Hillary Clinton: just because she deserves her own thread

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Saturday, September 27, 2025 01:07
VIEWED: 114591
PAGE 3 of 46

I'm confused SIG. When you say destabilizing a nation are you referring to what Russia is doing in the Ukraine? Because the consensus is that Russian has invaded Ukraine for the purpose of stealing territory and treasure.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I thought this was funny...

Quote:

---

Our source has obtained these draft notes from the waste paper basket in the office of the Director, Spin Central, Western Main Stream Media Holdings.

ISSUE: Putin has recently announced a partial pullout from Syria and claimed success.

BACKGROUND: For months we have been saying that Putin's air force has been clusterbombing civilians, good moderate rebels, sand and hospitals; that Putin is getting bogged down; that it was turning into another Afghanistan; that he was lying when he said he was bombing terrorists; that all he was doing was propping up Assad. In short that it was a failure that could only grow worse. "Russia's Failed Adventure in Syria" by Con Coughlin, Defence Editor of the Daily Telegraph is a typical example. Others are "Putin bogging down in Syria", "Russian army in Syria: A failure foretold" and "Putin Dare Not Send More Forces to Syria". These must now, as it were, be unspun in such a way that we do not look like fools [who were just speaking stenography to power -crossout].

PROBLEM: Many of our [dupes -punters -sheeple - crossout] citizens are in danger of forming the impression that Putin actually did what he said he would do, when he said he would do it and, having done it, is finished. Some are even going so far as to suggest Putin did us a service by attacking ISIS. Such an impression would directly threaten our [credibility- profits- crossout] freedoms and values.

SOLUTION: It is imperative that we develop a media campaign to [save our faces-crossout] regain the moral high ground. Consultations with our specialists have developed the following themes. The essence is that, while not a complete failure, Putin's war had a very limited and short-lived success. All writers are instructed to work these themes into their coverage.

* Putin attacked Syria to distract the population from the catastrophic economy. Nonstop videos of explosions on state-controlled TV had an initial effect which soon wore off. With the collapse of his popularity ratings [from 90% to 85%- crossout] he realised he had milked it for as much as he could and it was time for another diversion.

* The attack on Syria diverted attention from Putin's war in Ukraine. The pullout has successfully diverted attention from Putin's war in Syria.

* Putin's war has been countered by the successful diplomacy of President US President Obama and (insert the name of local stooge leader) which created the ceasefire and brought the warring parties to the negotiating table.

* Humorists can make the point that Putin has run out of Syrian hospitals and orphanages to bomb.

* Find "some expert" to "believe" that the cost of the intervention was ruinously high and that "probably" Putin's supporters told him to stop or they would dismiss him.

* Suggest there was a big argument with Assad and Putin left to punish him. "Some experts believe" is the way to introduce this story.

* Other departments will be trying to create a "Soldiers' Mothers Committee" to claim there were thousands of hidden casualties. Be ready to quote them.

* Don't forget to say that Putin claimed "mission accomplished" and that he promised to completely withdraw. This allows us to call him a liar if these things do not happen. In the meantime, anything short of 100% "accomplished" can be spun as failure.

Standard instructions continue as usual:

Scatter the expressions "barrel bombs", "troll factories", "hybrid war", "carpet bombing" and "weaponising" freely through your writings. But I don't think we can get away with "weaponising success" though.

Question the reliability of everything Putin says and observe that, while his motives are always obscure, they are always malign.

Don't forget personalisation: everything is "Putin's"

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

1KIKI

Monday, March 28, 2016 7:40 AM

Democrats, you can’t vote for Hillary: The case for writing in Bernie Sanders If Hillary Clinton is the nominee
We need structural change: Clinton as president would merge GOPers and Dems into one party on war & foreign policy
H. A. Goodman

http://www.salon.com/2016/03/21/democrats_you_cant_vote_for_hillary_th
e_case_for_writing_in_bernie_sanders_if_hillary_clinton_is_the_nominee/

The same neoconservatives who view the Iraq War as the right decision are now gravitating towards Hillary Clinton.

Only Bernie Sanders says “I’ll be damned” to quagmires. Trump is actually less hawkish than Clinton, which says a lot about Hillary Clinton, and lot about her supporters.

If Bernie Sanders doesn’t win the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton might be “better” than Trump in many ways, but certainly not from the vantage point of structural change. The word “better” doesn’t explain the global ramifications of allowing George W. Bush’s neoconservative advisers, and Henry Kissinger, into a Democratic White House. ...

The merger of both American political parties on war is actually the foundation for fascism. When a Democrat appeals to neoconservatives, and legitimizes Henry Kissinger’s foreign policy, then we’ve altered our democracy forever.

