I stay away from this immigration debate, however out of curiosity…
Some of the tweets claim their “tax dollars” (remember to ask for a balance sheet for proof) paying for this criminal to go to college, who achieved a valedictorian status, preparing to go to college (Yale), so that she can contribute to America’s health to become a neurosurgeon.
BUT—they don’t mind having their “tax dollars” pay for the incarceration of Bernie Madoff and the Boston Marathon’s “alleged” bomber. Not mentioning rapists, murderers, you know the whole shabang?
So let me get the word “criminal” clear:
The government creates criminals when they pass a law to outlaw certain actions or products. So if alcohol was illegal during prohibition and you consumed alcohol, you was a criminal. And if you smoked weed, you were a criminal.
So let me get most of Americans clear here…..
They’d rather pay taxes to lock Bernie Madoff and Boston “alleged” bomber up in federal prison in the name of “JUSTICE”…….
But refuse to pay, and be angry towards this young lady choosing to pursue a career in medicine and contribute—-I can’t even finish this….
So there’s your Prison Industrial Complex. THERE’S your future….
PAY FOR A SWINDLER FOR THREE MEALS A DAY
while….
VERBALLY PUNISHING THIS “CRIMINAL” FOR BEING THE TOP OF HER CLASS AND GOING TO COLLEGE.
Really America? Really?
TURN THAT FUCKING TV OFF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And for those tweets that called her a criminal, I’m curious if they saw and heard the entire speech first*
*I do want to make note that I wasn’t there, so this is allegations that I believe half what I hear and see. But let’s say it’s real. Congratulations.
Yes, we are ALL humans. That does NOT dismiss my questioning everything, which leads to this…
The other half I’m questioning is if she was planted by the government to insight heated debates (which cause division among the country), and invoke emotions towards immigration, rather in a positive or negative light. Is she a distraction?
I question EVERYTHING, and don’t leave NO stone un-turned.
Regardless of the “hidden” agendas, we would never know. However, what we CAN know is having unconditional love for ourself AND all humanity so that this profitable “immigration debate” no longer matters anymore.
OH, one last thing:
Did the alleged “founding fathers” (which were undocumented immigrants from Europe) ask for citizenship from the Native Americans? Wondering.
I guess you should’ve built that wall after all Pocahontas…
The welfare system, in theory, is supposed to be temporary and help people when they are down on their luck. But in practice, it has created an entire class of citizens who refuse to work and live off the work of others. In many minority communities, with the number of single-parent households skyrocketing, the state often takes the place of the father.
Watch (below) as Judge Judy takes a “lazy” guy to task for misspending money the government gave him for rent. Because his friend provided him housing, he pocketed the money. And in Barack Obama’s America, it’s clear he had a sense of entitlement to abuse that government program anyway he saw fit.
Judge Judy, as a taxpayer, is not pleased and explains to him where that money (allegedly) comes from(!) She explains the purpose of the program, and is so mad that she promises to send this clip to Congress.
Watch:
Original article credit: American Journal Review
Not blaming Judge Judy or anyone, but I’m afraid she (along with a lot of taxpayers) might be a little uninformed.
And I’m not defending this kid’s action either.
For the record, I’m not for or against welfare. And no, I don’t have to choose one or the other. I do not have an opinion based on others perception of anything. So I consider myself neutral. You’ll see why later on.
Being “productive in society” may mean something noble to you, but NOT for the powers in government. Not blaming them, but being “productive citizens” is also part of the game and the cog wheel. And Congress is loving it. Why wouldn’t they?
You’ll see why in a minute.
With that being said, let me share THE most SHOCKING news you’ll ever hear in your entire “taxpayer versus welfare recipient” life.
I wanted you to read the paragraphs above without my two cents. However, I did highlight some key words for a reason.
The word “suppose” is an assumption of an action that was designed for a particular purpose based on two or more agreements given to others. For example, tax dollars “supposed” to go towards a certain program but it’s not. Or, you “suppose” to go to work after finishing school, etc. Society put a condition on you that you’re “suppose” to do certain things based on what some politician or group told THEM about the particular action.
