veteranstoday--2020-12-02--How Obama grabbed Netanyahu by the balls and politically castrated him

I ’ ve got to give Obama credit again for unflinchingly describing how he clashed with Netanyahu in the final chapter of his new book , A Promised Land .
One can say that Obama was the first president ever to say that Benjamin Netanyahu is essentially living in a dream world .
Even the Boston Herald seems to recognize this .
Comparing Obama to Trump with respect to the Middle East , the Boston Herald declared last September : “ Ten years ago , Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was hustled out of the back door of the White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barack Obama .
Last week President Trump welcomed him as a hero… “ The old Obama insult of Netanyahu came when Obama , never a friend of Israel , abruptly walked out of a tense March 2010 meeting over Israeli expanded construction in Jerusalem .
Obama , who opposed the construction , left the gathering mid-meeting .
‘ I ’ m going to the residential wing to have dinner with Michelle and the girls , ’ Obama said , walking out.
” [ 1 ] In A Promised Land , Obama made it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ father was hostile toward Arabs .
In fact , Netanyahu ’ s father viewed the Arabs as Israel ’ s enemies .
Obama quotes Netanyahu ’ s father saying , “ The tendency towards conflict is in the essence of the Arab .
He is an enemy by essence .
His personality won ’ t allow him any compromise or agreement.
” [ 2 ] So , Obama had every good reason to oppose the Israeli settlements .
One can say that he saw the settlements as a form of colonial enterprise .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Netanyahu ’ s move , the Israelis felt that they were humiliated when Obama told them that the line has been drawn on the sand .
Throughout his administration , it is pretty clear that Obama had to have his political baseball bat with him whenever he met Netanyahu because he knew that the man is obviously a lunatic , or , as his administration put it then , a “ chickenshit ” —though Netanyahu can display a “ charming ” persona .
Obama writes : “ Netanyahu could be charming , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his purposes .
He ’ d gone out of his way , for example , to meet me in a Chicago airport lounge shortly after I ’ d been elected to the U.S. Senate , lavishing praise on me for an inconsequential pro-Israel bill I ’ d supported in the Illinois state legislature .
But his vision of himself as the chief defender of the Jewish people against calamity allowed him to justify almost anything that would keep him in power—and his familiarity with American politics and media gave him confidence that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like mine might try to apply.
” [ 3 ] Obama continues to say that Netanyahu immediately wanted to talk to him about Iran , which Netanyahu views “ as Israel ’ s largest security threat… ” But Obama , to Netanyahu ’ s dismay , did the opposite of what Netanyahu wanted with respect to Iran .
Obama talked to the fine folks in Iran and stroke a reasonable deal with them .
Netanyahu was looking for a war , but Obama didn ’ t deliver .
Of course , Netanyahu was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be bad because he wanted to create conflict and bloodshed when decent people are talking about peace .
Listen to Obama here : “ But when I raised the possibility of restarting peace talks with the Palestinians , he [ Netanyahu ] was decidedly noncommittal.
” [ 4 ] The plot thickens .
What is the opposite of peace ?
Well , it ’ s war , conflict , animosity , feud , tension , bloodshed , enmity , hostility , factionalism , etc .
Netanyahu was asking Obama to drop peace talks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and much of the Middle East in general .
Obama ’ s first move was that both the Palestinians and the Israeli government need to start talking about peace talks .
In order to do that , he asked Netanyahu to freeze the settlements .
Netanyahu again went berserk .
“ As expected , Netanyahu ’ s initial response to our proposed settlement freeze was sharply negative , and his allies in Washington were soon publicly accusing us of weakening the U.S.-Israeli alliance .
The White House phones started ringing off the hook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ team fielded calls from reporters , leaders of American Jewish organizations , prominent supporters , and members of Congress , all wondering why we were picking on Israel and focusing on settlements when everyone knew that Palestinian violence was the main impediment to peace.
” [ 5 ] That was in 2009 .
Obama had to call in Jewish organizations and members of Congress coaxing them that his commitment to Israel ’ s security was skin deep , and that he was simply advancing a peace deal .
Still , Netanyahu would have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ orchestrated by Netanyahu had the intended effect of gobbling up our time , putting us on the defensive , and reminding me that normal policy differences with an Israeli prime minister—even one who presided over a fragile coalition government—exacted a domestic political cost that simply didn ’ t exist when I dealt with the United Kingdom , Germany , France , Japan , Canada , or any of our other closest allies.
” [ 6 ] Got that ?
Obama nailed it here .
He is essentially saying that Benjamin Netanyahu has caused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he has dealt with in the past !
But it seems that Obama was not like the typical American president who would kowtow to Bibi ’ s every diabolical , irrational , and just plain stupid demand .
“ And after months of wrangling , ” Obama writes , “ he and Abbas finally agreed to join me for a face-to-face discussion while they were both in town for the annual leaders ’ gathering at the U.N. General Assembly at the end of September ” of 2009 .
[ 7 ] We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to save face because , as Obama puts it , “ Any optimism I felt about Bibi ’ s concession was short-lived.
” Why ?
Netanyahu did agree to freeze the settlements , but he picked up where he left off ten months later .
What was his reason ?
“ He insisted that in the absence of a total freeze , he would not join any talks.
” [ 8 ] As Joe Biden was about to visit Israel in 2010 “ on a goodwill mission , ” the Israeli Interior @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the constructions of thousands of “ new housing units in East Jerusalem , ” [ 9 ] a spit in the face of the Obama administration .
Obama immediately asked Hillary Clinton to pick up the phone and call Netanyahu to say that he was really upset about the stupid move .
Netanyahu ’ s response ?
The joker went to AIPAC and delivered a sermon to his brethren in which he declared that “ Jerusalem is not a settlement—it is our capital.
” [ 10 ] The very next day , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the diabolical character in order to discuss what the heck had just happened .
“ Downplaying the growing tension , ” writes Obama , “ I accepted the fiction that the permit announcement had been just a misunderstanding… ” [ 11 ] In other words , for the sake of the meeting , Obama accepted Netanyahu ’ s categorical lie that Netanyahu had nothing to do with the permit announcement .
Even then , Netanyahu , like Satan in Milton ’ s Paradise Lost who said “ evil be though my good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to what Obama was saying about peace .
“ What I do know is that despite the hours Hillary and George Mitchell spent doing shuttle diplomacy , our plans for peace talks went nowhere until late in August 2010 , just one month before the settlement freeze was set to expire… ” [ 12 ] Obama declared that he was even willing to release Jonathan Pollard in order to strike a serious peace deal with the Israelis , “ but it was all to no avail .
The Israelis refused to extend the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s assessments here are quite fair and balanced , but Jim Geraghty of National Review , which is now a bastion of Neocon or Israeli propaganda machine , declared that Obama “ was not a stalwart or reliable ally of the Jewish state.
” [ 14 ] Why does the Neocon flagship lambast Obama ?
Is it because he bailed out the banksters after the economy crashed ?
No .
National Review wants to put Obama ’ s feet on iron spikes because he told something that every single thinking person knows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Obama said : “ Members of both parties worried about crossing the American Israel Public Affairs Committee ( AIPAC ) , a powerful bipartisan lobbying organization dedicated to ensuring unwavering U.S. support for Israel .
AIPAC ’ s clout could be brought to bear on virtually every congressional district in the country , and just about every politician in Washington — including me — counted AIPAC members among their key supporters and donors .
“ In the past , the organization had accommodated a spectrum of views on Middle East peace , insisting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a continuation of U.S. aid to Israel and oppose efforts to isolate or condemn Israel via the U.N. and other international bodies .
“ But as Israeli politics had moved to the right , so had AIPAC ’ s policy positions .
Its staff and leaders increasingly argued that there should be ‘ no daylight ’ between the U.S. and Israeli governments , even when Israel took actions that were contrary to U.S. policy .
Those who criticized Israeli policy too loudly risked being tagged as ‘ anti-Israel ’ ( and possibly anti-Semitic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the next election.
” [ 15 ] Isn ’ t that true ?
You see , Jim Geraghty didn ’ t dispute the claim because that would put him in a hot seat .
In fact , virtually every serious scholar of the Israel/Palestine conflict has been saying pretty much the same thing .
[ 16 ] But Geraghty has to summon deceptions and use these tropes because that is the only way he can make a stupid point .
What he doesn ’ t seem to want his readers to know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ child in the Middle East since the beginning of time , and that Obama was the first president to publicly challenge the mad man in Tel Aviv .
In fact , the New York Times itself suggested that throughout his administration during his eight years , Obama had “ clawing conflict ” with Netanyahu .
[ 17 ] Two cheers for Obama for sticking it to Benjamin Netanyahu .
• [ 1 ] Peter Lucas , “ Trump , Obama have different views on Middle East , ” Boston Herald , September 26 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ See for example John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt , The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy ( New York : Farrar & Straus , 2006 ) ; Murray Friedman , The Neoconservative Revolution : Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy ( Cambridge : Cambridge University Press , 2005 ) ; Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke , America Alone : The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order ( Cambridge : Cambridge University Press , 2004 ) .
• [ 17 ] Peter Baker , “ For Obama and Netanyahu , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” NY Times , December 23 , 2016 ; see also Peter Baker and Jodi Rudoren , “ Obama and Netanyahu : A Story of Slights and Crossed Signals , ” NY Times , November 8 , 2015 .