The Middle East is engulfed in flames because of Bush’s decision to invade Iraq (aided by Democrats like Clinton) and unintended consequences, or blowback, like ISIS. As for the devastating toll on Iraq, over 174,000 civilian deaths have been documented, and this could be a conservative estimate. One study states that around 500,000 human beings have died, but that report was published in 2013. Still, there are far higher estimates of carnage.

I’m not saying writing-in Bernie, if Clinton is the nominee, will be perfect. However, as I’ve heard throughout this election, “don’t let perfect be the enemy of the good.”

If you blame Ralph Nader for 2000, then remember Iraq was the biggest tragedy of the Bush years. Not only did Clinton vote for Iraq, she’s learned from her “mistake” by appealing to neoconservatives on foreign policy.

---

---

---

SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

http://www.salon.com/2016/03/18/hillary_clinton_doesnt_get_it_paul_kru
gman_bernie_sanders_and_the_truth_about_the_free_trade_scam/

Hillary Clinton doesn’t get it: Paul Krugman, Bernie Sanders and the truth about the free trade scam
Trade has been a disaster for Democratic voters, but a boon for Democratic politicians -- especially the Clintons

/ Stung by the bad showing, Mrs. Clinton was already recalibrating her message, even altering her standard line before the Michigan race had been called. “I don’t want to be the president for those who are already successful — they don’t need me,” she said at a rally Tuesday night in Cleveland. “I want to be the president for the struggling and the striving.”/

It’s a characteristically breathtaking move on Clinton’s part. It sounds great, of course. But how can she be a president for the struggling and striving when she’s so out of touch with them that she’s been blindsided by the brokenness of their dreams? There’s so much more than messaging that needs to be adjusted here. As Paul Krugman now admits, “much of the elite defense of globalization is basically dishonest…. So the elite case for ever-freer trade is largely a scam.”

Just as Clinton, the candidate, was so disconnected from public anger, and the objective suffering it springs from, the entire policy apparatus around trade has for years been totally disconnected from virtually anyone outside of the corporate sector.

That might sound hyperbolic, but it’s quite literally true. Last year, when an early Senate vote on the Trans Pacific Partnership was about to be held, the Intercept explained that “Even members of Congress can only look at it one section at a time in the Capitol’s basement, without most of their staff or the ability to keep notes.” Hence, the only way the public knew what was in the TPP ahead of time was through Wikileaks. Things were different for our corporate overlords, however:

But there’s an exception: if you’re part of one of 28 U.S. government-appointed trade advisory committees providing advice to the U.S. negotiators. The committees with the most access to what’s going on in the negotiations are 16 “Industry Trade Advisory Committees,” whose members include AT&T, General Electric, Apple, Dow Chemical, Nike, Walmart and the American Petroleum Institute.

---

---

---

SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Would The World Survive President Hillary?

Paul Craig Roberts

Quote:

---

This is an English translation of an article that I wrote for the German magazine, Compact. I was encouraged by the high level of intelligent discourse that Compact brings to its readers. If only the US had more people capable of reaching beyond entertainment to comprehending the forces that affect them, there might be some hope for America.

Compact brings hope to Germany. The German people are beginning to understand that their country is not sovereign but a vassal of Washington and that their chancellor serves Washington’s hegemony and American financial interests, and not the German people.

Hillary Clinton is proving to be the “teflon candidate.” In her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, she has escaped damage from major scandals, any one of which would destroy a politician. Hillary has accepted massive bribes in the form of speaking fees from financial organizations and corporations. She is under investigation for misuse of classified data, an offense for which a number of whistleblowers are in prison. Hillary has survived the bombing of Libya, her creation of a failed Libyan state that is today a major source of terrorist jihadists, and the Benghazi controversy. She has survived charges that as Secretary of State she arranged favors for foreign interests in exchange for donations to the Clintons’ foundation. And, of course, there is a long list of previous scandals: Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate. Diana Johnstone’s book, Queen of Chaos, describes Hillary Clinton as “the top salesperson for the ruling oligarchy.”

Hillary Clinton is a bought-and-paid-for representative of the big banks, the military-security complex, and the Israel Lobby. She will represent these interests, not those of the American people or America’s European allies.

The Clintons’ purchase by interest groups is public knowledge. For example, CNN reports that between February 2001 and May 2015 Bill and Hillary Clinton were paid $153 million in speaking fees for 729 speeches, an average price of $210,000.

As it became evident that Hillary Clinton would emerge as the likely Democratic presidential candidate, she was paid more. Deutsche Bank paid her $485,000 for one speech, and Goldman Sachs paid her $675,000 for three speeches. Bank of American Morgan Stanley, UBS, and Fidelity Investments each paid $225,000. https://theintercept.com/2016/01/08/hillary-clinton-earned-more-from-1
2-speeches-to-big-banks-than-most-americans-earn-in-their-lifetime/

Despite Hillary’s blatent willingness to be bribed in public, her opponent, Bernie Sanders, has not succeeded in making an issue of Hillary’s shamelessness. Both of the main establishment newspapers, the Washington Post and the New York Times have come to Hillary’s defense.