The phrase “refuse to work and live off the work of others” is very popular among those who don’t know the game the government’s playing on them. The “refuse to work” is coined because the masses see “work” as a job you go to instead of the inner work of understanding who you are (thyself) without the labels put on you by others in society. But the BIGGEST misconceptions is “live off the work of others” myth. Others work has nothing to do with those on welfare because those who work aren’t paying for welfare recipient at all. Shocked? You’ll see why in a minute.
If “lazy” is such a bad thing, why do most people like to relax in a “lazy” river? Hahaha just joking….on the serious note though, lazy is used as a weapon of words used by those who feel like they’re being financially and legally raped by the government, and throw their venom towards those who’s learning and using the system. You’ll see why in a minute.
The blame game again; it’s all “Obama’s fault” right? His plan was to put as many people on welfare and food stamps right?
The word “entitlement” is another favorite from the “taxpayer’s” venom. They claim that this kid is “abusing” the system by using funds “earmarked” for his rent on something else. And now get angry about it for a long time because they’re “forced” to pay something they don’t want to pay for.
The last part’s my favorite. The author of this article obviously took this news personally based on the exclamation mark, and what most been told without seeing physical evidence or an audit showing how their “taxes” are used. And being “mad” about it definitely keep the fingers pointing and the “divide & conquer” game going.
Believe it or not, this stigma between taxpayers and “welfare recipients” are so profitable because it keeps America divided.
Look at it like this; it’s not the class warfare mentality that’s dividing America, it’s the assumption of where the resources coming from and where it’s going to…that keeps it going.
The best way to understand this game in a kindergarten level is to let Sherry Jackson, former IRS agent explain it to you.
Video source courtesy of bootme21 via YouTube
How you digest this information is totally up to you, it’s neither right or wrong. However the thing that stuck out to me is the division this tax code has created. It’s causing this so-call “United” states to fight among each other for who owes what to whom over SPECULATIONS…….
That word “United” has a funny lingo to it doesn’t it?
OH, AND THE UNITED STATES IS NOT BROKE AND NEVER WAS. FAR FROM IT. THAT’S THE OTHER SECRET YOU MAY NOT KNOW ABOUT, OR ELSE THIS “WELFARE” DEBATE WOULDN’T EVEN EXIST IN THE FIRST PLACE……..
I’m not really going to say anything regarding this subject. I want you to watch this really closely, then come to your own free thinking independent conclusion.
Source courtesy of: Activist News Australia via YouTube
WHAT’S YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS? SHARE YOUR COMMENTS BELOW…
(WARNING: STRONG LANGUAGE AND CONTENT. VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED)
Let me ask; what’s a “Progressive?” What does that mean?
I grew up in a right-wing Republican Bible Belt environment that always blamed “liberals” for every ills of politics, the economy, etc.
Well I’m not sure if they knew how to read but I did, and I decided to find out what the word “liberal” meant (according to old Webster, and NetScape..at the time…late 90s). I was surprise to read that LIBERAL in Latin meant (to liberate; a political philosophy that promotes liberty).
If that’s what “liberal” means then what the heck is “conservative?”
So if that’s liberal (among most American English language), maybe its best we learn a lot of Latin so we understand what the fuck we really saying without looking stupid?
I say that because in my experience I grew up around conservative “warmongers” who was ready to blow up everything under the sun in this God-forsaken planet. Everything and everyone who weren’t “conservative Christians” was an enemy of God and had to be dealt with. Yes, I grew up around that. Oh, and the death penalty was God’s will.
Now that I got all of that off my chest, it brings us back to the title regarding “war crimes”.
Let’s read the article below to get a clear reason why Hillary is being accused of such atrocious act.
IT’S PRETTY LONG SO BARE WITH ME HERE…
However if you’re impatient as me and realize that most of this shit is pure propaganda, you can skip all the way down to avoid insulting your intelligence.