I’ve got to give Obama credit again for unflinchingly describing how he clashed with Netanyahu in the final chapter of his new book, A Promised Land. One can say that Obama was the first president ever to say that Benjamin Netanyahu is essentially living in a dream world. Even the Boston Herald seems to recognize this. Comparing Obama to Trump with respect to the Middle East, the Boston Herald declared last September:
“Ten years ago, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was hustled out of the back door of the White House after he was dissed by President Barack Obama. Last week President Trump welcomed him as a hero…
“The old Obama insult of Netanyahu came when Obama, never a friend of Israel, abruptly walked out of a tense March 2010 meeting over Israeli expanded construction in Jerusalem. Obama, who opposed the construction, left the gathering mid-meeting. ‘I’m going to the residential wing to have dinner with Michelle and the girls,’ Obama said, walking out.”[1]
In A Promised Land, Obama made it very clear that Netanyahu’s own father was hostile toward Arabs. In fact, Netanyahu’s father viewed the Arabs as Israel’s enemies. Obama quotes Netanyahu’s father saying, “The tendency towards conflict is in the essence of the Arab. He is an enemy by essence. His personality won’t allow him any compromise or agreement.”[2]
So, Obama had every good reason to oppose the Israeli settlements. One can say that he saw the settlements as a form of colonial enterprise. But because he did not agree with Netanyahu’s move, the Israelis felt that they were humiliated when Obama told them that the line has been drawn on the sand.
Throughout his administration, it is pretty clear that Obama had to have his political baseball bat with him whenever he met Netanyahu because he knew that the man is obviously a lunatic, or, as his administration put it then, a “chickenshit”—though Netanyahu can display a “charming” persona. Obama writes:
“Netanyahu could be charming, or at least solicitous, when it served his purposes. He’d gone out of his way, for example, to meet me in a Chicago airport lounge shortly after I’d been elected to the U.S. Senate, lavishing praise on me for an inconsequential pro-Israel bill I’d supported in the Illinois state legislature. But his vision of himself as the chief defender of the Jewish people against calamity allowed him to justify almost anything that would keep him in power—and his familiarity with American politics and media gave him confidence that he could resist whatever pressure a Democratic administration like mine might try to apply.”[3]
Obama continues to say that Netanyahu immediately wanted to talk to him about Iran, which Netanyahu views “as Israel’s largest security threat…” But Obama, to Netanyahu’s dismay, did the opposite of what Netanyahu wanted with respect to Iran. Obama talked to the fine folks in Iran and stroke a reasonable deal with them. Netanyahu was looking for a war, but Obama didn’t deliver.
Of course, Netanyahu was mad, sad, and wanted to be bad because he wanted to create conflict and bloodshed when decent people are talking about peace. Listen to Obama here: “But when I raised the possibility of restarting peace talks with the Palestinians, he [Netanyahu] was decidedly noncommittal.”[4]
The plot thickens. What is the opposite of peace? Well, it’s war, conflict, animosity, feud, tension, bloodshed, enmity, hostility, factionalism, etc. Netanyahu was asking Obama to drop peace talks and embrace bloodshed with Iran in particular and much of the Middle East in general.
Obama’s first move was that both the Palestinians and the Israeli government need to start talking about peace talks. In order to do that, he asked Netanyahu to freeze the settlements. Netanyahu again went berserk. “As expected, Netanyahu’s initial response to our proposed settlement freeze was sharply negative, and his allies in Washington were soon publicly accusing us of weakening the U.S.-Israeli alliance. The White House phones started ringing off the hook, as members of my national security team fielded calls from reporters, leaders of American Jewish organizations, prominent supporters, and members of Congress, all wondering why we were picking on Israel and focusing on settlements when everyone knew that Palestinian violence was the main impediment to peace.”[5]
That was in 2009. Obama had to call in Jewish organizations and members of Congress coaxing them that his commitment to Israel’s security was skin deep, and that he was simply advancing a peace deal. Still, Netanyahu would have none of it. “The noise orchestrated by Netanyahu had the intended effect of gobbling up our time, putting us on the defensive, and reminding me that normal policy differences with an Israeli prime minister—even one who presided over a fragile coalition government—exacted a domestic political cost that simply didn’t exist when I dealt with the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Japan, Canada, or any of our other closest allies.”[6]
Got that? Obama nailed it here. He is essentially saying that Benjamin Netanyahu has caused more problems than any other major country that he has dealt with in the past! But it seems that Obama was not like the typical American president who would kowtow to Bibi’s every diabolical, irrational, and just plain stupid demand. “And after months of wrangling,” Obama writes, “he and Abbas finally agreed to join me for a face-to-face discussion while they were both in town for the annual leaders’ gathering at the U.N. General Assembly at the end of September” of 2009.[7]
We all know by then that Netanyahu was trying to save face because, as Obama puts it, “Any optimism I felt about Bibi’s concession was short-lived.” Why? Netanyahu did agree to freeze the settlements, but he picked up where he left off ten months later. What was his reason? “He insisted that in the absence of a total freeze, he would not join any talks.”[8] As Joe Biden was about to visit Israel in 2010 “on a goodwill mission,” the Israeli Interior Ministry declared that they will reinstate permits for the constructions of thousands of “new housing units in East Jerusalem,”[9] a spit in the face of the Obama administration.
Obama immediately asked Hillary Clinton to pick up the phone and call Netanyahu to say that he was really upset about the stupid move. Netanyahu’s response? The joker went to AIPAC and delivered a sermon to his brethren in which he declared that “Jerusalem is not a settlement—it is our capital.”[10]
The very next day, Obama, obviously still upset, met with the diabolical character in order to discuss what the heck had just happened. “Downplaying the growing tension,” writes Obama, “I accepted the fiction that the permit announcement had been just a misunderstanding…”[11]
In other words, for the sake of the meeting, Obama accepted Netanyahu’s categorical lie that Netanyahu had nothing to do with the permit announcement. Even then, Netanyahu, like Satan in Milton’s Paradise Lost who said “evil be though my good,” did not even pay attention to what Obama was saying about peace. “What I do know is that despite the hours Hillary and George Mitchell spent doing shuttle diplomacy, our plans for peace talks went nowhere until late in August 2010, just one month before the settlement freeze was set to expire…”[12]
Obama declared that he was even willing to release Jonathan Pollard in order to strike a serious peace deal with the Israelis, “but it was all to no avail. The Israelis refused to extend the settlement freeze.”[13] Obama’s assessments here are quite fair and balanced, but Jim Geraghty of National Review, which is now a bastion of Neocon or Israeli propaganda machine, declared that Obama “was not a stalwart or reliable ally of the Jewish state.”[14]
Why does the Neocon flagship lambast Obama? Is it because he bailed out the banksters after the economy crashed? No. National Review wants to put Obama’s feet on iron spikes because he told something that every single thinking person knows is true. Here’s what Obama said:
“Members of both parties worried about crossing the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a powerful bipartisan lobbying organization dedicated to ensuring unwavering U.S. support for Israel. AIPAC’s clout could be brought to bear on virtually every congressional district in the country, and just about every politician in Washington — including me — counted AIPAC members among their key supporters and donors.
“In the past, the organization had accommodated a spectrum of views on Middle East peace, insisting mainly that those seeking its endorsement support a continuation of U.S. aid to Israel and oppose efforts to isolate or condemn Israel via the U.N. and other international bodies.
“But as Israeli politics had moved to the right, so had AIPAC’s policy positions. Its staff and leaders increasingly argued that there should be ‘no daylight’ between the U.S. and Israeli governments, even when Israel took actions that were contrary to U.S. policy. Those who criticized Israeli policy too loudly risked being tagged as ‘anti-Israel’ (and possibly anti-Semitic) and confronted with a well-funded opponent in the next election.”[15]
Isn’t that true? You see, Jim Geraghty didn’t dispute the claim because that would put him in a hot seat. In fact, virtually every serious scholar of the Israel/Palestine conflict has been saying pretty much the same thing.[16] But Geraghty has to summon deceptions and use these tropes because that is the only way he can make a stupid point. What he doesn’t seem to want his readers to know is that Israel has been a problem child in the Middle East since the beginning of time, and that Obama was the first president to publicly challenge the mad man in Tel Aviv. In fact, the New York Times itself suggested that throughout his administration during his eight years, Obama had “clawing conflict” with Netanyahu.[17]
Two cheers for Obama for sticking it to Benjamin Netanyahu.