Hillary is a war-monger. She pushed the Obama regime into the destruction of a stable and largely cooperative government in Libya where the “Arab Spring” was a CIA-backed group of jihadists who were used to dislodge China from its oil investments in eastern Libya. She urged her husband to bomb Yugoslavia. She pushed for “regime change” in Syria. She oversaw the coup that overthrew the democratically elected president of Honduras. She brought neoconservative Victoria Nuland, who arranged the coup that overthrew the democratically elected president of Ukraine, into the State Department. Hillary has called President Vladimir Putin of Russia the “new Hitler.” Hillary as president guarantees war and more war. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/02/hillary-clintons-six-foreign-po
licy-catastrophes.html

In the United States government has been privatized. Office holders use their positions in order to make themselves wealthy, not in order to serve the public interest. Bill and Hillary Clinton epitomize the use of public office in behalf of the office holder’s interest. For the Clintons government means using public office to be rewarded for doing favors for private interests. The Wall Street Journal reported that “at least 60 compan

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

SIGNYM

Sunday, April 17, 2016 8:12 PM

Quote:

---

Hillary Clinton is a bought-and-paid-for representative of the big banks, the military-security complex, and the Israel Lobby. She will represent these interests, not those of the American people or America’s European allies.

Hillary is a war-monger. She pushed the Obama regime into the destruction of a stable and largely cooperative government in Libya where the “Arab Spring” was a CIA-backed group of jihadists who were used to dislodge China from its oil investments in eastern Libya. She urged her husband to bomb Yugoslavia. She pushed for “regime change” in Syria. She oversaw the coup that overthrew the democratically elected president of Honduras. She brought neoconservative Victoria Nuland, who arranged the coup that overthrew the democratically elected president of Ukraine, into the State Department. Hillary has called President Vladimir Putin of Russia the “new Hitler.” Hillary as president guarantees war and more war. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/02/hillary-clintons-six-foreign-po
licy-catastrophes.html

In the United States government has been privatized. Office holders use their positions in order to make themselves wealthy, not in order to serve the public interest. Bill and Hillary Clinton epitomize the use of public office in behalf of the office holder’s interest. For the Clintons government means using public office to be rewarded for doing favors for private interests. The Wall Street Journal reported that “at least 60 companies that lobbied the State Department during her [Hillary Clinton’s] tenure as Secretary of State donated a total of more than $26 million to the Clinton Foundation.” http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/02/hillary-clinton-exposed-part-1-
aggressively-lobbied-mega-corporations-secretary-state.html

According to washingtonsblog.com, “All told, the Clinton Foundation and its affiliates have collected donations and pledges from all souces of more than $1.6 billion, accoring to their tax returns.”

According to rootsactionteam.com, multi-million dollar donors to the Clinton Foundation include Saudi Arabia, Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk, Kuwait, ExxonMobil, Friends of Saudi Arabia, James Murdoch, Qatar, Boeing, Dow, Goldman Sachs, Walmart, and the United Arab Emirates.

According to the International Business Times, “Under Hillary Clinton, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments had given millions to the Clinton Foundation.” http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hil
lary-clintons-state-department-1934187

Hillary Clinton has escaped unharmed from so many crimes and scandals that she would likely be the most reckless president in American history. With the arms race renewed, with Russia declared “an existential threat to the United States,” and with Hillary’s declaration of President Putin as the new Hitler, Hillary’s arrogant self-confidence is likely to result in over-reach that ends in conflict between NATO and Russia. Considering the extraordinary destructive force of nuclear weapons, Hillary as president could mean the end of life on earth.

---

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/04/13/president-killary-paul-crai
g-roberts/


Geezus, the man likes his hyperbole. (even his name is hyperbolic as fas as names go) -ONEOFTHETHREESTOOGES

---

Wait ... wha ...? You're attacking a man because of HIS NAME???

How about ... Martin Luther King? Gosh, with such a hyperbolic name, I guess he had nothing worthwhile to say!

James Earl Jones? Couldn't have been much of an actor!

George Walker Bush Sounds like some hick from Bumfuk Kentucky. Couldn't have gotten very far in his life!

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Gosh, with a name like that, I'll bet he was given to hyperbole too. He might have even said something exaggerated like We have nothing to fear but fear itself. What a twit!

You have plumbed the depths of "nothing rational to say", ONEOFTHETHREESTOOG

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

I know you hope to distract from the facts of Hillary's whoring by turning this into yet another thread about... you! So you have not addressed her terrible deficiencies as a person and as a policy-maker, and you will never do so.

Hillary Clinton is a proven war-monger and demonstrably corrupted by international money. All you have to do is look at her top 20 donors, her speaking fees, the "donations" to "The Clinton Foundation", her voting record, and her record as Scy State.

You can forget about igniting a flame-war.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME