|
Post by FiendslayerPrime1976 on May 2, 2019 3:58:19 GMT
That could be a key factor, showing him looking so feeble could prompt some of his supporters to desert him and start things really rolling towards the downfall of the regime. My thoughts exactly - If Frothy's mental state begins to be seriously called into question due to his near-fatal injuries, I suspect a certain number of his less-hardcore supporters will withdraw their support for his administration, and that will certainly embolden those Americans opposed to his administration's policies to intensify their actions, which will cause even more cracks in the Santorum regime's already significantly cracked foundation...
|
|
|
Post by silentrunner on May 31, 2019 18:29:04 GMT
US TROOPS COMPLICIT IN INDIAN GOVERNMENT REPRESSION
Reuters June 29, 2008
According to a former US Army soldier, the United States military has been assisting the Indian military junta in repressing pro-democracy activism.
The soldier, who wished to remain anonymous, says that American troops have been rounding up dissidents and detaining them in a secret facility on the island of Diego Garcia. The US government justifies these actions by claiming that the detainees have links to Islamic terrorism.
Diego Garcia, a British overseas territory in the Indian Ocean, has served as a base for the US Navy under an agreement made in 1966. However, cooling relations between America and Britain over the past few years have led some in the British government to call for terminating the agreement.
|
|
|
Post by FiendslayerPrime1976 on Jun 4, 2019 1:12:13 GMT
US TROOPS COMPLICIT IN INDIAN GOVERNMENT REPRESSION Reuters June 29, 2008 According to a former US Army soldier, the United States military has been assisting the Indian military junta in repressing pro-democracy activism. The soldier, who wished to remain anonymous, says that American troops have been rounding up dissidents and detaining them in a secret facility on the island of Diego Garcia. The US government justifies these actions by claiming that the detainees have links to Islamic terrorism. Diego Garcia, a British overseas territory in the Indian Ocean, has served as a base for the US Navy under an agreement made in 1966. However, cooling relations between America and Britain over the past few years have led some in the British government to call for terminating the agreement. As if the USN's blockade of the United Republic of the Marianas isn't bad enough for the US's global image, now the world learns through an anonymous leaker that the US Army has been assisting India's military junta in imprisoning pro-democracy dissidents!
This is not going to go over well with a great many people across the globe... Certainly they're not going to buy the line that all of the detainees have links to Islamic terrorism... Perhaps the UK might decide at some point in the very near future to evict the US military forces stationed in Diego Garcia by canceling the US's lease on the island base... That would certainly be a very big stand taken by a nation fed up with the Santorum regime's policies, and cause a real uproar both within the US military and within Washington DC, particularly amongst Frothy's hardcore supporters!
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Jun 4, 2019 10:31:36 GMT
US TROOPS COMPLICIT IN INDIAN GOVERNMENT REPRESSION Reuters June 29, 2008 According to a former US Army soldier, the United States military has been assisting the Indian military junta in repressing pro-democracy activism. The soldier, who wished to remain anonymous, says that American troops have been rounding up dissidents and detaining them in a secret facility on the island of Diego Garcia. The US government justifies these actions by claiming that the detainees have links to Islamic terrorism. Diego Garcia, a British overseas territory in the Indian Ocean, has served as a base for the US Navy under an agreement made in 1966. However, cooling relations between America and Britain over the past few years have led some in the British government to call for terminating the agreement. As if the USN's blockade of the United Republic of the Marianas isn't bad enough for the US's global image, now the world learns through an anonymous leaker that the US Army has been assisting India's military junta in imprisoning pro-democracy dissidents!
This is not going to go over well with a great many people across the globe... Certainly they're not going to buy the line that all of the detainees have links to Islamic terrorism... Perhaps the UK might decide at some point in the very near future to evict the US military forces stationed in Diego Garcia by canceling the US's lease on the island base... That would certainly be a very big stand taken by a nation fed up with the Santorum regime's policies, and cause a real uproar both within the US military and within Washington DC, particularly amongst Frothy's hardcore supporters!
Given the current nature of the US government I wonder if they would accept such an eviction or decide their going to sit tight? Which would cause more unrest both inside the US and across the world but given that Britain wouldn't have any capacity to force the US to leave relations would worsen further.
|
|
|
Post by silentrunner on Jul 1, 2019 23:33:50 GMT
"The allegations concerning the US military in India are completely untrue and should be disregarded"
Acting President Lott
"End the US presence in the Indian Ocean"
Sign from a protest outside the US Embassy in London
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Jul 2, 2019 9:57:59 GMT
" The allegations concerning the US military in India are completely untrue and should be disregarded" Acting President Lott "End the US presence in the Indian Ocean" Sign from a protest outside the US Embassy in London
Considering the history of the regime and its past actions that will be taken as an admission by many people.
|
|
|
Post by FiendslayerPrime1976 on Jul 3, 2019 0:24:22 GMT
" The allegations concerning the US military in India are completely untrue and should be disregarded" Acting President Lott "End the US presence in the Indian Ocean" Sign from a protest outside the US Embassy in London
Considering the history of the regime and its past actions that will be taken as an admission by many people. My thoughts exactly... After the Santorum regime's assault upon democracy in their own country, their denials of the USM assisting the Indian junta in the repression of pro-democracy activists is only going to confirm in the minds of many people that the USM is doing exactly that, and the more that Lott & Co. continue to deny the allegations, the more people will come to the conclusion that they're being lied to!
|
|
|
Post by silentrunner on Jul 5, 2019 2:15:13 GMT
Happy Fourth of July, folks
BOMBS GO OFF AT DC FOURTH OF JULY PARADE
New York Times July 4, 2008
A Fourth of July celebration in the nation's capital turned into a scene of horror when two bombs went off during a parade.
According to Washington DC police, the explosions resulted in 28 dead and nearly 200 injured.
So far, nobody has stepped forward to claim responsibility for the bombing. The US government has blamed the Continental Army, a revolutionary group dedicated to overthrowing the federal government.
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Jul 5, 2019 9:46:24 GMT
Happy Fourth of July, folks BOMBS GO OFF AT DC FOURTH OF JULY PARADE New York Times July 4, 2008 A Fourth of July celebration in the nation's capital turned into a scene of horror when two bombs went off during a parade. According to Washington DC police, the explosions resulted in 28 dead and nearly 200 injured. So far, nobody has stepped forward to claim responsibility for the bombing. The US government has blamed the Continental Army, a revolutionary group dedicated to overthrowing the federal government.
This could be nasty whoever was responsible. The government will seek to gain respectability and support by blaming their opponents - and no doubt not differentiating between violent and non-violent ones. However if it turns out that the government was responsible, which given its past behaviour is a definite possibility, there would be hell to pay.
|
|
|
Post by omega13a on Jul 5, 2019 22:42:31 GMT
I have a hunch that it was another "false flag" operation.
|
|
|
Post by FiendslayerPrime1976 on Jul 6, 2019 8:06:37 GMT
Happy Fourth of July, folks BOMBS GO OFF AT DC FOURTH OF JULY PARADE New York Times July 4, 2008 A Fourth of July celebration in the nation's capital turned into a scene of horror when two bombs went off during a parade. According to Washington DC police, the explosions resulted in 28 dead and nearly 200 injured. So far, nobody has stepped forward to claim responsibility for the bombing. The US government has blamed the Continental Army, a revolutionary group dedicated to overthrowing the federal government.