veteranstoday--2020-12-03--Vile: Trump Tweets Reno’s COVID Surge Unit ‘fake’ –  Governor Says Trump ‘Unconsionable’

Trump retweeted an account called NetworkinVegas.com , which claimed that the picture of a doctor inside the hospital setup was @ @ @ @ @ were not visible and unused beds were in the background .
“ Fake election results @ @ @ @ @ ” Trump tweeted , an apparent reference to him losing the state to President-elect Joe @ @ @ @

Trump retweeted an account called NetworkinVegas.com, which claimed that the picture of a doctor inside the hospital setup was “fake” because patients were not visible and unused beds were in the background.
“Fake election results in Nevada, also!” Trump tweeted, an apparent reference to him losing the state to President-elect Joe Biden last month.


veteranstoday--2020-12-04--MIKE HARRIS SHOW:  “MIKE HARRIS SPECIAL” EXPOSED, THE GENX REPORT

This interview is a bit different .
I was contacted by this fellow who asked to be a guest on my show , instead , he wanted me to be a guest on his show , that I posted on my youtube channel .
The things we do in the days of censorship just to be heard .
Bottom line is I did most of the talking , which I am good at .
I hope you all find it enjoyable and find the truth as I perceive it in the current situation we in the USA and the World @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controlled by gangsters , who want to rule the world , and we must stop them .
This is the battle between good and evil .
I hope you choose your side wisely .
In Solidarity Mike Harris PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL AND TELL ALL YOUR FRIENDS TO SUBSCRIBE AND LIKE .
ATTENTION READERS Due to the nature of independent content , VT can not guarantee content validity .
We ask you to Read Our Content Policy so a clear comprehension of VT 's independent non-censored media is understood and given @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news , opinion and media .
All content is owned by author exclusively .
Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT , other authors , affiliates , advertisers , sponsors , partners or technicians .
Some content may be satirical in nature .
All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT. About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy Due to the nature of independent content , VT can not guarantee content validity.We ask you toso a clear comprehension of VT 's independent non-censored media is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world of news , opinion and media.All content is owned by author exclusively .
Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT , other authors , affiliates , advertisers , sponsors , partners or technicians .
Some content may be satirical in nature .
All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT .

Mike Harris is the Veteran’s Today Financial Editor and podcast radio show host of Short End of the Stick. Mr. Harris has enjoyed 30+ yrs in the manufacturing, financial, and technology sectors. He’s been core to numerous domestic and international start-ups, acquisitions, and mergers, skyrocketing profit margins through a highly cooperative/collaborative team approach. His sharp intellect and fluid intuition were a significant boon during his 2005/6 run for the Governor of Arizona where he emphasized the need to initiate immediate, practical, working solutions to the issues at hand.
From 1995 to 2000 Mr. Harris served as a technical advisor to the Committee on Science and Technology of the US Congress, as well as sitting as Chairman of various boards over the years. With an MBA in finance, from a foundation in Applied Physics and Economics, he has proven an exceptional ability to function well above and beyond “the box”. Dubbed “Iron Mike” through his many years as a martial artist, Mr. Harris has clearly demonstrated the resiliency to take blows and to come back fighting. This extraordinary skill-set he now brings to his ultimate Vision for a free, abundant, and prosperous society.


veteranstoday--2020-12-03--20,000 Years Ago Britain Was Not An Island

Carol graduated from Riverside White Cross School of Nursing in Columbus , Ohio and received her diploma as a registered @ @ @ @ @ Green State University where she received a Bachelor of Arts Degree in History and Literature @ @ @ @ @ of Toledo , College of Nursing , and received a Master ’ s of Nursing @ @ @ @ @ has traveled extensively , is a photographer , and writes on medical issues .
Carol @ @ @ @ @ Katherine , and Stephen – one daughter-in-law ; Katie – two granddaughters ; Isabella Marianna @ @ @ @ @ one grandson , Alexander Paul .
She also shares her life with husband Gordon Duff @ @ @ @ @ two rescue pups .

Carol graduated from Riverside White Cross School of Nursing in Columbus, Ohio and received her diploma as a registered nurse. She attended Bowling Green State University where she received a Bachelor of Arts Degree in History and Literature. She attended the University of Toledo, College of Nursing, and received a Master’s of Nursing Science Degree as an Educator.
She has traveled extensively, is a photographer, and writes on medical issues. Carol has three children RJ, Katherine, and Stephen – one daughter-in-law; Katie – two granddaughters; Isabella Marianna and Zoe Olivia – and one grandson, Alexander Paul. She also shares her life with her husband Gordon Duff, many cats, and two rescues.


veteranstoday--2020-12-03--Georgia to Investigate Lindsey Graham for Election Crimes

Disqualifying valid ballots would constitute such an offense and constitute a crime in itself .
State law also forbids interference with the performance of the secretary of state ’ s official election duties—by , for instance , asking him to falsify records .
An individual is culpable even if they failed to induce fraud .
Slate : A former U.S. attorney has asked Georgia to open an investigation into Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham ’ s potentially criminal interference in the state ’ s election .
Michael J. Moore , who served as U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Georgia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ request to the Georgia State Board of Elections on Thursday .
Moore cited multiple public interviews given by Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger , a Republican , in which Raffensperger said that Graham pressured him to throw out valid mail ballots .
According to the secretary of state , Graham asked whether he could toss all mail ballots from any county with a high rate of “ signature mismatch ” —signatures that don ’ t match those on a voter ’ s registration form .
( Under a federal court order , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a mismatched signature . )
Signature mismatch disproportionately affects racial minorities , who lean Democratic overall .
Graham requested that even ballots with matching signatures be rejected in precincts with large populations of Black voters .
It thus appears that Graham wanted Raffensberger to throw enough Democratic ballots to swing the state toward Donald Trump .
In his letter , Moore noted that Graham ’ s alleged conduct might constitute a criminal offense under Georgia law .
The state prohibits solicitation to commit election fraud , which occurs when an individual “ solicits @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or otherwise attempts to cause ” another person to commit an election-related offense .

Disqualifying valid ballots would constitute such an offense and constitute a crime in itself. State law also forbids interference with the performance of the secretary of state’s official election duties—by, for instance, asking him to falsify records. An individual is culpable even if they failed to induce fraud.
Slate: A former U.S. attorney has asked Georgia to open an investigation into Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham’s potentially criminal interference in the state’s election.


veteranstoday--2020-12-03--Trump Walked Away: Ex-Presidents fill leadership vacuum as Trump disappears during pandemic disaster

CNN : Former United States Presidents George W. Bush , Barack Obama and Bill Clinton address the audience during the “ Deep From The Heart : One America Appeal Concert ” at Reed Arena in this October 21 , 2017 file photo in College Station , Texas .
This is what presidential leadership looks like .
As President Donald Trump ignores America ’ s slide into a tragic winter and obsesses over his false claims of a stolen election , three of his predecessors are volunteering to bare their arms on camera to build confidence in the vaccines that could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by former Presidents George W. Bush , Bill Clinton and Barack Obama , which was reported by CNN ’ s Jamie Gangel , is sure to infuriate the current commander in chief .
Trump is claiming the lion ’ s share of credit for the unprecedented speed of development of several vaccines — despite his neglect of other aspects of the public health disaster that has killed more than a quarter of a million Americans .
The former presidents are stepping up as America plunges into its toughest battle against Covid-19 before the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approved by US regulators , bring deliverance .
But there are few signs that the current President is ready to call on the nation to muster for one last fight against the worsening pandemic before the immunizations become available to most Americans .
Trump ’ s silence comes as his own White House and senior health officials issue their most frightening warnings yet .
The recorded daily death toll hit a record of more than 2,800 Wednesday and 100,000 Covid-19 patients — more than ever before — are hospitalized as fears mount of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more…