Hillary Clinton made headlines with a speech in San Diego casting Donald Trump as unfit for the presidency due to the damage his incendiary rhetoric could cause. Simultaneously, the former Secretary of State sought to convince the California audience that she was the safer choice in foreign policy matters.
But when taking a closer look at US foreign policy under her leadership as the nation’s top diplomat, it’s obvious that Clinton could potentially be as disastrous as Trump if given the position of Commander-in-Chief.
Here are a few examples of countries where conditions are tremendously worse as a result of Hillary Clinton’s policies.
Hillary Clinton made Libya a failed state
In an April interview with Fox News, President Barack Obama, reflecting on his 7 years as Commander-in-Chief, admitted that ousting Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi was the biggest mistake of his presidency. While Obama took responsibility for the failure of Libya in that interview, he relied on the input of Hillary Clinton, his Secretary of State at the time.
In March of 2011, Clinton met with Mahmoud Jibril, who was leading the opposition to Gaddafi. As the New York Times reported, Clinton asked Jibril a series of questions about how his coalition planned to fill the power vacuum that would be created by Gaddafi’s ouster. And in the end, it was Clinton who convinced the White House that deposing Gaddafi was the right thing to do:
Her conviction would be critical in persuading Mr. Obama to join allies in bombing Colonel Qaddafi’s forces. In fact, Mr. Obama’s defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, would later say that in a “51-49” decision, it was Mrs. Clinton’s support that put the ambivalent president over the line.
The 2011 NATO-led invasion of Libya that took place after Clinton’s visit has since allowed extremist groups to seize power in an unprecedented takeover of much of the country over the last five years.
In 2014, the US State Department shut down the US embassy in Libya and issued a travel warning urging all Americans to stay away from the country. Roughly one year ago, Libya’s central bank, the last remaining institution in the failed state, was forced to flee to a city in the Eastern region of the country due to rebel forces encroaching on the bank’s facility in Tripoli, the capital. Libya is now a haven for terrorists, with thousands of ISIS soldiers using the country as a staging ground.
In an interview on CBS, Clinton laughed about Gaddafi’s slaying, proudly exclaiming, “We came, we saw, he died.”
Hillary Clinton deserves credit for poverty and instability in Haiti
In Haiti, the first state ever founded by freed black slaves, citizens are still fighting for political and economic freedom today, largely due to the influence of Bill and Hillary Clinton.
In 2011, Wikileaks published US State Department cables from 2008 and 2009 confirming that State Department officials were meeting behind closed doors with Haitian business leaders, plotting on how to stop the Haitian government from implementing a 37-cent hike in the minimum wage from $0.24 an hour to $0.61 cents an hour.
While Haitian President René Préval was initially neutral on the proposal of raising the minimum wage, he went on the record opposing the wage hike after consistent efforts from within the US Embassy in Haiti and the Haitian business lobby by July of 2009. Politifact rated the claim that Clinton’s State Department tried to suppress the wage hike as half-true, since there’s no link proving that Clinton directly played a role.
However, Clinton’s influence on Haiti didn’t stop there. As US Uncut previously reported, the former Secretary of State took an active role in swinging Haitian’s presidential elections in favor of corporate special interests. In the first round of Haiti’s presidential elections, thousands of citizens took to the streets demanding an annulment of election results, alleging that then-Haitian president Michel Martelly committed election fraud.
Martelly, who succeeded René Préval, is a close confidant of the Clinton family. In 2011, Martelly appointed Bill Clinton to an advisory board whose stated goal was to court foreign investors.
And in one of Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails made public, Clinton’s chief of staff received an email from another staffer openly boasting about using connections within the Haitian business elite to lobby for the withdrawal of Jude Célestin, Martelly’s political rival, from an upcoming runoff election. The aide, Kenneth Merten, predicted the news of the US interfering in election results would create widespread protests, and said he had called Martelly, asking him to plead with Haitians “to not pillage.”
While Martelly is no longer in power, his hand-picked successor, Jovenel Moïse, won the most recent election. However, watchdogs are calling the results fraudulent and demanding a new election. Ricardo Seitenfus, who has served as representative of the Organization of American States (OAS) for the last eight years, admitted that Haiti’s government is essentially a puppet of US interests, saying the Haitian election schedule is “subject to the U.S. schedule.” Hillary Clinton deserves to be closely scrutinized when touting her diplomacy record, as Haiti’s political instability is a result of her policies.
Honduras’ downfall resulted from a coup Clinton supported
In 2009, shortly after Obama took office and appointed Hillary Clinton as his Secretary of State, Honduran president Manuel Zelaya was arrested at gunpoint by the military and forced onto a plane to Costa Rica while a new government took power. While the US State Department didn’t directly oust Zelaya, it refused to call his ouster a coup, despite calls from the U.S. ambassador to Honduras and from Congress to do so. In her interview with the New York Daily News editorial board, Clinton defended her decision to keep sending aid to Honduras despite the violent overthrow of Zelaya:
I think, in retrospect, we managed a very difficult situation, without bloodshed, without a civil war, that led to a new election. And I think that was better for the Honduran people. But we have a lot of work to do to try to help stabilize that and deal with corruption, deal with the violence and the gangs and so much else.
However, the result of the coup was a massive amount of bloodshed, as gangs and drug cartels began to take more power in the absence of a stable government. In the year following the coup, Clinton’s State Department published a list of human rights abuses prevalent in Honduras:
“…unlawful killings by police and government agents, which the government took some steps to prosecute; arbitrary and summary killings committed by vigilantes and former members of the security forces; harsh prison conditions; violence against detainees; corruption and impunity within the security forces; lengthy pretrial detention and failure to provide due process of law; politicization, corruption, and institutional weakness of the judiciary; corruption in the legislative and executive branches; government restrictions on the recognition of some civil society groups; violence and discrimination against women; child prostitution and abuse; trafficking in persons; discrimination against indigenous communities; violence and discrimination against persons based on sexual orientation; ineffective enforcement of labor laws; and child labor.”
The horrific conditions in Honduras triggered a mass exodus of migrants to the US. As Telesur reported, approximately 9,000 child refugees fled Honduras in 2015. Also in 2015, Clinton defended the deportation of children back to the Central American countries they’re fleeing in order “send a message.” However, Clinton has since walked back that statement as her Democratic presidential primary battle with Bernie Sanders became more competitive.
This March, the violence in Honduras became a subject of international scrutiny when 44-year-old environmental activist Berta Caceres was assassinated in her home. Caceres had been an outspoken opponent of a proposed hydroelectric plant on indigenous land, and had recently gotten in an altercation with soldiers, police, and employees of a private power company while protesting the project just weeks before she was killed.
Clinton is responsible for the fall of Iraq and Syria (and the rise of ISIS)
In late 2011, after months of sustained anti-government protests inspired by the “Arab Spring” movement, Hillary Clinton called for the resignation of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. Then, in April 2012, Clinton gave a speech in Turkey more forcefully calling specifically for regime change, saying, “Assad must go.” Those three words created the policies that led to both the rise of ISIS in Syria and the European refugee crisis of 2015.
One of Clinton’s last actions as Secretary of State was to call for the arming of Syrian rebels fighting Assad. As the London Telegraph reported, Clinton’s plan to give weapons to Assad’s enemies was backed by not only former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, but also by former CIA director David Petraeus and General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. While Obama initially rejected his Secretary of State’s plan, he eventually agreed to arm Syrian rebels in the goal of ousting Assad.
However, as ISIS began to get a foothold into Syria and Iraq, the “moderates” that received weapons from the US were eventually overtaken by ISIS fighters, who suddenly found themselves in the possession of military-grade weapons paid for with US tax dollars. In a study conducted by Conflict Armament Research, which tracks the movement of arms in war-torn regions, researchers found that ISIS has weapons and ammunition not just from the US, but also from coalition forces that are funded by the US government. The access to advanced weaponry was likely the reason for ISIS’ rapid expansion into Libya, Egypt, and elsewhere.
The consequences of destabilizing Syria and Iraq are apparent. Over one million refugees, largely from countries where the US intervened militarily, fled to Europe between 2015 and 2016, creating the world’s largest refugee crisis since World War II. In this chart compiled by Eurostat, the top three countries people are fleeing are Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq:
Yemeni blood is on Hillary Clinton’s hands
Saudi Arabia’s invasion of Yemen, which started in 2015 and continues today, was made possible with arms purchased by the US government. Since Obama’s presidency, the US has sold approximately $46 billion in arms to the Saudis, with many of those weapons sales greenlighted by Hillary Clinton’s State Department. As US Uncut reported in April, Clinton was particularly focused on making sure the US came through for Saudi Arabia in a 2011 weapons deal. David Sirota of the International Business Times reported that Clinton argued the arms deal was “in the national interest.”
At press conferences in Washington to announce the department’s approval, an assistant secretary of state, Andrew Shapiro, declared that the deal had been “a top priority” for Clinton personally. Shapiro, a longtime aide to Clinton since her Senate days, added that the “U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army have excellent relationships in Saudi Arabia.”
Saudi Arabia is very likely using the weapons acquired from that 2011 exchange to wage brutal bombing campaigns in Yemen. In March, Foreign Policy magazine accused the US and its allies of complicity in war crimes by funding and arming the Saudi regime:
Hundreds of civilians have been killed in airstrikes while asleep in their homes, when going about their daily activities, or in the very places where they had sought refuge from the conflict. The United States, Britain, and others, meanwhile, have continued to supply a steady stream of weaponry and logistical support to Saudi Arabia and its coalition.
This week, the United Nations added the Saudi-led coalition to a blacklist of states and armed groups that violate children’s human rights during conflicts, with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon personally slamming
Hillary Clinton is completely right that Donald Trump is woefully unprepared to take on the responsibilities of Commander-in-Chief. But voters should also be leery of Clinton, who, despite having met with more world leaders than any presidential candidate in US history, is responsible for some of the worst foreign policy blunders of the 21st century.
I mentioned before how it seems as though ISIS is the new boogeyman to watch out for. Then the masses wait for the next boogeyman to be scared of and ready to “shoot first and ask questions later”.
However, I’m going to play Hillary’s (and every political figure accused of war crimes) attorney here and ask who the REAL war crime offenders are.
According to the Constitution, and an alleged conversation Ben Franklin had with someone back in the days (“you have a republic, if you can keep it” -Ben Franklin), the American people are blessed with the power to elect certain people to lead their country (which have me questioning and wondering about this Electoral College gig).
So let’s say that the American people vote for the president to make them feel special and important. During my entire life of paying attention to politics, every election I’ve seen, a candidate that mentions blowing something, ANYTHING up was the one that end up being the nominee for that party. I mean, they have to sound all bad ass and “cowboy” like in order to get the votes, ‘we gon’ track em down, wanted dead or alive’ and the people–the PEOPLE–eat that shit up like a siesta festival! You mentioned the Constitution? Well…
Sorry Ron but War loving ‘Muricans voted Romney as their Republican nominee in 2012
But you throw out some WAR candy like a Mardi Gras confetti and…
You sell it Trump and Cruz! I need to beef up my Lockheed Martin dividend checks…
By the way, you can count on Trump to deliver on ‘blowing the shit out of em’ because it seems like “blowing up’ sounds better than ‘utterly destroy’. (Cruz dropped out)
War sales. And it continues to sell. You just need a salesman/woman to pitch it very good to the bloodthirsty crowd that knows that these countries aren’t human.
So who’s the warmonger? Oh it doesn’t just end with Republicans, with Democrats war is only barbaric, until they got their boy in the white house…
The thing is Obama didn’t lie. He’s as truthful as he can come across. No really! He’s only a reflection of most of his “followers” who already knows war and see it everyday, they just need a (D) at the end for it to be okay.
So you see Bush, it wasn’t because you was the “worst President”, you just didn’t have the (D) at the end. All you had to do was play with the alphabets a little bit, then invading Iraq and Afghanistan would’ve been okay with them too.
