I totally agree with what you said!!!!Carol Kelly!!! Kim could turn the table on the U.S. and use South Korea against us, regardless of how much we had South Korea's back. I call it brainwashing on Kim's part.We lost many lives of our Troops in that bloodshed.

Regardless!!!! of the fact!! it's still not right.

7 Forces Driving America Toward Civil War
John Hawkins
John Hawkins
|
Posted: Apr 29, 2018 7:40 AM
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent the views of Townhall.com.
7 Forces Driving America Toward Civil War
Trending

Walter E. Williams
Educational Fraud Continues
Ben Shapiro
Who Controls Your Kids' Lives?
Marina Medvin
Bernie Sanders Taunts Us With New Threats of Economic S***ery

I was interviewed by a mainstream media reporter yesterday. I thought he wanted to talk tech issues, but we actually spent almost the entire conversation discussing the feeling that many conservatives have that America has gone off the tracks and is headed toward dissolution or alternately, a civil war one day. Obviously, this would be a terrible thing and ironically, twenty years ago, it would have been laughable. Today, the joke isn’t so funny because we are a deeply unhealthy society with a dysfunctional government and for all our money, success and storied history, we seem to be on an increasingly dangerous trajectory.

1) A Post-Constitutional Era: Liberals don’t believe in the Constitution. Typically they deny this, but that’s exactly what a “living” Constitution means. You make it up as you go along. The Founders foresaw the instability and danger that would be created by this approach, which is why they wanted us to be a constitutional republic, not a democracy. Unfortunately, America has in many ways already become a post-constitutional democracy and we’re one liberal judge away from abandoning the Constitution altogether. Once we get to that point, America just becomes the representation of that old saying, “Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner.” Of course people are not lambs and when large numbers of them believe they aren’t being treated fairly, they do have the option of getting away from the wolves.
CARTOONS | Steve Kelley
View Cartoon

2) Tribalism: The “you only have to listen to people you already agree with” nature of social media has dramatically ramped up the level of tribalism in the United States. The Right has gotten much more tribal since Donald Trump rose to prominence and the Left has taken tribalism into hyper-drive. Increasingly, liberals treat a range of opinion between Elizabeth Warren and Hillary Clinton as legitimate while everyone else is viewed as a w***e s*********t N**i primitive that must be driven down into the gutter for society to move forward. This makes any sort of dialogue or cooperation nearly impossible. When every issue is a zero sum war where one tribe must win or lose, a lot of people quite understandably ask, “What do we gain by staying allied to this other tribe?”

3) Federal Government Too Powerful: Federalism is a safety valve on the American pressure cooker. As long as people in San Francisco can, for the most part, live the way they want to live while the people in rural North Carolina can, for the most part, live the way they want to live, it’s much easier for everyone to get along. When people are unnecessarily forced to live under rules they find abhorrent because the federal government has become an octopus that has inserted its tentacles into every minute crevice of American life, it creates discontent on a wide scale. If most Americans wanted to live like people in San Francisco, they’d live in San Francisco.

4) Moral Decline: As Samuel Adams once noted, “A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely o*******w the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.”

A large number of Americans HAVE LOST their principles, manners and virtue and it shows through from the sort of politicians they elect, to their rudeness online, to the sort of shallow hedonism and fame whoring they find appealing. Americans are increasingly becoming a soft and decadent people which is problematic because the challenges may change, but we can be certain that Americans will face future challenges every bit as difficult as the ones past generations had to tackle. This is frightening because if you look at the “principles, manners and virtue” of Americans today, they don’t seem capable of dealing with monumental events like the War of 1812, the Civil War, the Depression or World War II. Most people in their twenties probably couldn’t tell you why all those events were such challenges in the first place. When America faces a challenge bigger than we can handle because of ineffective politicians and our “amusing ourselves to death” population, there are no guarantees our republic will survive.

5) The Debt: America is a freight train heading toward a cliff, but because we’re not moving toward the edge at lightning speed, no one seems all that concerned. However, the fact of the matter is that a reckoning is coming. At some point, probably within the next decade or two, we will face a debt-driven economic collapse; borrowed money will stop flowing into the United States and Medicare/Social Security as we know it will fall apart because we will not have the money to pay it. If and when we get to that point, all bets are off because if regions of the country see an advantage to splitting off from the United States at that point, they will do it.

6) Lack Of A Shared Culture: There has never been a time when American culture was more fragmented than it is today. By that, I mean that there are legions of people with millions of fans or followers on the Internet that the vast majority of Americans have never heard of in their lives. We don’t have that shared love of anybody or for that matter, anything. Conservatives and liberals disagree on economics (capitalist/socialist), religion (friendly to Christianity/hostile to Christianity), the Constitution (support/believe in a living Constitution i.e. no Constitution), etc., on and on. The average conservative and the average liberal disagree on 95% of the issues and in the few limited cases where they do look at things the same, they won’t support a proposal by the other out of sheer tribalism. Over the long haul, there has be something more to hold a country together than, “We wear Nikes, like pop music and play golf.”

7) Gun Grabbing: Liberals have fallen in love with the idea of ignoring the 2nd Amendment and confiscating all firearms. The logistics of doing this in a nation with hundreds of millions of guns (many of which are off the books) when many police departments and tens of millions of Americans would not cooperate is seldom discussed. Another thing that seldom seems brought up is that large numbers of conservatives would see this as a prelude to the government’s use of force against the citizenry. When it is discussed on the Left, there seems to be an assumption that lone resisters might get into firefights with dozens of police or soldiers, as opposed to ganging up with other formerly law-abiding Americans to waylay gun confiscators, politicians and anti-gun activists at THEIR HOMES in guerrilla actions that would be silently applauded and supported by hundreds of millions of Americans concerned about their freedom. Confiscating guns is a dangerous and stupid idea that could in and of itself end our republic if a serious attempt were ever made to implement it.

http://www.townhall.com




This is totally insane what our Country is facing and nothing is being done to cure it. Not from either Party!!!!!. Us folks are being caught in the middle and it seems there isn't Doodle, we can say or do. What do y'all feel about this insanity going on in our Country?

From Starbucks to Waffle House: American Society Devalues Black Lives

A police car sits in front of a Waffle House restaurant in Nashville, Tenn., on Sunday. Four people died after a gunman opened fire at the restaurant that day. (Mark Humphrey / AP)

Every now and then seemingly disconnected incidents occur around the nation that, taken together, coalesce into a clear social pattern. Events of the past couple of weeks paint a deeply disturbing picture of the perils of being black in America, beginning with the now-infamous police arrest of two African-American men at a Philadelphia Starbucks and ending with two horrific incidents at separate branches of the Waffle House chain, one of them deadly. When people question the label adopted by the Black L***s M****r movement, countering, ‘Don’t all l***s m****r?’, they are seemingly blind to patterns of anti-black r****m all around us.

The most violent of the series of recent events was the mass shooting at a Waffle House in Antioch, Tenn., last Sunday that claimed the lives of four young people of color. Clearly Black Lives did not Matter to Travis Reinking, the suspected shooter, most of whose victims from the April 22 incident were black. Reinking, like so many other white men suspected of causing horrific violence, managed to be captured alive and unhurt. In contrast to the care police showed this alleged mass murderer, law enforcement officers far too often demonstrate that Black Lives don’t Matter when they shoot black men in the back simply for carrying a cell phone, as was done to Stephon Clark in Sacramento, Calif., or when they fire a hail of bullets at a black man in a parked car, as was done on April 5 to Diante Yarber in a Walmart parking lot in Barstow, Calif.

Reinking roamed free for more than a day before he was found by police, who took him to a hospital before booking him at the police station on charges of massacring four people. Contrast that description with how police treated Yarber after they shot him: Yarber’s autopsy revealed that he “died from choking on his own blood as police delayed getting him medical help,” making clear just how little his Life Mattered compared to Reinking’s.

After Reinking was charged, the judge in his case showed a familiar disregard for the Black (and one Latino) Lives lost at the Antioch Waffle House when the suspect was initially booked on a $2 million bond—which meant he could have paid a portion of that bond and walked free. The judge in the case only revoked the bond following a public outcry.

Had the Waffle House shooting suspect been Muslim or black or both, we would likely have seen the word “terrorism” bandied about from the very start in both major media outlets and on President Trump’s Twitter feed. From Trump’s refusal to address the incident and considering how little speculation has occurred in the media questioning the motives of this white anti-government perpetrator in his targeting of black and brown folk, we can only conclude that there are racial double standards permeating our society, making necessary the assertion that Black Lives need to Matter.

Reinking would have slaughtered many more people had he not been stopped by James Shaw Jr., an African-American. Were Shaw an armed white man who used his gun to stop Reinking, there might have been no end to the political hay that Trump and the National Rifle Association would have made of the scenario. Instead, there has been a deafening silence from the outspoken president on Shaw, whose life-risking actions contradict the NRA’s favorite fantasy scenario of a “good guy with a gun.” But none of this should surprise us, as neither Trump nor the NRA have demonstrated any real respect for Black Lives.

