Posts for: atomikmom
Feb 4, 2017 16:24:12 #
(Main)
Does Washington want war with Russia?
Feb. 4, 2017
Does Washington want a war with Russia? A review of recent US actions surrounding the crisis in Ukraine clearly poses what would have once seemed an unthinkable question. The Obama administration is playing a very dangerous game of Russian Roulette.
In the last 48 hours, the Pentagon has announced the deployment of US paratrooper units to Poland and the three former Baltic republics of the Soviet Union—Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania—bringing US troops to Russia’s very border. Another American warship has been dispatched to the Black Sea and more US forces are slated to deploy to Ukraine itself this summer under an exercise known as Operation Rapid Trident.
These military moves by Washington are unfolding in the context of an acute crisis within Ukraine that, thanks to the machinations of Washington and its puppets, threatens to erupt into full-blown civil war.
Less than one week after signing a joint statement with Russia, the US and the European Union in Geneva pledging to end all violence in Ukraine and disarm illegal groups, the US puppet regime in Kiev has ordered its military to carry out an “anti-terrorist” crackdown against the restive Russian-speaking population in the country’s industrial southeast. To that end it has dispatched not only troops, tanks and warplanes, but also armed thugs from the neo-f*****t Right Sector.
The Putin government in Moscow, which has desperately searched for an accommodation with Washington, appears to be waking up to the deadly seriousness of the situation. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned in an English-language interview with the state-run RT television channel Wednesday that his government would treat an attack on Russian citizens in Ukraine as an attack on Russia itself. He raised as a precedent the August 2008 offensive launched by the government of Georgia on Russians in South Ossetia, to which Russia responded by intervening militarily to repel Georgian forces.
The implication that the Russian government would carry out a similar intervention to stop Ukrainian troops from slaughtering Russian-speaking civilians in the Donbas region should be treated with the utmost seriousness.
In the interview, Lavrov also observed, referring to the actions of the government in Kiev, that “the Americans are running the show in a very close way.” This is indisputable. The regime itself is the product of a protracted American intervention in the country’s internal affairs, with some $5 billion in so-called “democracy promotion” funding pumped into Ukraine since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991.
These efforts culminated in the fomenting of a right-wing opposition movement to destabilize the Russian-aligned government of President Viktor Yanukovych by means of street violence. When a deal was brokered between the opposition and Yanukovych, Washington ensured that it was scuttled and the elected president o*******wn by f*****t paramilitary forces.
The prime minister of the regime brought to power by the February 22 f*****t-led c**p, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, was handpicked by US officials, who affectionately referred to him as “Yats.”
The point person for this operation has been US Undersecretary of State for Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland, a former chief security adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney and the wife of Robert Kagan, the founding chairman of the Project for a New American Century. She has brought to Ukraine and to Russia itself the same policy of aggressive war that was implemented in the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
The way in which Washington calls the shots has been demonstrated in an even more sinister fashion with the launching of the first abortive “counterterrorist” operation in the Donbas in the immediate aftermath of a covert trip to Kiev by CIA Director John Brennan, and then its resumption in the immediate aftermath of this week’s visit by Vice President Joseph Biden.
From start to finish, the Ukraine crisis has been instigated by US imperialism. Every action Washington has taken has been directed at exacerbating and intensifying this crisis. The longer this crisis goes on, the clearer it becomes that US policy is directed not so much at Ukraine as at Russia itself. Ukraine, it would seem, is meant merely to provide the pretext for a war with Russia.
Short of that, it would be used to force a humiliating capitulation by Moscow that would only set the stage for redoubled aggression aimed at Russia’s dismemberment and t***sformation into a powerless semi-colony.
Presumably, those in the White House and the Pentagon believe that such a conflict would stop short of a nuclear war, but who knows?
The threat of a US war on Russia is also apparent in the flood of war propaganda being unleashed upon the public. Vladimir Putin is being subjected to the same kind of demonization previously reserved for Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi, while the State Department and its faithful scribes at the New York Times serve up “photographic evidence” of Russian troops in Ukraine that has all the authenticity of similar “proofs” of Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction.”
What underlies the US war drive? In the run-up to the Ukraine crisis, Washington had grown increasingly incensed by Moscow’s role in blocking US war plans against both Syria and Iran, not to mention Putin’s granting of asylum to NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. Earlier, there was the fiasco that Moscow dealt Washington in the US-backed 2008 war launched by Georgia against South Ossetia. The events in Ukraine suggest that US imperialism has embarked on a strategy to eliminate Russia as an obstacle to its drive to assert hegemony over the Middle East and, more broadly, the landmass of Eurasia.
There are also internal factors driving Washington to war. Social contradictions within the United States have reached a dangerous intensity. Masses of working people continue to bear the brunt of the capitalist economic crisis, even as Wall Street rec**ps its losses from the 2008 collapse and grows richer than ever. More and more fingers are pointing at the super-rich as the party responsible for unprecedented social ine******y and misery in America.
As so often in the past, war provides an external outlet for internal social pressures and the danger of domestic unrest. Under conditions of overwhelming popular hostility to military intervention, one thing is certain: a war with Russia would rapidly lead to the shredding of the Constitution, the abrogation of democratic rights, the outlawing of political opposition and a massive escalation of police state measures.
The greatest danger would be to underestimate the threat of war. Even if it is averted or postponed in the immediate instance, the profound contradictions of the imperialist system make the catastrophe of a nuclear Third World War not just a danger, but an inevitability, outside of the working class mobilizing its strength internationally in a unified movement to put an end to capitalism.
It is to prepare such a struggle that the International Committee of the Fourth International and the World Socialist Web Site are holding an International May Day Online Rally on May 4. We urge workers and youth from every country to join in this common forum and discussion on forging the international revolutionary socialist movement that is so urgently needed. Register today at internationalmayday.org.
http://www.wsws.org/
That's all we need is another battle!! with the Dark Side!!! They are pushing us just to see what kind of damage they can do, of course we know what's on their mind. They want to catch us off guard, so they Nuke us with the BIG BOMB!!!! I am sorry!! but we must step up to the plate, and give them a taste of their own medicine. " Do It to It!!!! America, i got your back. This is from a Veteran!!!ME!!!!! 'All Men On Board!!! Man your Guns!!! Full !!!! Speed Ahead!!!!.