Now now. In the meantime give Laura Bush (D) the head’s up if you want a second run at it. 😉 CREDIT: giphy
Most of the American people NEED war because they’re at war with themselves–constantly. That’s as criminal to humanity as the accusations thrown towards Henry Kissinger. How criminal?
It’s criminal in the first degree to say “God bless America”, and fear God at the same time. That’s where the war’s at; putting love and fear in the same sentence–that’s why they’re at war, their soul is like ‘WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS?!’
Then with the fear of this make-believe God who will punish you into eternal damnation if you don’t “love him”, you’re promoting an abusive relationship AND blackmail…
Hmmm, how does that fit in foreign policy? No..no…no the American people aren’t going to have a policy staying neutral according to that stale document called the Constitution. They need their “leader” to do a…hmm, what did Romney (the 2012 presidential nominee) say about implementing a “regime change” that’s best for American interest?
Church: give your life to an invisible God and pay your tithe or face torment and go to hell.
American foreign policy: give your allegiance to the U.S. and we put our bases here or face an invasion and we tell the American people through our CIA-back propaganda media you’re an enemy because you’re Muslim.
Better pay your tithing Imam…
If the American people DON’T vote for the president, then who get them the votes during primaries?
All I know is this; Ron Paul and every candidate that mentioned ANYTHING regarding the Constitution was left out, while the war mongers got the vote.
If voting with your dollar count, then is it on the businesses that fund the war, or the customer that fund the businesses that creates the war?
Article source courtesy of: usuncut.com
WHAT’S YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS? SHARE IT ON THE COMMENTS BELOW
If this is true, congratulations Hillary and Bill Clinton for achieving wealth that MOST people wish they had. But you know, they need a target guys.
Congratulations to ALL wealthy and successful people in the United States, and all over the world.
With that being said; I’m definitely seeing class warfare at work here.
Regardless if it’s Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump or any political candidate, I’m trying to figure out what is it that their residence have ANYTHING to do with the campaign or election?
Not trying to play the gender card here, but I’m actually surprised I didn’t hear any of the girls congratulating Hillary for being a powerful woman that achieved success for herself in a male-dominated arena. It would’ve been better than hearing ‘she can’t relate to us’…
Who’s “us?” Better speak for ya’ self…
CREDIT: globalgrind.com
The ONLY thing anyone knows about ANY candidate is what the corporate controlled CIA-backed propaganda mainstream media WANTS YOU TO KNOW. Nothing more.
Not defending either of them, but regardless of how ANYBODY feel about Hillary or Bill, most likely don’t know any of them personally, and probably never met them. And regardless of HOW the Clintons made their money, how certain people feel about them won’t stop them from banking it today, or forever more.
Next, this sounds like pure allegations. I didn’t hear anyone ask for proof, or evidence Hillary own any of those homes (not that it matters by the way). However, what disturbed me was the reaction after the “revealing” of the homes. They suddenly changed their minds with a flick of a switch–ALL BECAUSE she has multiple homes.
OMG they’re changing their vote because of a few extra million dollar cribs!!!!!
Don’t worry about it. It’s not like their vote ACTUALLY COUNT, totally forgot about that Super-delegate move…
CREDIT: knowyourmeme.com
Rather this video was scripted or candid, it also got me wondering if being successful (regardless of profession) has become a negative stigma in America? Did you hear what they said? ‘It seems like she can’t relate to everyday Americans‘……
Really? Well, now I’m wondering what’s an everyday American? I mean I would assume Bill Gates is an everyday American, so is Abigail Johnson (Fidelity Investments). Is being an “everyday American” have some kind of INCOME CAP or something? Is there some kind of bad taste regarding wealth in America these days?
The bottom line? Everybody want the wealth, but hate on the ones who have it. Go figure.
No wonder the wealthy keep to themselves.
WHAT’S YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS? SHARE IT ON THE COMMENTS BELOW…
thediary461 