This could be nasty whoever was responsible. The government will seek to gain respectability and support by blaming their opponents - and no doubt not differentiating between violent and non-violent ones. However if it turns out that the government was responsible, which given its past behaviour is a definite possibility, there would be hell to pay. In my own opinion I seriously doubt that this attack is the work of the Continental Army, for one very simple reason: The Continental Army needs the support of the American people in their fight to remove the Santorum regime from power. Bombing a parade during the July 4th celebrations in the nation's capital no less would seriously turn public opinion against them, which is exactly what they do not need. The fact that they have not promptly claimed responsibility for this attack, unlike the April 30th shootout at the MPDC HQ, only strengthens my suspicion that this is not their doing. So that leaves three possibilities: the attack was committed by either (1) a lone wolf, (2) a different resistance group which isn't concerned about collateral damage, or (3) the Santorum regime itself; a false flag operation against the Continental Army. Given all their prior bad acts, I strongly suspect that it's number 3. And I also strongly suspect that regardless of whoever committed this attack, things are going to turn really nasty in the very near future.
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Jul 6, 2019 9:39:46 GMT
This could be nasty whoever was responsible. The government will seek to gain respectability and support by blaming their opponents - and no doubt not differentiating between violent and non-violent ones. However if it turns out that the government was responsible, which given its past behaviour is a definite possibility, there would be hell to pay. In my own opinion I seriously doubt that this attack is the work of the Continental Army, for one very simple reason: The Continental Army needs the support of the American people in their fight to remove the Santorum regime from power. Bombing a parade during the July 4th celebrations in the nation's capital no less would seriously turn public opinion against them, which is exactly what they do not need. The fact that they have not promptly claimed responsibility for this attack, unlike the April 30th shootout at the MPDC HQ, only strengthens my suspicion that this is not their doing. So that leaves three possibilities: the attack was committed by either (1) a lone wolf, (2) a different resistance group which isn't concerned about collateral damage, or (3) the Santorum regime itself; a false flag operation against the Continental Army. Given all their prior bad acts, I strongly suspect that it's number 3. And I also strongly suspect that regardless of whoever committed this attack, things are going to turn really nasty in the very near future.
Fully agree. There needs to be some reservation that we don't assume everything bad is the responsibility of the regime but it does seem the most likely. As you say its extremely unlikely the Continental Army would be responsible as is definitely not in their interest to make such an attack. There is the possibility of a lone nutter but even then if someone really hated the regime - and plenty have reasons to - their more likely to attack some part of the government rather than a public parade. Especially at such an event.
|
|
|
Post by Spartan025 on Jul 6, 2019 17:35:13 GMT
In my own opinion I seriously doubt that this attack is the work of the Continental Army, for one very simple reason: The Continental Army needs the support of the American people in their fight to remove the Santorum regime from power. Bombing a parade during the July 4th celebrations in the nation's capital no less would seriously turn public opinion against them, which is exactly what they do not need. The fact that they have not promptly claimed responsibility for this attack, unlike the April 30th shootout at the MPDC HQ, only strengthens my suspicion that this is not their doing. So that leaves three possibilities: the attack was committed by either (1) a lone wolf, (2) a different resistance group which isn't concerned about collateral damage, or (3) the Santorum regime itself; a false flag operation against the Continental Army. Given all their prior bad acts, I strongly suspect that it's number 3. And I also strongly suspect that regardless of whoever committed this attack, things are going to turn really nasty in the very near future.
Of course there is always option 4 (which could come under option 1 and/or 2 anyway) in that the attack was carried out by Islamic terrorists
|
|
|
Post by silentrunner on Jul 7, 2019 16:44:54 GMT
Tell us about the July 4 2008 attacks
"The Continental Army had been a thorn in the side of the Santorum/Lott Administration for some time. They had the support of a large chunk of the American public, despite the government's attempts to paint them as barbaric terrorists. The most vexing part was that the Army made a point of minimizing collateral damage in their attacks on the federal government. Operation Festival was meant to change that."
How was this operation carried out?
"A couple of FBI agents set up two bombs on a street where a parade was scheduled to go. The only real trouble was finding someone willing to kill American civilians in cold blood."
Did Operation Festival succeed in turning the American public against the Continental Army?
"Not really. The only people who fell for it were the kind of people who already saw the Army as violent anarchists. Everyone else saw right through it."
Testimony of John Ashcroft, former Director of the FBI, to the Sotomayor Commission, November 21, 2011
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Jul 7, 2019 18:09:09 GMT
Tell us about the July 4 2008 attacks"The Continental Army had been a thorn in the side of the Santorum/Lott Administration for some time. They had the support of a large chunk of the American public, despite the government's attempts to paint them as barbaric terrorists. The most vexing part was that the Army made a point of minimizing collateral damage in their attacks on the federal government. Operation Festival was meant to change that." How was this operation carried out?"A couple of FBI agents set up two bombs on a street where a parade was scheduled to go. The only real trouble was finding someone willing to kill American civilians in cold blood." Did Operation Festival succeed in turning the American public against the Continental Army?"Not really. The only people who fell for it were the kind of people who already saw the Army as violent anarchists. Everyone else saw right through it." Testimony of John Ashcroft, former Director of the FBI, to the Sotomayor Commission, November 21, 2011
Well that's what we're thinking so its no great shock but if/when that secret comes out its probably going to be a quick and bloody end to the regime.
|
|
|
Post by FiendslayerPrime1976 on Jul 8, 2019 5:00:58 GMT
Tell us about the July 4 2008 attacks"The Continental Army had been a thorn in the side of the Santorum/Lott Administration for some time. They had the support of a large chunk of the American public, despite the government's attempts to paint them as barbaric terrorists. The most vexing part was that the Army made a point of minimizing collateral damage in their attacks on the federal government. Operation Festival was meant to change that." How was this operation carried out?"A couple of FBI agents set up two bombs on a street where a parade was scheduled to go. The only real trouble was finding someone willing to kill American civilians in cold blood." Did Operation Festival succeed in turning the American public against the Continental Army?"Not really. The only people who fell for it were the kind of people who already saw the Army as violent anarchists. Everyone else saw right through it." Testimony of John Ashcroft, former Director of the FBI, to the Sotomayor Commission, November 21, 2011 I knew it... Looks like Operation Festival didn't work out the way the Santorum regime expected it to - but then again what else can you expect? By now the majority of the American people no longer believes or trusts the current administration, and with very good reason: The disappearances / deaths of opponents / critics of the regime, the passage of laws that most people rightfully see as cruel and unjust, the USN's blockade of the Marianas, and the USM's complicity in the Indian junta's suppression of pro-democracy activists... Operation Festival has simply confirmed to most Americans that they've got a rogue administration that's attempting to hold on to power at all costs running the country, so things are very likely going to come to a breaking point very soon - I'm just wondering what the spark that lights the conflagration thats going to burn down Frothy's entire regime is going to be!
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Jul 8, 2019 8:30:23 GMT
Tell us about the July 4 2008 attacks"The Continental Army had been a thorn in the side of the Santorum/Lott Administration for some time. They had the support of a large chunk of the American public, despite the government's attempts to paint them as barbaric terrorists. The most vexing part was that the Army made a point of minimizing collateral damage in their attacks on the federal government. Operation Festival was meant to change that." How was this operation carried out?"A couple of FBI agents set up two bombs on a street where a parade was scheduled to go. The only real trouble was finding someone willing to kill American civilians in cold blood." Did Operation Festival succeed in turning the American public against the Continental Army?"Not really. The only people who fell for it were the kind of people who already saw the Army as violent anarchists. Everyone else saw right through it." Testimony of John Ashcroft, former Director of the FBI, to the Sotomayor Commission, November 21, 2011
Actually thinking about it I would say a greater problem would be finding such people without people who would be utterly appalled by such an operation finding out about it and blowing the whistle as loudly as they could. Which might be the spark that ignites the explosion?
