bringing on an independent expert to conduct a rigorous review of the VIPS technical claims.
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
Certainly, I read that. What's your point? I don't think anyone has credibly disputed the issues pointed out in the article.
As a matter of logic, it is supported. For one thing, the US intel community and news media rutinely made false statements that Russian collusion was absolute fact. But, with Putin denying responsibility, logic dictates that it can't be proven so easily. The issue is that the US could have assets in russia acting as 'russians' in order to frame Russia and POTUS. It seems that this is in fact what happened. Also, Julien Assange has been vocal about Russia not being his source and implying that Seth Rich was the source. Guccifer was a false story. Generally, these are considered national security issues that normally would be classified. The very fact that it was all suddenly presented to the public tells me that the whole thing was an operation to target the mind of the american public. The goal, to frame Potus and Russia. Created for public consumption.
- Status