CNN: Former United States Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Bill Clinton address the audience during the “Deep From The Heart: One America Appeal Concert” at Reed Arena in this October 21, 2017 file photo in College Station, Texas.
(CNN)
This is what presidential leadership looks like.
As President Donald Trump ignores America’s slide into a tragic winter and obsesses over his false claims of a stolen election, three of his predecessors are volunteering to bare their arms on camera to build confidence in the vaccines that could finally end the pandemic.
The effort by former Presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, which was reported by CNN’s Jamie Gangel, is sure to infuriate the current commander in chief. Trump is claiming the lion’s share of credit for the unprecedented speed of development of several vaccines — despite his neglect of other aspects of the public health disaster that has killed more than a quarter of a million Americans.
The former presidents are stepping up as America plunges into its toughest battle against Covid-19 before the new vaccines, expected to soon be approved by US regulators, bring deliverance. But there are few signs that the current President is ready to call on the nation to muster for one last fight against the worsening pandemic before the immunizations become available to most Americans.
Trump’s silence comes as his own White House and senior health officials issue their most frightening warnings yet. The recorded daily death toll hit a record of more than 2,800 Wednesday and 100,000 Covid-19 patients — more than ever before — are hospitalized as fears mount of an even worse post-Thanksgiving surge. read more…
Thank you so much #President #Bush , President #Clinton President #Obama for stepping up #COVID_19 you make you Children Proud , Your Current & Future Grandchildren Proud, You make this #American Happy❤🙏
Ex Presidents fill leadership vacuum – CNNPolitics https://t.co/PeI28lMl0s — MaryB (@kelticlass60) December 3, 2020
.


veteranstoday--2020-12-03--How Neutralizing Antibodies Interact With SARS-CoV-2


veteranstoday--2020-12-03--MSNBC: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is complex.  Israel’s racist ‘nation state’ law isn’t.

MSNBC : A court in Israel clarified something Monday with its decision to cite the country ’ s controversial “ nation state ” law : Israel has enshrined racism as one of its basic principles .
The court all but said the city couldn ’ t risk attracting more Arab residents — a decision that it used the “ nation state ” law to justify .
The lawsuit asked the northern Israeli city of Carmiel to reimburse Arab parents for the costs of driving their kids to school each day , because Arabic-language schooling isn ’ t available inside the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the case , the court all but said the city couldn ’ t risk attracting more Arab residents — a decision that it used the “ nation state ” law to justify .
I normally hate writing about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict— mostly because it ’ s a subject that produces a black hole of misunderstandings and prompts people to ignore nuance , especially online .
There ’ s a lot that makes that the case — but setting aside the anti-Semitism against Israelis , the violence carried out over the last 70 years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resulting humanitarian crisis , and everything else that makes this issue so contentious , we should be able to agree on one thing : The court ’ s decision is racist .
ATTENTION READERS Due to the nature of independent content , VT can not guarantee content validity .
We ask you to Read Our Content Policy so a clear comprehension of VT 's independent non-censored media is understood and given its proper place in the world of news , opinion and media .
All content is owned by author exclusively .
Expressed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ VT , other authors , affiliates , advertisers , sponsors , partners or technicians .
Some content may be satirical in nature .
All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT. About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy Due to the nature of independent content , VT can not guarantee content validity.We ask you toso a clear comprehension of VT 's independent non-censored media is understood and given its proper place in the world of news , opinion and media.All content is owned by author exclusively .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of VT , other authors , affiliates , advertisers , sponsors , partners or technicians .
Some content may be satirical in nature .
All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT .

MSNBC: A court in Israel clarified something Monday with its decision to cite the country’s controversial “nation state” law: Israel has enshrined racism as one of its basic principles.
As the judge says: "Karmiel is a Jewish city, designed to deepen Jewish settlement in the Galilee. Establishing an Arabic language school, or paying for bussing Arab pupils… could change the demographic balance and the city's character (currently 6% of residents are Arab)". 3/
The court all but said the city couldn’t risk attracting more Arab residents — a decision that it used the “nation state” law to justify.
The lawsuit asked the northern Israeli city of Carmiel to reimburse Arab parents for the costs of driving their kids to school each day, because Arabic-language schooling isn’t available inside the city limits. In its dismissal of the case, the court all but said the city couldn’t risk attracting more Arab residents — a decision that it used the “nation state” law to justify.
International Day of Solidarity with Palestine Today, as all should every day, we stand in solidarity with the Palestinians. Israel's governments have been allowed to act with impunity for decades. Illegal separation wall,
a nation-state law enshrining discrimination, 1/2 pic.twitter.com/LjaxsJKm8O — STUC (@ScottishTUC) November 29, 2020
I normally hate writing about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict— mostly because it’s a subject that produces a black hole of misunderstandings and prompts people to ignore nuance, especially online. There’s a lot that makes that the case — but setting aside the anti-Semitism against Israelis, the violence carried out over the last 70 years, the blockade of Gaza and the resulting humanitarian crisis, and everything else that makes this issue so contentious, we should be able to agree on one thing: The court’s decision is racist.


veteranstoday--2020-12-03--During December Starbucks to Give Free Coffee to Front Line Responders


COVID Tracking Project


veteranstoday--2020-12-03--Keep Trump?  Clown value alone?  Even a rabid dog can be funny…

VT : Biden is heading for 82 million votes and a 5 percentage point plurality .
Trump now stands with 46 percent of the vote compared to 51 for Biden .
As Trump slid under 47 % and Biden moves up toward 52 % , the crying is only going to get louder and louder .
Were we to assume that all Republicans aren ’ t totally nuts , then the crazy stuff going on has to have turned millions of moderates who voted for Trump out of lie based fear away from his as well .
If the election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lose by the 14 points predicted instead of only 5 , which is huge anyway .
Exit polling showed 56 % Biden , 43 % Trump , 13 % difference , right on the polling predictions .
Then again , why were recounts blocked in rural Wisconsin , rural Pennsylvania , North Carolina , Texas and Ohio ?
These are states that have a long tradition of GOP voter fraud where millions of fake votes actually could have been staged .
Also note that there were ZERO ( “ 0 ” ) Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump rolled up what votes he did get .
There were none , for instance , in Ottawa County where Betsy Devos lives and where the streets were lined with Biden signs yet Trump won a very strong plurality .
When I mean “ none , ” I mean I personally checked .