The other Waffle House incident, which took place in the neighboring state of Alabama on the same day as the Antioch shooting, offered up yet more evidence of anti-black r****m with the incredibly disturbing arrest of Chikesia Clemons by multiple male police officers late at night. As with the Starbucks episode, after Clemons complained about being charged extra for plastic utensils, she was deemed so dangerous by the establishment’s staff that the police were called. In the videotape of the incident, Clemons was seated, composed and clearly unarmed when an officer sat down next to her. Within seconds three male officers were tackling her to the ground, threatening to break her arm, exposing her breasts in a manner tantamount to sexual assault and even, at one point, choking her.

It is a scene so disturbing that it could come out of Jim Crow’s segregationist America. It is hard to imagine police officers ever treating an unarmed white woman with such savagery. And yet the police department in question has determined that its officers did no wrong and confirmed our collective suspicion that to them Clemons’ Life simply did not Matter.

The same weekend as the two Waffle House incidents, five black women playing golf in Pennsylvania found themselves at the receiving end of a situation similar to the Starbucks arrests. The women were golfing at a course in a mostly white town in York County when the club’s white owner, together with some white patrons, decided the women were not playing fast enough and called the police. Perhaps because it was broad daylight, or because there were five of them, none of the women was physically assaulted. But the black women got the message: Their Lives don’t Matter.

White America has been calling the cops on Black America for as long as there have been cops—and for as long as there has been a White America. American police are more than capable of becoming powerful and explosive weapons wielded against anyone considered too unruly, too uppity or simply too black. W***e A******ns need to understand that when they call 9-1-1 on a b***k A******n, they may have just summoned that person’s judge, jury and executioner. They need to understand that police will not treat b***k A******ns with the same courtesy that they treat white mass murderers.

B***k A******ns understand only too well that when they are massacred, there is great reluctance to address the r****t motives of their murderers, whether police or vigilantes. Worse, there is little done to prevent such future crimes. The events of the past week have proved what we’ve all known all along—that in America, Black Lives still don’t Matter.

http://www.t***hdig.com



This is a Sin and a Shame!!!!We have criminals of every Race and background. Why should one race be the target of h**e and destruction? I look at it this way,'We all Piss Yellow, Poop!!! Brown, and Bleed Red.I am not a R****t or H**eful Woman by any means. Now Folks what do y'all feel in regards to what's happening?

Kim Prepared to Cede Nuclear Weapons if U.S. Pledges Not to Invade

By CHOE SANG-HUNAPRIL 29, 2018
Continue reading the main story


Photo
President Moon Jae-in of South Korea, right, toasting on Friday with Kim Jong-un, the leader of North Korea, center, and Mr. Kim’s wife, Ri Sol-ju, in the border village of Panmunjom. Credit Pool photo by Korea Summit Press

SEOUL, South Korea — Keeping diplomatic developments coming at a head-snapping pace, the South Korean government said on Sunday that North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, had told President Moon Jae-in that he would abandon his nuclear weapons if the United States agreed to formally end the Korean War and promise not to invade his country.

In a confidence-building gesture ahead of a proposed summit meeting with President Trump, a suddenly loquacious and conciliatory Mr. Kim also said he would invite experts and journalists from South Korea and the United States to watch the shutdown next month of his country’s only known underground nuclear test site.

In Washington, Trump officials spoke cautiously about the chances of reaching a deal and laid out a plan for the rapid dismantling of the North’s nuclear program, perhaps over a two-year period.

That would be accompanied by a “full, complete, total disclosure of everything related to their nuclear program with a full international verification,” said John R. Bolton, Mr. Trump’s new national security adviser.

The apparent concessions from the youthful leader were widely welcomed as perhaps the most promising signs yet of ending a standoff on the Korean Peninsula frozen in place since fighting in the Korean War ended 65 years ago.
Continue reading the main story
Related Coverage

‘We No Longer Need’ Nuclear or Missile Tests, North Korean Leader Says APRIL 20, 2018
North Korea to Move 30 Minutes Backward to Create Its Own Time Zone AUG. 7, 2015
North and South Korea Set Bold Goals: A Final Peace and No Nuclear Arms APRIL 27, 2018

But skeptics warned that North Korea previously made similar pledges of denuclearization on numerous occasions, with little or no intention of abiding by them. Mr. Kim’s friendly gestures, they said, could turn out to be nothing more than empty promises aimed at lifting sanctions on his isolated country.

A South Korean government spokesman, Yoon Young-chan, provided remarkable details of a summit meeting the two Korean heads of state held on Friday, when Mr. Kim made history by becoming the first North Korean leader to set foot in the South.

“I know the Americans are inherently disposed against us, but when they talk with us, they will see that I am not the kind of person who would shoot nuclear weapons to the south, over the Pacific or at the United States,” Mr. Kim told Mr. Moon, according to Mr. Yoon’s account.

It was another in a series of startling statements by Mr. Kim, whose country threatened to do exactly those things during the height of nuclear tensions last year.

Mr. Kim’s apparent willingness to negotiate away his nuclear arsenal was revealed just as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo spoke for the first time about a “good conversation” he had with Mr. Kim during his secret visit to Pyongyang, the North Korean capital, over Easter weekend.

Mr. Pompeo told ABC News in a broadcast on Sunday that the Trump administration’s objective was “complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization” with North Korea, and that Mr. Kim was prepared to “lay out a map that would help us achieve” denuclearization.

“We had an extensive conversation on the hardest issues that face our two countries,” Mr. Pompeo said. “I had a clear mission statement from President Trump. When I left, Kim Jong-un understood the mission exactly as I described it today.”

But Mr. Bolton, a longtime critic of past diplomacy with North Korea, expressed skepticism on Sunday, recalling past moments that looked hopeful. Those would include a commitment by Pyongyang in the 1990s to give up its nuclear program and the destruction of a nuclear power cooling tower in 2008 as part of a similar promise.

“We want to see real commitment,” he said on “Face the Nation” on CBS. “We don’t want to see propaganda from North Korea. We’ve seen words. We’ve seen words so far.”

Asked about North Korea’s insistence on a promise by the United States not to invade, Mr. Bolton noted that was an old demand that had been rolled out on other occasions. “We’ve heard this before,” he said. “The North Korean propaganda playbook is an infinitely rich resource.”

Mr. Trump sees the potential for a historic deal with Mr. Kim, “a breakthrough nobody would have imagined a few months ago,” Mr. Bolton told Fox News on Sunday, but his administration is not “starry eyed about what may happen here.”

“I think it is going to happen; the dates and the places are still under discussion,” he said. “I think the president is eager to do it as soon as possible.”

On Friday, Mr. Kim and Mr. Moon signed a joint declaration recognizing “a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula” and “complete denuclearization” as a common goal of the two Koreas. But during the summit events, some of which were broadcast live around the world, Mr. Kim never publicly renounced his nuclear weapons.
Newsletter Sign Up
Continue reading the main story
The Interpreter Newsletter

Understand the world with sharp insight and commentary on the major news stories of the week.
You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.

See Sample Privacy Policy Opt out or contact us anytime

Even in the additional details released on Sunday by South Korean officials, Mr. Kim appeared to hedge his bets, indicating that denuclearizing his country could be a long process that required multiple rounds of negotiations and steps to build trust. But he laid out a vague idea of what his impoverished country would demand in return for giving up its nuclear weapons.

”If we meet often and build trust with the United States, and if an end to the war and nonaggression are promised, why would we live in difficulty with nuclear weapons?” Mr. Kim was quoted as saying by South Korean officials.

Mr. Moon briefed Mr. Trump on the meeting during a call on Saturday, telling him that Mr. Kim had said that he and Mr. Trump could “get along well,” to which Mr. Trump responded that he “looked forward” to their meeting.

On Sunday, Mr. Moon also spoke with the Japanese prime minister, Shinzo Abe, to relay Mr. Kim’s willingness to open dialogue with Tokyo, which is threatened by the North’s nuclear weapons and missile development.

The peacemaking comments stand in stark contrast to previous remarks and actions by Mr. Kim, who drove the Peninsula close to the brink of war last year by undertaking a series of missile and nuclear tests.

He suddenly switched to diplomatic overtures this year, extending an offer to meet Mr. Trump, which, surprisingly, was accepted. A week ago, Mr. Kim announced an end to all nuclear and long-range missile tests and the closing of the nuclear test site in mountainous Punggye-ri, in northeast North Korea.

In the meeting on Friday, Mr. Kim and Mr. Moon also agreed to start talks this year with Washington to negotiate a peace treaty to formally end the 1950-53 Korean War, one of the key security guarantees that the North has long demanded.

But North Korea has so far offered no timeline for dismantling its nuclear weapons and facilities. Nor has it clarified how it defines a “nuclear-free Korean Peninsula,” and especially whether that means a withdrawal or significant reconfiguration of American troops based in South Korea, as it has demanded before.

Even before Mr. Moon met with Mr. Kim, South Korean officials said any joint statement was bound to be vague on the terms of denuclearization because Mr. Kim would try to settle critical issues directly with Washington.

If Mr. Kim intends to win a peace treaty, diplomatic recognition and billions of dollars in economic aid from Washington and its allies, as South Korean officials hope he does, trading away his nuclear arsenal is his biggest bargaining chip. He cannot reveal his hand too soon, South Korean officials said.

Skeptics fear that Mr. Kim does not really intend to give up his nuclear weapons and is merely trying to soften his image, escape sanctions and make it more difficult for Mr. Trump to continue to threaten military action. But South Korean officials argue that Mr. Kim is sincere in trading his nuclear weapons for a promise to end hostilities and get Washington’s help to improve his country’s economy.

North Korea’s promise to invite outsiders to Punggye-ri reflected “Mr. Kim’s determination to actively and pre-emptively deal with the process of verifying denuclearization,” Mr. Yoon said.

In another conciliatory gesture toward South Korea, Mr. Kim made his own pledge of nonaggression toward the South.

“I am determined not to repeat the painful history of the Korean War. As the same nation living on the same land, we should never shed blood again,” he told Mr. Moon, according to Mr. Yoon.

Mr. Kim even vowed to readjust his country’s clock to match the time zone in South Korea, which with the rest of the region run 30 minutes ahead of the North’s.

“When I was sitting in the waiting room, I saw two clocks on the wall, one of the Seoul time and the other of the Pyongyang time, and I felt bad about it,” Mr. Kim was quoted as telling Mr. Moon. “Why don’t we reunify our clocks first?”

http://www.thenewyorktimesasiapacific.com


Kim better hold his promise!!! to make Peace, or it will be their Funeral (North Korea) and the U.S. will destroy them 100%.. We lost a lot of our troops in North Korea . President Trump needs to keep his eyes open, and be prepared. What do y'all think?

Trump: 'We Are Sealing Up Our Southern Border'
Image: Trump: 'We Are Sealing Up Our Southern Border'
This Sunday, April 2, 2017, file photo made with a drone, shows the U.S. Mexico border fence as it cuts through the two downtowns of Nogales. (AP Photo/Brian Skoloff, File)

By Wanda Carruthers | Friday, 20 April 2018 03:00 PM



President Donald Trump on Saturday tweeted the U.S. was "sealing up our Southern Border," maintaining it was for the safety and security of Americans.

"We are sealing up our Southern Border. The people of our great country want Safety and Security. The Dems have been a disaster on this very important issue!"

Democrats have largely opposed limits to immigration, but lawmakers failed to work with Republicans when Congress sought to address changes to i*********n l*w as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program was being debated in Congress earlier this year. Trump called for an end to the program in September and gave Congress six months to find a solution.

After reports surfaced a week ago that a caravan of over a thousand migrants from Central America was marching through Mexico aiming to cross into the U.S. illegally, Trump announced he was deploying the National Guard to assist in protecting the southern border.

Republican governors of Arizona, New Mexico and Texas backed the deployment, but a spokesperson for Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval, a Republican, said he opposed sending the National Guard to the border for that purpose.

Friday Attorney General Jeff Sessions in a memo to federal prosecutors along the southwest border announced the Justice Department was enacting a "zero tolerance" policy regarding immigrants illegally crossing into the U.S. from Mexico.

Defense Secretary James Mattis Friday night approved using Defense Department funds to pay for as many as 4,000 National Guard personnel to perform border security missions.

A Pentagon memo said National Guard personnel will not perform law enforcement functions or "interact with migrants or other persons detained by" the Department of Homeland Security without Mattis' approval. It said, "arming will be limited to circumstances that might require self-defense," but it did not further define that.

http://www.newsmax.com



I will believe it when i see it, and not until then!!! What do y'all think? Seeing it is believing it.

YUP!!!! I AGREE!!!! with You!!!! BigMike.

I tend to feel the same way as you do woodguru, as long as our Laws and Constitution is not ignored and trampled over.

You sure got that Right!!!!! Moonbats!!!

How Much Longer Can the U.S. Remain a Superpower?

People wave as a U.S. f**g flies on the dashboard of a "mine resistant ambush protected" (MRAP) vehicle heading to Kuwait in 2011. (Lucas Jackson / AP)

Having already violated every tenet of international law in its proxy jihadist war against Syria, including the seizure of one-third of the country, the United States invoked a Non-Law, a Law That Never Was, to justify its missile strikes against fictitious “chemical warfare” facilities. Syrian President Assad “k**ls his own people,” said Trump, leader of the nation whose police k**l more of its “own people” than any country except (fellow white settler state) Brazil, and whose prisons entomb one-quarter of all the world’s inmates. (One out of every eight prisoners on the planet is an African-American.)

On the Saturday morning after the bombs fell in Damascus and Homs, Omalii Yes**tela, chairman of the Black Is Back Coalition for Social Justice, Peace and R********ns, held a press conference in St. Louis to denounce Washington’s aggression. “If you can use that justification,” said Yes**tela, “that, somehow, the Syrian state is attacking its own people and, therefore, the U.S. can rain missiles, along with France and England, on Syria, then what would prevent Russia from attacking the United States because of all the people that the United States is k*****g in our communities, all of the starvation that is imposed on our communities, the fact that more than a million Africans are lumped up in prison?”

In his post-strike statement, President Trump called chemical weapons “uniquely dangerous”—as if such uniqueness provided legal justification for Washington’s act of war. But the United States has been poisoning “its own” Black people for generations. “They talk about chemical warfare, but books have even been written about how crack cocaine was introduced into the community through the CIA—the same CIA that’s involved in murdering people in Syria and other places around the world,” said Yes**tela.

The United States began in smallpox-infected blankets and mountains of Native American scalps-for-bounty, and remains true to its genocidal imperatives. “We live in a country today where people are living in concentration camps that are euphemistically referred to as Indian reservations. What is it that would keep another country from attacking the United States based on that?” asked Yes**tela.

Imperial Shriek

The fading empire refuses to accept the humiliation of defeat of its jihadist proxies, the head-cutters Washington and Saudi Arabia have nurtured as a foreign terror legion since deploying them against a l*****t government in Afghanistan and its Soviet ally almost 40 years ago.

The billions in cash and arms that flowed into jihadist structures in Syria and Iraq since 2011 equipped and financed an al-Qaida army (al Nusra) mighty enough to absorb and dominate a menagerie of other murderous Islamic factions, and to finally birth ISIS, the death cult caliph**e. But the Syrian Arab Army, with the help of Russia, Iran, and its Shia neighbors in Lebanon and Iraq, is now on the cusp of retaking the bulk of its national territory—except for the vital region of its oil fields, upon which the U.S. military sits like flies on s**t.

Aside from the remaining head-h****rs, Washington’s only indigenous ally in Syria is an army of Marxist Kurds who were among the prime victims—and fiercest resisters—of the American-sponsored jihadist onslaught. For years they were tacit allies of Syria’s government—whose secularism they share—in the struggle against the U.S.-sponsored barbarians. But Don Uncle Sam made them an offer of protection-or-else that they believed could not be refused, and the Kurds are now pawns—as is the whole planet, in a sense—to Washington’s quandary: How does the world’s sole Superpower remain in a region where it is despised, after its proxy forces have been defeated? And if it cannot remain, is it any longer The Superpower?

Washington is answering this imperial existential question the only way it can, with its awesome war machine, oiled by lies that no one believes outside the western corporate information bubble. There was no chemical attack by Syria, this month or last April or in August of 2013. All lies, but derivative of the much bigger lies that sought to justify the U.S.-Saudi-Turkish-French-British (and, of course, Israeli) war against, first Libya, and all but simultaneously, Syria: that these were civil wars, rather than naked imperial aggression.

Huge lies require powerful megaphones to mold the minds of the host country population, the only people that can (theoretically) shut down the U.S war machine without firing a shot. The Iraq war so repulsed the U.S. public, it became politically impossible for George Bush to “stay the course,” or for Pentagon planners to contemplate another large-scale American invasion of the region. The only alternative was an enormously beefed-up al-Qaida to wage holy terror wars that the corporate media would dutifully “report” as civil wars of an “Arab Spring.”

Most w***e A******ns bought into the lie because they wanted to: imperial-mindedness is white privilege on a global scale. B****s have historically opposed U.S. militarism, but they acquiesced to Obama’s aggressions and neutered their own peace politics because they wanted to—in deference to the Black family in the White House.

But Obama-Time is over; the spell is broken. Donald Trump is the sum of all Black fears and loathings, an arch r****t who is perceived as rendering the entire planet unsafe for people of color. B****s are primed to oppose all of his policies, foreign and domestic. Black people are the only U.S. group that shares the general global distrust of U.S. foreign policy motives. Moreover, Black America is inherently skeptical of U.S. power structures, because Power in the U.S. has always lied about Black people—and about people of color elsewhere in the world.

As Omali Yes**tela said of Trump’s “flimsy excuse” for bombing Syria: “It’s all fabrication, and we have been victims of such fabrications for 400 years in this country.”

Glen Ford is the executive editor of Black Agenda Report. He can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com.


http://www.t***hdig.com

We all have to get along, even if we don't always agree. This Middle East Crisis, has got to end!! or America will be washed down the Tube. I can't stand Power Hungry People!!!!!. We all got to stand together, instead of Butting Heads and destroying our own Country. Be you Black, White, or any other Race, this is your country and we all need to stand together and protect our country. I am a Mixed Breed, and i am proud. We need to all stand together and keep America at the Top!!!!or she will become a Sinking Ship, and Outsiders(Other Countries will destroy us . Now I am asking Y'all, how do y'all feel, about America Sinking Away?

You are Right!!!totally so.

20 Examples of Liberals vs. Also Liberals
John Hawkins
John Hawkins
|
Posted: Apr 20, 2018 12:01 AM
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent the views of Townhall.com.
20 Examples of Liberals vs. Also Liberals
Trending

Kevin McCullough
Comey's Hubris Will Be His Demise
Paul Jacob
Don’t Fiddle with the Franchise
Derek H****r
Comey Cometh

1) Liberals: Conservatives are so paranoid! No one wants to take your guns.

Also liberals: Repeal the 2nd Amendment! No one needs AR-15s! Gun owners are murderers and terrorists!

2) Liberals: College kids need to be protected from hurtful words with safe spaces because they’re so fragile and the poor dears need to be able to stay on their parents’ insurance until 26!

Also liberals: 16 year-olds should be able to v**e!

3) Liberals: You can’t criticize Islam! We must be respectful to all religions!

Also liberals: Of course, there’s nothing wrong with using your tax dollars to build a life-size nativity scene made out of pig sh*t!

4) Liberals: We absolutely should not put armed guards in schools to stop shooters! It won’t work! Terrible idea!

Also liberals: There’s a school shooter! Quick, call someone with a gun to save the kids!

5) Liberals: Love trumps h**e! When they go low, we go high! H**e has no home here!

Also liberals: You don’t agree with me? BIGOT! R****T! F*****T! WHY ARE YOU SO H**EFUL?

6) Liberals: Romney is such an i***t for thinking Russia is our biggest geopolitical threat. Get back in your time machine so you can get back to the Cold War, Grandpa! Ha, hah, ha!
CARTOONS | Henry Payne
View Cartoon

Also liberals: Can we talk about how big a threat Russia is to us? Where are the sanctions? Maybe we should bomb Russia! Why are more people not talking about the danger of Russia?

7) Liberals: We need to do wh**ever it takes to curb g****l w*****g!

Also liberals: Let's all fly overseas in private jets and ride in SUVS to an opulent conference so we can discuss g****l w*****g.

8) Liberals: My baby can decide his own g****r!

Also liberals: Spanking your child? That’s child abuse!

9) Liberals: We’re a rape culture! Women are under a constant threat of sexual assault from men!

Also liberals: Women should be able to carry guns for protection? That’s insane!

10) Liberals: Diversity is a strength!

Also liberals: No conservatives should be allowed to work for liberal publications, act in Hollywood or teach in schools!

11) Liberals: Donald Trump is another Hitler and the police are r****ts who are murdering young black men for no reason.

Also liberals: Only the government and police should have guns!

12) Liberals: It’s my body, my choice!

Also liberals: You should be fined by the government if you don’t want to buy health insurance!

13) Liberals: We’re the party of science!

Also liberals: Unborn children aren’t people and you can pick your own g****r!

14) Liberals: The death penalty is morally wrong! You can’t do that to another human being, even if he’s a serial k**ler!

Also liberals: Not even the father of the child has the right to keep a woman from aborting her baby.

15) Liberals: School choice? Vouchers! Those are bad for children! Children should have to go to public schools!

Also (rich) liberals: Of course my kids are going to private school! It’s only the best for my children!

16) Liberals: You don’t want to give more of what you earned to the government? You’re SELFISH!

Also liberals: You want welfare, school lunches and housing you didn’t earn? Don’t be ashamed! There’s nothing wrong with taking it!

17) Liberals: The law is your fist when you're dealing with N**is! They deserve it!

Also liberals: Everyone who disagrees with me is a N**i!

18) Liberals: Conservatives are sexists who don’t respect women!

Also liberals: Give me a second; I just called Dana Loesch the c-word on Twitter and I have to like it with all 8 of my f**e accounts.

19) Liberals: There is no reason to oppose tearing down Confederate statues other than r****m!

Also liberals: The Jefferson Memorial? He was a s***e owner; so it should go. William McKinley wasn’t nice enough to the Indians. He has to go! Oh, and let’s destroy Mount Rushmore while we’re at it!

20) Liberals: We need more women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics!

http://www.townhall.com


Liberals tend to Butt Heads, when they don't agree completely with each other on different subjects, same as a Conservative . Both Parties have problems agreeing with each other, unless there is a subject they want to agree with. I am glad that i am a Non Partisan. I don't take sides with one party and ignore the other. I make my own choices, when it comes to Politics and Living. Now what do y'all feel about what i posted here? Do y'all agree or disagree?

I totally agree with your Post!!!

Gorsuch Sabotages Trump’s Immigration Reform And Endangers Americans


When Trump ran for office, he made it crystal clear one of his top priorities was to keep America safe.

Determined to deport violent criminals from harming innocent Americans, Trump has cracked down on immigration.

But the latest Supreme Court decision caused a major setback in Trump’s immigration plan, and now America remains in danger.

In fact, if Congress doesn’t act quickly, dangerous criminals will continue to roam America’s neighborhoods.

When Trump selected Gorsuch as his Supreme Court nominee, conservatives cheered.

But in a critical moment, Gorsuch went rogue, and instead of standing up for conservative values, he sided with dangerous i*****l i*******ts.

In a 5-4 v**e, the Supreme Court struck down a provision calling for “mandatory deportation” for immigrants convicted of some “crimes of violence.”

Claiming the provision was too vague, the Supreme Court refused to allow the provision to pass.

This case was carried over from the Obama era, when James Garcia Dimaya, pleaded no contest to several crimes.

The Supreme Court had their chance to finally crack down on immigrants who break the law, but they blew it in a major way.

CNN reported:

“The Supreme Court delivered a resounding message today: You can’t banish a person from his home and family without clear lines, announced up front. Congress cannot write a mushy standard that leaves it to unaccountable immigration officials and judges to make it up as they go along,” said Josh Rosenkranz, an attorney for Dimaya.

This decision is of enormous consequence, striking down a flawed law that applies in a vast range of criminal and immigration cases and which has resulted in many thousands of immigrants being deported for decades in violation of their due process rights.”

In court, arguing for the Trump administration, Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler said that when it comes to deportation, “I think it is important for the court to understand that immigration provisions and grounds for deportation are often written in very broad and general terms and given content by the executive branch in which Congress has vested authority.”

Trump’s Supreme Court pick stabbed him in the back.

Now, the only way to remove dangerous criminals is through Congress.

Immigrants who break the law should not be able to roam free in America.

This decision further gives cover to those who break the law, and only encourages criminal activity.

Fox News reported:

“Today’s Court decision means that Congress must close loopholes that block the removal of dangerous criminal aliens, including aggravated felons.

This is a public safety crisis that can only be fixed by Congress – House and Senate must quickly pass a legislative fix to ensure violent criminal aliens can be removed from our society. Keep America Safe!” Trump tweeted in response Tuesday evening.”

But while this ruling may be a setback for Trump’s immigration plan, it’s obvious he will keep the pressure on to pass tough immigration policies.

There’s too much at stake to allow violent criminals to cause harm on America’s streets.

What are your thoughts on the Supreme Court ruling backing violent criminals over American citizens?

Are you disappointed in how Trump’s Supreme Court choice v**ed?

http://www.mommyunderground.com


We need to protect America and it's people, and kick these criminals out of our country!!!. There is enough crime in the Country, with out adding more crimes from these criminals coming into our country, and trying to take over our system.This is my opinion!!! now what do y'all say?

DHS: Trump to order National Guard to protect border with Mexico

Thomson Reuters
Thomson Reuters
Apr 5th 2018 12:35PM
X

WASHINGTON, April 4 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump will sign a proclamation on Wednesday ordering the deployment of the National Guard to help protect the border with Mexico, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said.

Troops may be heading to the border as early as Wednesday night, Nielsen said, saying that theNational Guard would support U.S. Custom and Border Protection but would not be involved in enforcement.

Nielsen spoke at a White House news briefing a day after Trump sharpened his anti-immigration rhetoric by saying he wanted to deploy U.S. military forces until his promised border wall is built.

"The president has directed that the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security work together with our governors to deploy the National Guard to our southwest border to assist the Border Patrol," Nielsen said. "The president will be signing a proclamation to that effect today."

She said the administration had drafted legislation and would be asking Congress to provide the legal authority and resources to address "this crisis at our borders."

RELATED: Where the wall already exists along the US-Mexico border
Slideshow preview image
29 PHOTOS
Where the wall already exists along the US-Mexico border
See Gallery

She did not give the number of the troops to be deployed or the cost of the operation.

Nielsen said that despite steps taken by the administration, the levels of drug smuggling, i*****l i*********n and dangerous gang activity across the border were unacceptable.

Trump met with Defense Secretary James Mattis, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Nielsen and other officials to discuss border issues on Tuesday.

"Until we can have a wall and proper security we’re going to be guarding our border with the military," Trump told reporters at the White House on Tuesday, lamenting what he called "horrible" U.S. laws that left the southern border poorly protected.
http://www.breakingnews.com



I fully support President Trumps choice in order to protect the Border between Mexico and the US!!!!. Let's hope this Works, for our sake and our security. What do y'all think? Agree or Disagree!!! with President Trumps Plan. Speak your piece!!!.