Feb. 4, 2017
Does Washington want a war with Russia? A review of recent US actions surrounding the crisis in Ukraine clearly poses what would have once seemed an unthinkable question. The Obama administration is playing a very dangerous game of Russian Roulette.
In the last 48 hours, the Pentagon has announced the deployment of US paratrooper units to Poland and the three former Baltic republics of the Soviet Union—Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania—bringing US troops to Russia’s very border. Another American warship has been dispatched to the Black Sea and more US forces are slated to deploy to Ukraine itself this summer under an exercise known as Operation Rapid Trident.
These military moves by Washington are unfolding in the context of an acute crisis within Ukraine that, thanks to the machinations of Washington and its puppets, threatens to erupt into full-blown civil war.
Less than one week after signing a joint statement with Russia, the US and the European Union in Geneva pledging to end all violence in Ukraine and disarm illegal groups, the US puppet regime in Kiev has ordered its military to carry out an “anti-terrorist” crackdown against the restive Russian-speaking population in the country’s industrial southeast. To that end it has dispatched not only troops, tanks and warplanes, but also armed thugs from the neo-f*****t Right Sector.
The Putin government in Moscow, which has desperately searched for an accommodation with Washington, appears to be waking up to the deadly seriousness of the situation. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned in an English-language interview with the state-run RT television channel Wednesday that his government would treat an attack on Russian citizens in Ukraine as an attack on Russia itself. He raised as a precedent the August 2008 offensive launched by the government of Georgia on Russians in South Ossetia, to which Russia responded by intervening militarily to repel Georgian forces.
The implication that the Russian government would carry out a similar intervention to stop Ukrainian troops from slaughtering Russian-speaking civilians in the Donbas region should be treated with the utmost seriousness.
In the interview, Lavrov also observed, referring to the actions of the government in Kiev, that “the Americans are running the show in a very close way.” This is indisputable. The regime itself is the product of a protracted American intervention in the country’s internal affairs, with some $5 billion in so-called “democracy promotion” funding pumped into Ukraine since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991.
These efforts culminated in the fomenting of a right-wing opposition movement to destabilize the Russian-aligned government of President Viktor Yanukovych by means of street violence. When a deal was brokered between the opposition and Yanukovych, Washington ensured that it was scuttled and the elected president o*******wn by f*****t paramilitary forces.
The prime minister of the regime brought to power by the February 22 f*****t-led c**p, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, was handpicked by US officials, who affectionately referred to him as “Yats.”
The point person for this operation has been US Undersecretary of State for Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland, a former chief security adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney and the wife of Robert Kagan, the founding chairman of the Project for a New American Century. She has brought to Ukraine and to Russia itself the same policy of aggressive war that was implemented in the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
The way in which Washington calls the shots has been demonstrated in an even more sinister fashion with the launching of the first abortive “counterterrorist” operation in the Donbas in the immediate aftermath of a covert trip to Kiev by CIA Director John Brennan, and then its resumption in the immediate aftermath of this week’s visit by Vice President Joseph Biden.
From start to finish, the Ukraine crisis has been instigated by US imperialism. Every action Washington has taken has been directed at exacerbating and intensifying this crisis. The longer this crisis goes on, the clearer it becomes that US policy is directed not so much at Ukraine as at Russia itself. Ukraine, it would seem, is meant merely to provide the pretext for a war with Russia.
Short of that, it would be used to force a humiliating capitulation by Moscow that would only set the stage for redoubled aggression aimed at Russia’s dismemberment and t***sformation into a powerless semi-colony.
Presumably, those in the White House and the Pentagon believe that such a conflict would stop short of a nuclear war, but who knows?
The threat of a US war on Russia is also apparent in the flood of war propaganda being unleashed upon the public. Vladimir Putin is being subjected to the same kind of demonization previously reserved for Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi, while the State Department and its faithful scribes at the New York Times serve up “photographic evidence” of Russian troops in Ukraine that has all the authenticity of similar “proofs” of Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction.”
What underlies the US war drive? In the run-up to the Ukraine crisis, Washington had grown increasingly incensed by Moscow’s role in blocking US war plans against both Syria and Iran, not to mention Putin’s granting of asylum to NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. Earlier, there was the fiasco that Moscow dealt Washington in the US-backed 2008 war launched by Georgia against South Ossetia. The events in Ukraine suggest that US imperialism has embarked on a strategy to eliminate Russia as an obstacle to its drive to assert hegemony over the Middle East and, more broadly, the landmass of Eurasia.
There are also internal factors driving Washington to war. Social contradictions within the United States have reached a dangerous intensity. Masses of working people continue to bear the brunt of the capitalist economic crisis, even as Wall Street rec**ps its losses from the 2008 collapse and grows richer than ever. More and more fingers are pointing at the super-rich as the party responsible for unprecedented social ine******y and misery in America.
As so often in the past, war provides an external outlet for internal social pressures and the danger of domestic unrest. Under conditions of overwhelming popular hostility to military intervention, one thing is certain: a war with Russia would rapidly lead to the shredding of the Constitution, the abrogation of democratic rights, the outlawing of political opposition and a massive escalation of police state measures.
The greatest danger would be to underestimate the threat of war. Even if it is averted or postponed in the immediate instance, the profound contradictions of the imperialist system make the catastrophe of a nuclear Third World War not just a danger, but an inevitability, outside of the working class mobilizing its strength internationally in a unified movement to put an end to capitalism.
It is to prepare such a struggle that the International Committee of the Fourth International and the World Socialist Web Site are holding an International May Day Online Rally on May 4. We urge workers and youth from every country to join in this common forum and discussion on forging the international revolutionary socialist movement that is so urgently needed. Register today at internationalmayday.org.
http://www.wsws.org/
That's all we need is another battle!! with the Dark Side!!! They are pushing us just to see what kind of damage they can do, of course we know what's on their mind. They want to catch us off guard, so they Nuke us with the BIG BOMB!!!! I am sorry!! but we must step up to the plate, and give them a taste of their own medicine. " Do It to It!!!! America, i got your back. This is from a Veteran!!!ME!!!!! 'All Men On Board!!! Man your Guns!!! Full !!!! Speed Ahead!!!!.Feb 4, 2017 16:08:03 #
Feb 4, 2017 16:03:00 #
(Main)
February 4, 2017 By Kirsty Jane
ALERT: Congress Just Told Obama To GET LOST
With a Republican in the White House, GOP lawmakers in Congress finally have the opportunity to scrap former President Barack Obama’s litany of overburdensome environmental and gun regulations.