|
|
|
Post by omega13a on Jul 8, 2019 23:27:38 GMT
Tell us about the July 4 2008 attacks"The Continental Army had been a thorn in the side of the Santorum/Lott Administration for some time. They had the support of a large chunk of the American public, despite the government's attempts to paint them as barbaric terrorists. The most vexing part was that the Army made a point of minimizing collateral damage in their attacks on the federal government. Operation Festival was meant to change that." How was this operation carried out?"A couple of FBI agents set up two bombs on a street where a parade was scheduled to go. The only real trouble was finding someone willing to kill American civilians in cold blood." Did Operation Festival succeed in turning the American public against the Continental Army?"Not really. The only people who fell for it were the kind of people who already saw the Army as violent anarchists. Everyone else saw right through it." Testimony of John Ashcroft, former Director of the FBI, to the Sotomayor Commission, November 21, 2011
Actually thinking about it I would say a greater problem would be finding such people without people who would be utterly appalled by such an operation finding out about it and blowing the whistle as loudly as they could. Which might be the spark that ignites the explosion?
Which is the same problem with the attempted assassination of that governor using a sabotaged plane. Which reminds me, how is that investigation in to that plane crash going as well as the one into that Hawaiian plane?
|
|
|
Post by silentrunner on Aug 17, 2019 1:30:19 GMT
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION HELD IN PHILADELPHIA
Reuters July 11, 2008
The Democratic Party of the United States has convened at the Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia to select a candidate for 2008 Presidential Election.
It is generally accepted that Representative Bud Cramer from Alabama will be chosen as candidate. Cramer's message of moderate conservatism has won over Americans dissatisfied by the Santorum Administration's increasing extremism. Cramer also has the support of the Heartland Party, a splinter party from the Republicans, has also endorsed Cramer in lieu of running their own candidate.
However, some in the Democratic Party feel that Cramer's ideology is too similar to Santorum's. Former Vermont governor Howard Dean has emerged as Cramer's strongest challenger.
The 2008 Democratic National Convention was an unmitigated disaster. Things started out fine on the first day, with Cramer pledging to roll back Santorum's policies. The convention started to fall aprt the next day, when Howard Dean brought up Cramer's conservative voting record and suggested that Cramer would not in fact repeal Santorum's policies. Things deteriorated from there as Dean supporters accused Cramer supporters of being DINOs-Democrats in name only.
By the end of the convention, the Democrats had split into two factions. Cramer was the "official" ticket. As an olive branch to left-wingers, he chose Senator Dianne Feinstein of California as his running mate. Dean launched his own "rogue" candidacy, choosing Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois as his running mate.
Chris Hedges, Santorumstan: Life Under American Theocracy, 2012
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Aug 17, 2019 10:37:10 GMT
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION HELD IN PHILADELPHIA Reuters July 11, 2008 The Democratic Party of the United States has convened at the Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia to select a candidate for 2008 Presidential Election. It is generally accepted that Representative Bud Cramer from Alabama will be chosen as candidate. Cramer's message of moderate conservatism has won over Americans dissatisfied by the Santorum Administration's increasing extremism. Cramer also has the support of the Heartland Party, a splinter party from the Republicans, has also endorsed Cramer in lieu of running their own candidate. However, some in the Democratic Party feel that Cramer's ideology is too similar to Santorum's. Former Vermont governor Howard Dean has emerged as Cramer's strongest challenger. The 2008 Democratic National Convention was an unmitigated disaster. Things started out fine on the first day, with Cramer pledging to roll back Santorum's policies. The convention started to fall aprt the next day, when Howard Dean brought up Cramer's conservative voting record and suggested that Cramer would not in fact repeal Santorum's policies. Things deteriorated from there as Dean supporters accused Cramer supporters of being DINOs-Democrats in name only.
By the end of the convention, the Democrats had split into two factions. Cramer was the "official" ticket. As an olive branch to left-wingers, he chose Senator Dianne Feinstein of California as his running mate. Dean launched his own "rogue" candidacy, choosing Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois as his running mate. Chris Hedges, Santorumstan: Life Under American Theocracy, 2012
Great. Just when the US needs a clear alternative to Santorum the Democrats can't agree.
|
|