VT: Biden is heading for 82 million votes and a 5 percentage point plurality. Trump now stands with 46 percent of the vote compared to 51 for Biden. As Trump slid under 47% and Biden moves up toward 52%, the crying is only going to get louder and louder.
Were we to assume that all Republicans aren’t totally nuts, then the crazy stuff going on has to have turned millions of moderates who voted for Trump out of lie based fear away from his as well.
If the election were held again, Trump would really lose by the 14 points predicted instead of only 5, which is huge anyway.


veteranstoday--2020-12-05--Interview on Iran, Israel, Trump, and Talmudic Ideology

This interview has been published by Nader Talebzadeh and his wife .
Talebzadeh is an Iranian researcher , film director and producer , chairman of International New Horizon Conference and documentary filmmaker known for his 2007 film entitled The Messiah .
Talebzadeh studied at Columbia University Film School .
The interview has been translated to Farsi ( it started at 28:28 ) : Question : The American mainstream media is covering the assassination of the top nuclear scientist very heavily i.e by covering Netanyahu portraying this man as his potential target .
What does this reveal about the intentions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tells us that Netanyahu still has a grip on much of the West .
Netanyahu tells the entire world that Mohsen Fakhrizadeh is actually his target ; Fakhizadeth ended up being assassinated , and no politician in the entire Western world has the political and intellectual courage to stand against Netanyahu and declare that these activities are contrary to the moral and political order .
Former CIA boss John Brennan did say that the killing of Fakhrizadeh was “ a criminal act & highly reckless , ” [ 1 ] but Brennan didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Israelis , largely because he knew that would get him in deep trouble with the Zionist superstructure .
I do give Brenan some credit for saying that “ Iranian leaders would be wise to wait for the return of responsible American leadership on the global stage.
” [ 2 ] He certainly knew that Biden would never accept such a diabolical maneuvering .
The killing of Fakhizadeth by the Israelis is against what Immanuel Kant would have called the categorical imperative .
In other words , we can not universalize what the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In fact , if the Iranian government happens to exterminate an Israeli scientist , much of the West would go up in flame saying that Iran needs to be bombed .
So why isn ’ t any politician in the West even asking probing questions ?
The second thing we need to point out is that it is generally agreed among US and Israeli intelligence that Iran stopped its nuclear push in 2003 .
[ 4 ] As Gareth Porter rightly points out in his study Manufactured Crisis : The Untold Story of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vision among Israeli officials that Iran has been trying to acquire nuclear weapons is pure fiction , and it has been deliberately concocted by the Israeli regime itself .
Listen to Porter : “ These IAEA investigations generated one round of news stories after another that portrayed each activity under investigation as suggesting that Iran ’ s nuclear program was a cover for nuclear weapons .
To the chagrin of the United States and Israel , however , these investigations ended in early 2008 without having found any evidence to support that charge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had a more potent weapon for consolidating the nuclear scare over Iran .
In 2008 , they quickly shifted the focus of the IAEA inquiry to a collection of documents , purportedly stolen from a secret Iranian nuclear weapons program , which had been given to the United States by an unknown party .
Thus began the second stage of the crisis , from 2008-2011 , ostensibly aimed at holding Iran ‘ accountable ’ for what the IAEA called the ‘ alleged studies ’ documents .
But the actual aim at that stage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where it could be accused of noncompliance with the resolutions of the US-dominated IAEA Board of Governors.
” [ 5 ] Patrick Buchanan has rightly pointed out that “ Since 2015 , Iran ’ s nuclear facilities , under the Iran nuclear deal , have been subject to U.N. surveillance and inspections .
And Iran has neither produced plutonium nor enriched uranium to the 90 % level needed for a bomb .
Israel claims Iran never stopped working on a bomb , but US Intel agencies and UN nuclear inspectors have agreed that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was ended in 2003.
” [ 6 ] The logic is pretty simple here : Netanyahu has been lying to the West about Iran ’ s nuclear program .
Politicians in the West need to distance themselves from this man because he has caused nothing but trouble over the past thirty years or so .
The Iraq war is a classic example because this war alone will cost America at least six trillion dollars .
[ 7 ] And the entire war was based on a total lie .
[ 8 ] Question @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump to initiate or provoke a crisis with a dimension of war ?
Answer : Netanyahu .
Trump is just a puppet .
Keep in mind that Netanyahu has been trying to provoke a war with Iran since 1995 .
For him , wars seem to be like playing video games .
Here is what Netanyahu said way back in 1995 , and you can find the following quote in his own book , Fighting Terrorism : How Democracies Can Defeat Domestic and International Terrorists : “ The best estimate at this time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ away from possessing the prerequisites required for the independent production of nuclear weapons .
After this time , the Iranian Islamic republic will have the ability to construct atomic weapons without the importation of materials or technology from abroad.
” [ 9 ] It ’ s been twenty-five years !
And we ’ re still talking about Iran acquiring nuclear weapons !
Obviously we have a problem here .
Question : You have recently written a book about the Talmudic ideology and how it undermines Western culture today .
Please elaborate .
For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Zionist paranoia about Iran becoming armed with sophisticated weapons at the end of times ?
Answer : Zionism vs. the West is the final book in a trilogy .
It can be read independently .
In that book , I argue that the Israel/Palestine issues are very deep .
In fact , they have theological , philosophical , historical , and political ramifications .
When we apply the historical and political ramifications to Iran , the issues even get more interesting .
Why ?
Well , consider this .
Even by the fall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , neoconservatives such as Bill Kristol were still on the front lines pushing for a military strike against Iran .
Neoconservative Jamie Fly of the Foreign Policy Initiative even encouraged Obama to approve what seemed to be perpetual wars in the Middle East .
“ It is time for President Obama to follow in the footsteps of his predecessors and stand up to tyrants who kill Americans and threaten our interests .
It is time to take military action against the Iranian government elements that support terrorism and its nuclear program .
More @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ 10 ] Yet while the neoconservatives push for war , some members of the CIA stated that the evidence for war as non-existent .
“ Fishy , fishy , fishy , ” declared Bruce Riedel , a veteran of the CIA .
A military strike against Iran is a “ truly awful Hollywood script.
” [ 11 ] Other CIA members such as Colonel Pat Lang were of the same opinion .
[ 12 ] Paul Pillar , a twenty-eight-year CIA veteran and author of the ground-breaking book Intelligence and US Foreign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plot .
[ 13 ] Michael Scheuer , former CIA agent and author of a number of ground-breaking books , also found the allegation irresponsible .
The plot was indeed fishy , but not for neoconservative newspapers such as the Weekly Standard .
[ 14 ] The Israel Lobby and others moved into new territory by the fall of 2011 when the IAEA falsely declared that Iran has the capability to build nuclear weapons .
[ 15 ] It has been pointed out that the IAEA did not base their assessment on evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Israeli historian and flaming Zionist Benny Morris declared that some of the “ evidence ” came from “ the Israeli intelligence in the first place.
” [ 17 ] Later discoveries indicated that the IAEA claim was a forgery .
[ 18 ] Robert Kelley , a retired IAEA director , noted that there was virtually nothing in the report that was new .
[ 19 ] Iran has done its best to reach out to the West for decades , but the neoconservative hawks have given the country no chance .
Flynt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New America Foundation and a professor at Pennsylvania State University , declared that Iran is a rational country and has made several attempts to make rational deals with the West , most particularly America , but the United States has reversed those deals and continued to propound the neoconservative mantra that Iran is a suicide country .
In 2008 , CBS did an interview with Ali Akbar Salehi , who got his Ph.D. from MIT in nuclear engineering .
Once he was done with his studies , Salehi moved back to Iran for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Technology .
During the interview , Salehi declared : “ I have a lot of respect…for the people of the US and I ’ ve always said this : I do not consider the US as a country .
I think the US belongs to the whole human kind .
It ’ s a human heritage .
I don ’ t think history will be able to produce another country like the US Because it ’ s a country that has served humanity so much , in terms of technology , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the US Even my bachelor ’ s degree is from the American University of Beirut .
Again I had a lot of US professors there .
I feel indebted to them .
This is part of my religion .
You know , whoever teaches you something , you are indebted to them for your life .
So my respect goes for the entire US people .
But you see this is different when it comes to the actions of their government.
” [ 20 ] This certainly does not correspond with neoconservative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interesting is that Salehi was appointed by Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Khamenei , two rulers the neoconservatives have labeled as irrational .
Khamenei even declared : “ Certainly there are conditions where our ties with the United States could be normalized.
” [ 21 ] Prior to Ahmadinejad , Mohammed Khatami , then president of Iran , made several attempts to reach out to the US .
In a 1998 CNN interview , he claimed “ an intellectual affinity with the essence of American civilization , ” a reference to Alexis de Tocqueville .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iran are intrinsically religious and that both countries ought to find common ground for fruitful dialogue and relationship .
He even apologized for “ the 1979-1981 hostage crisis ” that “ left Americans with negative feelings toward the Islamic Republic.
” [ 22 ] But the Zionist machine shut him down .
Yet Iran never gave up on engaging America on a fruitful relationship .
In 2003 , the Iranian government re-energized the peace talks and even made it clear that Iran would allow full transparency of their nuclear program .
They also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action against any terrorists—above all Al-Qaida—on Iranian territory.
” They further agreed to cooperate “ for actively supporting political stabilization and the establishment of democratic institutions and democratic government representing all ethnic and religious groups.
” Iran also made it clear that the United States must take action against terrorist organizations such as the MEK , which the US was supporting at the time .
[ 23 ] But the US once again turned all those opportunities down precisely because the neoconservative/Zionist machine allows no peace talks .
As Leverett puts it , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is implacably and unreasonably hostile to the United States is , of course , a staple of neoconservatism.
” [ 24 ] I have thoroughly discussed many of these fundamental and profound issues in the book .
• [ 3 ] “ World Should Thank Us for Killing Iran ’ s Top Nuclear Scientist , Senior Israeli Official Tells NYT , ” Haaretz , November 28 , 2020 .
• [ 4 ] See for example Greg Miller , “ Iran halted nuclear push in 2003 , U.S. now says , ” LA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mark Mazzetti , “ U.S .
Finds Iran Halted Its Nuclear Arms Effort in 2003 , ” NY Times , December 4 , 2007 ; “ U.S .
report : Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003 , ” CNN , December 12 , 2007 .
• [ 5 ] Gareth Porter , Manufactured Crisis : The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare ( Charlottesville : Just World Books , 2014 ) , kindle edition .
• [ 7 ] David Lazarus , “ Iraq war cost : $ 6 trillion .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” LA Times , March 18 , 2013 ; Ernesto Londono , “ Study : Iraq , Afghan war costs to top $ 4 trillion , ” Washington Post , March 28 , 2013 ; Michael B. Kelley , “ The Iraq War Could Cost More Than $ 6 Trillion , ” Business Insider , March 14 , 2013 .
• [ 8 ] See for example John J. Mearsheimer , Why Leaders Lie : The Truth About Lying in International Politics ( New York : Oxford University Press , 2011 ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. Foreign Policy : Iraq , 9/11 , and Misguided Reform by Paul R. Pillar ( New York : Columbia University Press , 2011 ) .
• [ 9 ] Benjamin Netanyahu , Fighting Terrorism : How Democracies Can Defeat Domestic and International Terrorists ( New York : Farrar , Straus and Giroux , 1995 ) , 121 .
• [ 13 ] Paul R. Pillar , “ Stoking Nationalism in Iran , ” National Interest , Oct. 26 , 2011 ; Paul R. Pillar , “ Bizarre Responses to a Bizarre Plot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2011 ; Paul R. Pillar , “ How Liberals Buy into Stupid Wars , ” National Interest , Oct. 18 , 2011 • [ 15 ] Isabel Kershner , “ Israel Lobbies Discreetly for More Sanctions After U.N. Report on Iran , ” NY Times , Nov. 13 , 2011 • [ 19 ] Seymour M. Hersh , “ Iran and the IAEA , ” New Yorker , Nov. 18 , 2011 • [ 20 ] Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett , Going to Tehran : Why the United States Must Come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York : Henry Holt , 2013 ) , 81 .