And thankfully, they are fully intent on using this newfound power.
From Conservative Tribune
As reported by Newsmax, on Thursday the GOP-controlled House passed a resolution that eliminated the requirement that Social Security recipients with mental disabilities undergo extended background checks before purchasing a gun.
“There is no evidence suggesting that those receiving disability benefits from the Social Security Administration are a threat to public safety,” argued Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
“Once an unelected bureaucrat unfairly adds these folks to the federal background check system, they are no longer able to exercise their Second Amendment right,” he added.
The bill eliminating the gun rule now needs approval from the Senate.
Likewise, the GOP-controlled Senate issued a final approval to eliminate an Obama-era regulation known as the “stream rule” that had prevented coal-mine debris from being dumped into streams near mine sites.
Note that the senators did not revoke this rule because they h**e streams. But as Luke Popovich, vice president of external communications for the National Mining Association, wrote in a blog post last month, the “stream rule” is a job-k*****g measure that put federal bureaucrats at the Office of Surface Mining in charge of decisions that should be handled by the states or other federal agencies.
“The stream rule is to bad regulations what the Sistine Chapel is to Renaissance art,” Popovich wrote. “It’s a pure expression of all that ordinary Americans loathe about rule by bureaucracy.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., also expressed displeasure in the rule, arguing it would threaten coal jobs and damage communities in coal-producing states — like Kentucky.
http://www.eheadlines.com
Butt!!! Out!!!! Obama!! you are no longer our President, Trump is. Go Away!!!!!ADIOS!!!Go live your own life, and stop meddling. America no longer needs your 2 Cents in put. Your term is up.
ALERT: Congress Just Told Obama To GET LOST
With a Republican in the White House, GOP lawmakers in Congress finally have the opportunity to scrap former President Barack Obama’s litany of overburdensome environmental and gun regulations.
And thankfully, they are fully intent on using this newfound power.
From Conservative Tribune
As reported by Newsmax, on Thursday the GOP-controlled House passed a resolution that eliminated the requirement that Social Security recipients with mental disabilities undergo extended background checks before purchasing a gun.
“There is no evidence suggesting that those receiving disability benefits from the Social Security Administration are a threat to public safety,” argued Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
“Once an unelected bureaucrat unfairly adds these folks to the federal background check system, they are no longer able to exercise their Second Amendment right,” he added.
The bill eliminating the gun rule now needs approval from the Senate.
Likewise, the GOP-controlled Senate issued a final approval to eliminate an Obama-era regulation known as the “stream rule” that had prevented coal-mine debris from being dumped into streams near mine sites.
Note that the senators did not revoke this rule because they h**e streams. But as Luke Popovich, vice president of external communications for the National Mining Association, wrote in a blog post last month, the “stream rule” is a job-k*****g measure that put federal bureaucrats at the Office of Surface Mining in charge of decisions that should be handled by the states or other federal agencies.
“The stream rule is to bad regulations what the Sistine Chapel is to Renaissance art,” Popovich wrote. “It’s a pure expression of all that ordinary Americans loathe about rule by bureaucracy.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., also expressed displeasure in the rule, arguing it would threaten coal jobs and damage communities in coal-producing states — like Kentucky.
http://www.eheadlines.com
Butt!!! Out!!!! Obama!! you are no longer our President, Trump is. Go Away!!!!!ADIOS!!!Go live your own life, and stop meddling. America no longer needs your 2 Cents in put. Your term is up.Feb 4, 2017 15:52:36 #
(Main)
February 4, 2017 By Kirsty Jane
RED ALERT: Trump LAYS DOWN THE HAMMER On Iran
President Donald Trump announced new U.S. sanctions against Iran Friday in response to a ballistic missile test conducted by Iran last week.
In addition to the sanctions, defense officials confirmed Friday the USS Cole has been moved to patrol the waters off the coast of Yemen to protect waterways from attacks on ships by the Houthi, a m*****a group aligned with Iran.
From Western Journalism
The USS Cole is the same ship that was attacked while in port in Yemen by a terrorist bomb in 2000, k*****g 17 U.S. sailors.
A Saudi warship off the western coast of Yemen was attacked by a suicide bomber earlier this week, causing an explosion that k**led two crew members.
U.S. officials feared the attack was either intended for a U.S. ship, or was a practice run for a similar attack against a U.S. ship.
The move comes approximately five months after the U.S. military launched cruise missile strikes aimed at destroying three coastal radar sites in areas of Yemen controlled by Houthi forces. That attack was a retaliation for failed missile attacks by the Houthi on another U.S. destroyer.
White House officials have described Friday’s sanctions as an “initial step,” indicating additional steps will be taken against Iran.
The newest actions against Iran drew praise from a high-ranking Republican lawmaker.
“This announcement makes clear that it is a new day in U.S.-Iran relations and that we will no longer tolerate Iran’s destabilizing behavior,” Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said in a statement. “A coordinated, multi-faceted effort to pushback against a range of illicit Iranian behavior is long overdue.”
The sanctions were not imposed on the government of Iran, but rather a dozen individuals and organizations involved in obtaining the materials and technology for the country’s missile program.
http://www.eheadlines.com
Full !!!!Speed Ahead!!! Trump!!! do it to it.
RED ALERT: Trump LAYS DOWN THE HAMMER On Iran
President Donald Trump announced new U.S. sanctions against Iran Friday in response to a ballistic missile test conducted by Iran last week.
In addition to the sanctions, defense officials confirmed Friday the USS Cole has been moved to patrol the waters off the coast of Yemen to protect waterways from attacks on ships by the Houthi, a m*****a group aligned with Iran.
From Western Journalism
The USS Cole is the same ship that was attacked while in port in Yemen by a terrorist bomb in 2000, k*****g 17 U.S. sailors.
A Saudi warship off the western coast of Yemen was attacked by a suicide bomber earlier this week, causing an explosion that k**led two crew members.
U.S. officials feared the attack was either intended for a U.S. ship, or was a practice run for a similar attack against a U.S. ship.
The move comes approximately five months after the U.S. military launched cruise missile strikes aimed at destroying three coastal radar sites in areas of Yemen controlled by Houthi forces. That attack was a retaliation for failed missile attacks by the Houthi on another U.S. destroyer.
White House officials have described Friday’s sanctions as an “initial step,” indicating additional steps will be taken against Iran.
The newest actions against Iran drew praise from a high-ranking Republican lawmaker.
“This announcement makes clear that it is a new day in U.S.-Iran relations and that we will no longer tolerate Iran’s destabilizing behavior,” Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said in a statement. “A coordinated, multi-faceted effort to pushback against a range of illicit Iranian behavior is long overdue.”
The sanctions were not imposed on the government of Iran, but rather a dozen individuals and organizations involved in obtaining the materials and technology for the country’s missile program.
http://www.eheadlines.com
Full !!!!Speed Ahead!!! Trump!!! do it to it.Feb 4, 2017 15:45:16 #
(Main)
Well !!! if we would stop giving our money to these outsiders(I*****l A***ns) and took care of America, and it's people, we would not have to worry about us going broke, and that's no joke. We need to keep our jobs here in our country so folks would have good Pennies!! and then when the time comes for them to retire, they would live in peace, and not poverty. Lord only knows what Trump is going to do to us.Feb 4, 2017 15:34:49 #
(Main)
Democrats back Trump administration’s new sanctions against Iran
By Joseph Kishore
4 February 2017
Top Democrats have thrown their support behind new sanctions announced by US President Donald Trump against Iran, part of an aggressive foreign policy shift of the incoming administration.
The sanctions were formally announced on Friday by the US Treasury Department, nominally in response to Iran’s launching of a missile last weekend and its alleged support for Houthi forces targeted by the US-backed Saudi bombardment of Yemen. The sanctions target 13 individuals and 12 companies that have ties to Iran, including one Chinese national.
Friday’s actions are more significant for what they indicate about the direction of the Trump administration’s policy toward Iran than for their immediate impact. They came two days after an extraordinary press briefing in which National Security Adviser Michael Flynn declared that Iran was being put “on notice,” and that the US would retaliate in some way, including possible military action.
The announcement of the new sanctions was followed by a statement from Flynn on Friday, declaring that the “international community has been too tolerant of Iran’s bad behavior” and that “the days of turning a blind eye to Iran’s hostile and belligerent actions toward the United States and the world community are over.”
The US president responded with a Tweet on Friday: “Iran is playing with fire—They don’t appreciate how ‘kind’ President Obama was to them. Not me!” The administration is reportedly carrying out a “strategic review” of Iran policy, and one top administration official said that the sanctions were just “initial steps.”
At a briefing on Friday, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer was asked whether “military options” against Iran were “still on the table” and whether “there are more actions coming.” Spicer replied, “I would never rule anything off the table. I think the president has made it clear throughout his time that that’s what’s going to happen.”
While there are divisions within the American ruling class over whether to continue with the 2015 nuclear agreement backed by the Obama administration, there is broad support from both Democrats and Republicans for a harsher line against Iran, which is seen as a principal regional threat to US imperialist interests in the Middle East.
In advance of Friday’s formal announcement, a bipartisan group of 22 senators, including Tim Kaine, Democratic Party p**********l candidate Hillary Clinton’s running mate, sent a letter to Trump backing the new sanctions. Eight of the signatories, including Kaine, had supported the nuclear deal with Iran, which Trump has pledged to scrap.
The letter states that the senators are “concerned by reports of a ballistic missile test,” which would violate “both the letter and the spirit of its obligations under UN Security Council Resolution 2231 not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology.”
UN Resolution 2231 endorsed the nuclear deal agreed by Iran and the US, along with other major imperialist powers. Iran has said that the missile tested was not nuclear-capable and is not covered by the resolution, and that the test was instead a response to the militarization of other countries in the region.
“Full enforcement of existing sanctions and the imposition of additional sanctions on Iran for its ballistic missiles program are necessary,” the letter states.
The letter was spearheaded by Republican Bob Corker and Democrat Ben Cardin, the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, respectively. Among the Democrats endorsing the letter was Chris Coons from Delaware. Coons said in an interview with the Weekly Standard earlier in the week that Iran’s actions are “a grave threat to our vital ally Israel, and to our troops in the region, and if they continue along the path of developing better and better ballistic missiles, it’s ultimately a threat to Europe and the rest of the world.”
The involvement of Kaine in endorsing the sanctions underscores the central focus of the criticisms of Trump from Democrats and the campaign of Hillary Clinton—US foreign policy. While Democrats have raised concerns that the Trump administration will be “too soft” on Russia, there is agreement on taking more aggressive measures against Iran, either within or outside the framework of the nuclear agreement.
The response of Democrats and the Democratic Party-aligned media to the extraordinary statements from Flynn—an open threat of war against Iran—has been either muted or broadly supportive.
In an editorial published on Friday, the New York Times called Flynn’s statements “dangerously provocative,” but added that the Trump administration was right to highlight “Iran’s troubling behavior … as well as Iran’s expanding influence in Iraq.” The newspaper added, “Israel and America’s Sunni Arab allies are also alarmed about Iran’s aggressive moves and consider the country their chief adversary.”
The Times said nothing about the fact that Israel has interpreted the e******n of Trump to be a green light to aggressively militarize and expand illegal settlements in Palestinian territory. It also did not note that Saudi Arabia, armed and funded by the United States, is waging a bloody war in Yemen that has k**led more than 10,000 people.
The real concerns of both Democrats and Republicans were outlined in a report by Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, which has close ties to the US military and intelligence apparatus. “Iran remains the major threat to US strategic interests in the Gulf and the Middle East,” Cordesman wrote last month. He added that General James Mattis, Trump’s new secretary of defense, “has been all too correct in singling out Iran as such a threat.”
Iran’s development of non-nuclear missiles, Cordesman warned, could allow it to target “critical petroleum, desalination, power, and military facilities in the Gulf, and even Israel and Egypt.” Cordesman also expressed concern that Iran was building up its political influence in Iraq.
The initial actions of the Trump administration make clear that the US is preparing a major escalation of military aggression in Central Asia and the Middle East. Fifteen years of the “war on terror” under Bush and Obama—including the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the bombing of Libya, the US-backed civil war in Syria, and the Saudi bombardment of Yemen—have k**led over one million people.
American imperialism, however, has failed to secure its aim of establishing unrivaled domination over the oil-rich region. Now, under Trump, a new and even bloodier chapter is opening.
http://www.wsws.org
Well !!! I'll be Dipped!! both Parties are working together!!!! "Full Speed Ahead!!! LOL!!!! Let's get this Job done, y'all.
By Joseph Kishore
4 February 2017
Top Democrats have thrown their support behind new sanctions announced by US President Donald Trump against Iran, part of an aggressive foreign policy shift of the incoming administration.
The sanctions were formally announced on Friday by the US Treasury Department, nominally in response to Iran’s launching of a missile last weekend and its alleged support for Houthi forces targeted by the US-backed Saudi bombardment of Yemen. The sanctions target 13 individuals and 12 companies that have ties to Iran, including one Chinese national.
Friday’s actions are more significant for what they indicate about the direction of the Trump administration’s policy toward Iran than for their immediate impact. They came two days after an extraordinary press briefing in which National Security Adviser Michael Flynn declared that Iran was being put “on notice,” and that the US would retaliate in some way, including possible military action.
The announcement of the new sanctions was followed by a statement from Flynn on Friday, declaring that the “international community has been too tolerant of Iran’s bad behavior” and that “the days of turning a blind eye to Iran’s hostile and belligerent actions toward the United States and the world community are over.”
The US president responded with a Tweet on Friday: “Iran is playing with fire—They don’t appreciate how ‘kind’ President Obama was to them. Not me!” The administration is reportedly carrying out a “strategic review” of Iran policy, and one top administration official said that the sanctions were just “initial steps.”
At a briefing on Friday, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer was asked whether “military options” against Iran were “still on the table” and whether “there are more actions coming.” Spicer replied, “I would never rule anything off the table. I think the president has made it clear throughout his time that that’s what’s going to happen.”
While there are divisions within the American ruling class over whether to continue with the 2015 nuclear agreement backed by the Obama administration, there is broad support from both Democrats and Republicans for a harsher line against Iran, which is seen as a principal regional threat to US imperialist interests in the Middle East.
In advance of Friday’s formal announcement, a bipartisan group of 22 senators, including Tim Kaine, Democratic Party p**********l candidate Hillary Clinton’s running mate, sent a letter to Trump backing the new sanctions. Eight of the signatories, including Kaine, had supported the nuclear deal with Iran, which Trump has pledged to scrap.
The letter states that the senators are “concerned by reports of a ballistic missile test,” which would violate “both the letter and the spirit of its obligations under UN Security Council Resolution 2231 not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology.”
UN Resolution 2231 endorsed the nuclear deal agreed by Iran and the US, along with other major imperialist powers. Iran has said that the missile tested was not nuclear-capable and is not covered by the resolution, and that the test was instead a response to the militarization of other countries in the region.
“Full enforcement of existing sanctions and the imposition of additional sanctions on Iran for its ballistic missiles program are necessary,” the letter states.
The letter was spearheaded by Republican Bob Corker and Democrat Ben Cardin, the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, respectively. Among the Democrats endorsing the letter was Chris Coons from Delaware. Coons said in an interview with the Weekly Standard earlier in the week that Iran’s actions are “a grave threat to our vital ally Israel, and to our troops in the region, and if they continue along the path of developing better and better ballistic missiles, it’s ultimately a threat to Europe and the rest of the world.”
The involvement of Kaine in endorsing the sanctions underscores the central focus of the criticisms of Trump from Democrats and the campaign of Hillary Clinton—US foreign policy. While Democrats have raised concerns that the Trump administration will be “too soft” on Russia, there is agreement on taking more aggressive measures against Iran, either within or outside the framework of the nuclear agreement.
The response of Democrats and the Democratic Party-aligned media to the extraordinary statements from Flynn—an open threat of war against Iran—has been either muted or broadly supportive.
In an editorial published on Friday, the New York Times called Flynn’s statements “dangerously provocative,” but added that the Trump administration was right to highlight “Iran’s troubling behavior … as well as Iran’s expanding influence in Iraq.” The newspaper added, “Israel and America’s Sunni Arab allies are also alarmed about Iran’s aggressive moves and consider the country their chief adversary.”
The Times said nothing about the fact that Israel has interpreted the e******n of Trump to be a green light to aggressively militarize and expand illegal settlements in Palestinian territory. It also did not note that Saudi Arabia, armed and funded by the United States, is waging a bloody war in Yemen that has k**led more than 10,000 people.
The real concerns of both Democrats and Republicans were outlined in a report by Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, which has close ties to the US military and intelligence apparatus. “Iran remains the major threat to US strategic interests in the Gulf and the Middle East,” Cordesman wrote last month. He added that General James Mattis, Trump’s new secretary of defense, “has been all too correct in singling out Iran as such a threat.”
Iran’s development of non-nuclear missiles, Cordesman warned, could allow it to target “critical petroleum, desalination, power, and military facilities in the Gulf, and even Israel and Egypt.” Cordesman also expressed concern that Iran was building up its political influence in Iraq.
The initial actions of the Trump administration make clear that the US is preparing a major escalation of military aggression in Central Asia and the Middle East. Fifteen years of the “war on terror” under Bush and Obama—including the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the bombing of Libya, the US-backed civil war in Syria, and the Saudi bombardment of Yemen—have k**led over one million people.
American imperialism, however, has failed to secure its aim of establishing unrivaled domination over the oil-rich region. Now, under Trump, a new and even bloodier chapter is opening.
http://www.wsws.org
Well !!! I'll be Dipped!! both Parties are working together!!!! "Full Speed Ahead!!! LOL!!!! Let's get this Job done, y'all.Feb 4, 2017 15:27:41 #
(Main)
The sooner the better!!! we need to wipe them out. Iran is going to be the death of America, if action is fast. I wish we could leave the Middle East, and shut the door.Feb 3, 2017 20:23:30 #
(Main)
What President Trump's Two Options Are with Social Security
By Money Morning Staff Reports, Money Morning • Feb. 3, 2017
Social Security
President Trump speaks on his relief at having won the state of Texas on e******n night, Dec. 15, 2016.
President Donald Trump pledged repeatedly on the campaign trail not to cut Medicare or Social Security benefits.
But something must be done – and soon – to address these entitlement programs' looming financial crisis.
According to Congressional Budget Office estimates released in 2015, Social Security's cash deficit is set to explode to $361 billion in 2025 from $74 billion in 2014.
The CBO's findings also pointed to the $2.8 trillion Social Security trust fund (which includes Medicare expense coverage) to begin its official depletion run late in 2029, after which its revenue will cover only about 75% of scheduled benefits until 2034.
These estimates, of course, pertain to Social Security and Medicare's fate should Uncle Sam take no further actions to thwart the programs' demise in the very near future.
And despite Donald Trump's reiterated vows not to cut SS benefits, his nomination for budget director – Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-SC) – suggests he might do just that…
Trump's First Option for Social Security: Cut Benefits
In his Senate testimony last Tuesday (Jan. 25), Mulvaney stated he believes cuts to Social Security and Medicare are necessary in order to keep the programs solvent. His statement directly contradicted Trump's campaign pledges about entitlement programs.
"I have no reason to believe the president has changed his mind" on not touching entitlement programs, Mulvaney said, according to The Washington Post on Jan. 24. But, he added, "My job … is to be completely and brutally honest with him."
The South Carolina senator clarified his stance by stating his proposed cuts would not affect current recipients.
Must Read: These are the best stocks to buy for a profitable 2017.
Mulvaney also suggested immediate "means-testing" for those applying for Medicare benefits to begin as early as this year.
Means-testing is a method used by the government to determine whether someone qualifies for a financial assistance program. Insofar as Medicare is concerned, Mulvaney's plan would make Medicare available to retirement-age individuals on a case-by-case basis – thereby stripping away the program's designated "entitlement" status.
Aside from cutting benefits to these entitlement programs, however, there is another controversial option President Trump could utilize to stifle Social Security's fiscal demise…
Trump's Second Option for Social Security: Increase Payroll Taxes
Another method to keep entitlement programs solvent would be to increase payroll taxes across the board for all working Americans.
Last year's Social Security Trustees report listed an actuarial deficit of 2.66% in 2016, suggesting that a 2.66% increase in the payroll tax should sustain the program without the need for benefit cuts through the year 2090.
The problem with enacting an across-the-board hike is that it poses a potential burden on lower-income and middle-class individuals and families.
According to a 2014 survey by the National Academy of Social Insurance, the most popular solution among citizens interviewed at random would actually be a combination of gradually increasing the Social Security tax rate from its current 6.2% to 7.2% for both employers and employees while removing the cap on Social Security taxable wages altogether.
Historically, Social Security's payroll tax cap wasn't always wage-indexed. That method was undertaken in 1975 when Congress felt that retirees needed a raise and the program needed more revenue. From 1937 to 1971, the cap was instated arbitrarily – on an "as-needed" basis. From 1972 to 1974, the maximum taxable earnings were determined by amendments passed in 1972.
Trump Social Security
Currently, any wages earned above and beyond $127,200 are free and clear of the payroll tax.
Up Next
Uncle Sam is about to implement another controversial plan – one that likewise threatens the retirement of millions of Americans…
The U.S. government will soon exploit an obscure loophole buried in Title 29 of the U.S. Labor Code to do it. If you have a 401(k), IRA, or any type of retirement account, this could cause you to miss out on $68,870 or more. Learn more…
http://moneymorning.com
I pray that he does not screw us Seniors and Disabled up. That I pray!! do you?
By Money Morning Staff Reports, Money Morning • Feb. 3, 2017
Social Security
President Trump speaks on his relief at having won the state of Texas on e******n night, Dec. 15, 2016.
President Donald Trump pledged repeatedly on the campaign trail not to cut Medicare or Social Security benefits.
But something must be done – and soon – to address these entitlement programs' looming financial crisis.
According to Congressional Budget Office estimates released in 2015, Social Security's cash deficit is set to explode to $361 billion in 2025 from $74 billion in 2014.
The CBO's findings also pointed to the $2.8 trillion Social Security trust fund (which includes Medicare expense coverage) to begin its official depletion run late in 2029, after which its revenue will cover only about 75% of scheduled benefits until 2034.
These estimates, of course, pertain to Social Security and Medicare's fate should Uncle Sam take no further actions to thwart the programs' demise in the very near future.
And despite Donald Trump's reiterated vows not to cut SS benefits, his nomination for budget director – Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-SC) – suggests he might do just that…
Trump's First Option for Social Security: Cut Benefits
In his Senate testimony last Tuesday (Jan. 25), Mulvaney stated he believes cuts to Social Security and Medicare are necessary in order to keep the programs solvent. His statement directly contradicted Trump's campaign pledges about entitlement programs.
"I have no reason to believe the president has changed his mind" on not touching entitlement programs, Mulvaney said, according to The Washington Post on Jan. 24. But, he added, "My job … is to be completely and brutally honest with him."
The South Carolina senator clarified his stance by stating his proposed cuts would not affect current recipients.
Must Read: These are the best stocks to buy for a profitable 2017.
Mulvaney also suggested immediate "means-testing" for those applying for Medicare benefits to begin as early as this year.
Means-testing is a method used by the government to determine whether someone qualifies for a financial assistance program. Insofar as Medicare is concerned, Mulvaney's plan would make Medicare available to retirement-age individuals on a case-by-case basis – thereby stripping away the program's designated "entitlement" status.
Aside from cutting benefits to these entitlement programs, however, there is another controversial option President Trump could utilize to stifle Social Security's fiscal demise…
Trump's Second Option for Social Security: Increase Payroll Taxes
Another method to keep entitlement programs solvent would be to increase payroll taxes across the board for all working Americans.
Last year's Social Security Trustees report listed an actuarial deficit of 2.66% in 2016, suggesting that a 2.66% increase in the payroll tax should sustain the program without the need for benefit cuts through the year 2090.
The problem with enacting an across-the-board hike is that it poses a potential burden on lower-income and middle-class individuals and families.
According to a 2014 survey by the National Academy of Social Insurance, the most popular solution among citizens interviewed at random would actually be a combination of gradually increasing the Social Security tax rate from its current 6.2% to 7.2% for both employers and employees while removing the cap on Social Security taxable wages altogether.
Historically, Social Security's payroll tax cap wasn't always wage-indexed. That method was undertaken in 1975 when Congress felt that retirees needed a raise and the program needed more revenue. From 1937 to 1971, the cap was instated arbitrarily – on an "as-needed" basis. From 1972 to 1974, the maximum taxable earnings were determined by amendments passed in 1972.
Trump Social Security
Currently, any wages earned above and beyond $127,200 are free and clear of the payroll tax.
Up Next
Uncle Sam is about to implement another controversial plan – one that likewise threatens the retirement of millions of Americans…
The U.S. government will soon exploit an obscure loophole buried in Title 29 of the U.S. Labor Code to do it. If you have a 401(k), IRA, or any type of retirement account, this could cause you to miss out on $68,870 or more. Learn more…
http://moneymorning.com
I pray that he does not screw us Seniors and Disabled up. That I pray!! do you?Feb 3, 2017 20:16:55 #
(Main)
Securing our Borders from Terrorist Threats
This week President Trump fired acting Attorney General Sally Yates, a holdover from the Obama administration, when she declared his executive order on i*****l i*********n. That’s not her job, and the President was right to fire her, as I said in this statement to the press:
President Trump is to be commended for upholding the rule of law in firing Yates for her politicization of the Justice Department. Judicial Watch has long sounded a warning about allowing unvetted refugees into the United States.
According to the official White House statement, President Trump fired her for “refusing to enforce a legal order designed to protect the citizens of the United States.” If you doubt that there is a crisis being prevented by the Trump administration’s sensible pause on foreign refugees and other foreign nationals from terror-torn countries, consider just a few JW reports on the threat caused by the failing vetting process for alleged refugees:
Terrorist Enter U.S. via Resettlement Program for “Vulnerable Refugees”
Iraqi Refugee Granted U.S. Residency Charged With Terrorism in Texas
Feds Blame “Lapse in Vetting” for Admitting Syrian Refugees with Terrorist Ties into U.S.
In addition, you may recall how we uncovered the waste, fraud, and lies associated with the Obama refugee program.
As I explained to Bloomberg News, the Left is in full attack mode for open borders (for terrorists, even):
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a Washington-based conservative group that pressed a series of lawsuits to force the release of Hillary Clinton’s e-mails, said liberals have a well-funded infrastructure that uses the courts to impose policies they can’t enact through Congress. Fitton said conservatives have nothing to compare to the left’s “legal machinery.”
“The left pretends that disagreements on policy mean their opponents are doing something illegal,” said Fitton, who said liberal groups also benefit from friendly government workers and a sympathetic media. He said his group is monitoring the suits against Trump and “may take steps to enter the litigations on the side of the rule of law.”
Judicial Watch is tracking each and every legal challenge from the ACLU crowd to the Trump immigration initiatives, has launched Freedom of Information Act requests and is considering direct legal action in these lawsuits on behalf of the rule of law and the national security of the United States.
http://www.info@news.judicalwatch.org.
It is something we need to do, regardless of what these Pro= Illegal Lovers want. I don't want one of these freaks to come up to my neighborhood, creating H**e and discontent, Do You?
This week President Trump fired acting Attorney General Sally Yates, a holdover from the Obama administration, when she declared his executive order on i*****l i*********n. That’s not her job, and the President was right to fire her, as I said in this statement to the press:
President Trump is to be commended for upholding the rule of law in firing Yates for her politicization of the Justice Department. Judicial Watch has long sounded a warning about allowing unvetted refugees into the United States.
According to the official White House statement, President Trump fired her for “refusing to enforce a legal order designed to protect the citizens of the United States.” If you doubt that there is a crisis being prevented by the Trump administration’s sensible pause on foreign refugees and other foreign nationals from terror-torn countries, consider just a few JW reports on the threat caused by the failing vetting process for alleged refugees:
Terrorist Enter U.S. via Resettlement Program for “Vulnerable Refugees”
Iraqi Refugee Granted U.S. Residency Charged With Terrorism in Texas
Feds Blame “Lapse in Vetting” for Admitting Syrian Refugees with Terrorist Ties into U.S.
In addition, you may recall how we uncovered the waste, fraud, and lies associated with the Obama refugee program.
As I explained to Bloomberg News, the Left is in full attack mode for open borders (for terrorists, even):
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a Washington-based conservative group that pressed a series of lawsuits to force the release of Hillary Clinton’s e-mails, said liberals have a well-funded infrastructure that uses the courts to impose policies they can’t enact through Congress. Fitton said conservatives have nothing to compare to the left’s “legal machinery.”
“The left pretends that disagreements on policy mean their opponents are doing something illegal,” said Fitton, who said liberal groups also benefit from friendly government workers and a sympathetic media. He said his group is monitoring the suits against Trump and “may take steps to enter the litigations on the side of the rule of law.”
Judicial Watch is tracking each and every legal challenge from the ACLU crowd to the Trump immigration initiatives, has launched Freedom of Information Act requests and is considering direct legal action in these lawsuits on behalf of the rule of law and the national security of the United States.
http://www.info@news.judicalwatch.org.
It is something we need to do, regardless of what these Pro= Illegal Lovers want. I don't want one of these freaks to come up to my neighborhood, creating H**e and discontent, Do You?Feb 3, 2017 20:10:52 #
(Main)
It’s Naive To Think I*****l A***ns Aren’t V****g
For many years we have fought to restore integrity to e******ns in the United States, fighting both the Obama Justice Department and its l*****t allies, such as the well-funded ACLU. You can sample our efforts here. Finally the issue of e******n integrity has new national prominence thanks to President Donald Trump’s call for an investigation into illegal v****g.
I wrote about this for The Daily Caller:
L*****ts and their media outlets have been all too eager to dismiss President Donald Trump’s charge that as many as 5 million i*****l a***ns v**ed in the 2016 p**********l e******n, enough to easily swing the popular v**e to Hillary Clinton.
Many of these pundits, backed by an army of so-called “fact-checkers,” would have you believe that the number of i******s who are registering to v**e and v****g is insignificant. Oh, there may be the occasional, misguided “undocumented worker” who inadvertently wanders into the e******n booth, they seem to suggest. But, surely, not enough to make any difference.
Anyone who thinks that needs to think again.
There are a total of 43 million noncitizens currently living within U.S. borders. Of these, approximately 12 million are i*****l a***ns. Not only are there well-documented reasons to believe that many of them may be violating e******n integrity, the fact is many on the left are more than happy to see them do so. A Rasmussen Reports poll last year found that 53 percent of the Democratic Party supports allowing i*****l a***ns to v**e.
Part of the problem is that e******n laws in the United States are a complicated hodgepodge of federal, state, and local rules, regulations, and red tape. Generally speaking, it is illegal for any noncitizens to cast a v**e in any e******n, and those who do are at least theoretically subject to criminal penalties if they are caught.
But many states do not have a v**er ID requirement. Worse yet, many states do not even have a requirement to certify citizenship, other than saying out loud that you are a citizen. All too many of the systems that are in place to prevent unlawful v****g are either nonexistent or are so weak that they are useless. We are naïve to think that the millions of people who are present in the United States illegally are all resisting the temptation to cast unlawful v**es, especially when so much is at stake – including their being able to continue illegally residing within our borders.
As I point out in my book, Clean House, in 2014 a disturbing study by political scientists at Old D******n found that 6.4 percent of foreign nationals residing in the United States v**ed in the 2008 p**********l e******n. If the key Old D******n study results on the 2008 e******n were applied to 2016 — 1.41 million aliens may have v**ed illegally, with probably 1.13 million v****g for Democrats.
Add to that the 2012 Pew Research Center study noting that “approximately 2.75 million people have active registrations in more than one state.” On top of that, the study revealed, more than “1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as active v**ers.” Combine those figures with the number of aliens the Old D******n study cites, and the Trump allegations may not be so far out of line.
A full-scale, non-partisan federal v***r f***d investigation is long overdue. I’m not aware of any systematic federal investigation of v***r f***d – ever. Initially, such an investigation would be a simple matter of analyzing v***r r**********n databases against federal databases of aliens and deceased individuals. Judicial Watch’s E******n Integrity team, headed up by Robert Popper, former Deputy Chief of the V****g Section in the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, would be more than happy to help.
Of course we’ll keep you updated on our efforts and those of the Trump administration.
http://www.info@news.judicalwatch.org
It doesn't take much, to see the Writing on the Wall, it is plain to see, that this is a fact.
For many years we have fought to restore integrity to e******ns in the United States, fighting both the Obama Justice Department and its l*****t allies, such as the well-funded ACLU. You can sample our efforts here. Finally the issue of e******n integrity has new national prominence thanks to President Donald Trump’s call for an investigation into illegal v****g.
I wrote about this for The Daily Caller:
L*****ts and their media outlets have been all too eager to dismiss President Donald Trump’s charge that as many as 5 million i*****l a***ns v**ed in the 2016 p**********l e******n, enough to easily swing the popular v**e to Hillary Clinton.
Many of these pundits, backed by an army of so-called “fact-checkers,” would have you believe that the number of i******s who are registering to v**e and v****g is insignificant. Oh, there may be the occasional, misguided “undocumented worker” who inadvertently wanders into the e******n booth, they seem to suggest. But, surely, not enough to make any difference.
Anyone who thinks that needs to think again.
There are a total of 43 million noncitizens currently living within U.S. borders. Of these, approximately 12 million are i*****l a***ns. Not only are there well-documented reasons to believe that many of them may be violating e******n integrity, the fact is many on the left are more than happy to see them do so. A Rasmussen Reports poll last year found that 53 percent of the Democratic Party supports allowing i*****l a***ns to v**e.
Part of the problem is that e******n laws in the United States are a complicated hodgepodge of federal, state, and local rules, regulations, and red tape. Generally speaking, it is illegal for any noncitizens to cast a v**e in any e******n, and those who do are at least theoretically subject to criminal penalties if they are caught.
But many states do not have a v**er ID requirement. Worse yet, many states do not even have a requirement to certify citizenship, other than saying out loud that you are a citizen. All too many of the systems that are in place to prevent unlawful v****g are either nonexistent or are so weak that they are useless. We are naïve to think that the millions of people who are present in the United States illegally are all resisting the temptation to cast unlawful v**es, especially when so much is at stake – including their being able to continue illegally residing within our borders.
As I point out in my book, Clean House, in 2014 a disturbing study by political scientists at Old D******n found that 6.4 percent of foreign nationals residing in the United States v**ed in the 2008 p**********l e******n. If the key Old D******n study results on the 2008 e******n were applied to 2016 — 1.41 million aliens may have v**ed illegally, with probably 1.13 million v****g for Democrats.
Add to that the 2012 Pew Research Center study noting that “approximately 2.75 million people have active registrations in more than one state.” On top of that, the study revealed, more than “1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as active v**ers.” Combine those figures with the number of aliens the Old D******n study cites, and the Trump allegations may not be so far out of line.
A full-scale, non-partisan federal v***r f***d investigation is long overdue. I’m not aware of any systematic federal investigation of v***r f***d – ever. Initially, such an investigation would be a simple matter of analyzing v***r r**********n databases against federal databases of aliens and deceased individuals. Judicial Watch’s E******n Integrity team, headed up by Robert Popper, former Deputy Chief of the V****g Section in the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, would be more than happy to help.
Of course we’ll keep you updated on our efforts and those of the Trump administration.
http://www.info@news.judicalwatch.org
It doesn't take much, to see the Writing on the Wall, it is plain to see, that this is a fact.
Jan 31, 2017 21:30:02 #
(Main)
It is too soon to tell, just what's going to happen. We shall see what we shall see, now that's my opinion!!