This interview has been published by Nader Talebzadeh and his wife. Talebzadeh is an Iranian researcher, film director and producer, chairman of International New Horizon Conference and documentary filmmaker known for his 2007 film entitled The Messiah. Talebzadeh studied at Columbia University Film School. The interview has been translated to Farsi (it started at 28:28):
https://www.telewebion.com/episode/2441794.
Question: The American mainstream media is covering the assassination of the top nuclear scientist very heavily i.e by covering Netanyahu portraying this man as his potential target. What does this reveal about the intentions of the West?
Answer: That simply tells us that Netanyahu still has a grip on much of the West. Netanyahu tells the entire world that Mohsen Fakhrizadeh is actually his target; Fakhizadeth ended up being assassinated, and no politician in the entire Western world has the political and intellectual courage to stand against Netanyahu and declare that these activities are contrary to the moral and political order. Former CIA boss John Brennan did say that the killing of Fakhrizadeh was “a criminal act & highly reckless,”[1] but Brennan didn’t name names or calling out the Israelis, largely because he knew that would get him in deep trouble with the Zionist superstructure. I do give Brenan some credit for saying that “Iranian leaders would be wise to wait for the return of responsible American leadership on the global stage.”[2] He certainly knew that Biden would never accept such a diabolical maneuvering.
The killing of Fakhizadeth by the Israelis is against what Immanuel Kant would have called the categorical imperative. In other words, we cannot universalize what the Israelis just did.[3] In fact, if the Iranian government happens to exterminate an Israeli scientist, much of the West would go up in flame saying that Iran needs to be bombed. So why isn’t any politician in the West even asking probing questions?
The second thing we need to point out is that it is generally agreed among US and Israeli intelligence that Iran stopped its nuclear push in 2003.[4] As Gareth Porter rightly points out in his study Manufactured Crisis: The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare, the prevailing vision among Israeli officials that Iran has been trying to acquire nuclear weapons is pure fiction, and it has been deliberately concocted by the Israeli regime itself. Listen to Porter:
“These IAEA investigations generated one round of news stories after another that portrayed each activity under investigation as suggesting that Iran’s nuclear program was a cover for nuclear weapons. To the chagrin of the United States and Israel, however, these investigations ended in early 2008 without having found any evidence to support that charge. But Israel and the United States had a more potent weapon for consolidating the nuclear scare over Iran.
In 2008, they quickly shifted the focus of the IAEA inquiry to a collection of documents, purportedly stolen from a secret Iranian nuclear weapons program, which had been given to the United States by an unknown party. Thus began the second stage of the crisis, from 2008-2011, ostensibly aimed at holding Iran ‘accountable’ for what the IAEA called the ‘alleged studies’ documents. But the actual aim at that stage was to maneuver Iran into a position where it could be accused of noncompliance with the resolutions of the US-dominated IAEA Board of Governors.”[5]
Patrick Buchanan has rightly pointed out that “Since 2015, Iran’s nuclear facilities, under the Iran nuclear deal, have been subject to U.N. surveillance and inspections. And Iran has neither produced plutonium nor enriched uranium to the 90% level needed for a bomb. Israel claims Iran never stopped working on a bomb, but US Intel agencies and UN nuclear inspectors have agreed that the military nuclear program that Fakhrizadeh oversaw was ended in 2003.”[6]
The logic is pretty simple here: Netanyahu has been lying to the West about Iran’s nuclear program. Politicians in the West need to distance themselves from this man because he has caused nothing but trouble over the past thirty years or so. The Iraq war is a classic example because this war alone will cost America at least six trillion dollars.[7] And the entire war was based on a total lie.[8]
Question: Who is more desperate Netanyahu or Trump to initiate or provoke a crisis with a dimension of war?
Answer: Netanyahu. Trump is just a puppet. Keep in mind that Netanyahu has been trying to provoke a war with Iran since 1995. For him, wars seem to be like playing video games. Here is what Netanyahu said way back in 1995, and you can find the following quote in his own book, Fighting Terrorism: How Democracies Can Defeat Domestic and International Terrorists:
“The best estimate at this time place Iran between three and five years away from possessing the prerequisites required for the independent production of nuclear weapons. After this time, the Iranian Islamic republic will have the ability to construct atomic weapons without the importation of materials or technology from abroad.”[9]
It’s been twenty-five years! And we’re still talking about Iran acquiring nuclear weapons! Obviously we have a problem here.
Question: You have recently written a book about the Talmudic ideology and how it undermines Western culture today. Please elaborate. For instance, how does Talmudic ideology affect Zionist paranoia about Iran becoming armed with sophisticated weapons at the end of times?
Answer: Zionism vs. the West is the final book in a trilogy. It can be read independently. In that book, I argue that the Israel/Palestine issues are very deep. In fact, they have theological, philosophical, historical, and political ramifications. When we apply the historical and political ramifications to Iran, the issues even get more interesting. Why? Well, consider this.
Even by the fall of 2011, after the Libya war, neoconservatives such as Bill Kristol were still on the front lines pushing for a military strike against Iran. Neoconservative Jamie Fly of the Foreign Policy Initiative even encouraged Obama to approve what seemed to be perpetual wars in the Middle East. “It is time for President Obama to follow in the footsteps of his predecessors and stand up to tyrants who kill Americans and threaten our interests. It is time to take military action against the Iranian government elements that support terrorism and its nuclear program. More diplomacy is not an adequate response.”[10]
Yet while the neoconservatives push for war, some members of the CIA stated that the evidence for war as non-existent. “Fishy, fishy, fishy,” declared Bruce Riedel, a veteran of the CIA. A military strike against Iran is a “truly awful Hollywood script.”[11] Other CIA members such as Colonel Pat Lang were of the same opinion.[12] Paul Pillar, a twenty-eight-year CIA veteran and author of the ground-breaking book Intelligence and US Foreign Policy, was skeptical of the alleged plot.[13]
Michael Scheuer, former CIA agent and author of a number of ground-breaking books, also found the allegation irresponsible. The plot was indeed fishy, but not for neoconservative newspapers such as the Weekly Standard.[14] The Israel Lobby and others moved into new territory by the fall of 2011 when the IAEA falsely declared that Iran has the capability to build nuclear weapons.[15] It has been pointed out that the IAEA did not base their assessment on evidence but upon hearsay.[16] Israeli historian and flaming Zionist Benny Morris declared that some of the “evidence” came from “the Israeli intelligence in the first place.”[17] Later discoveries indicated that the IAEA claim was a forgery.[18] Robert Kelley, a retired IAEA director, noted that there was virtually nothing in the report that was new.[19]
Iran has done its best to reach out to the West for decades, but the neoconservative hawks have given the country no chance. Flynt Leverett, a senior fellow at the New America Foundation and a professor at Pennsylvania State University, declared that Iran is a rational country and has made several attempts to make rational deals with the West, most particularly America, but the United States has reversed those deals and continued to propound the neoconservative mantra that Iran is a suicide country. In 2008, CBS did an interview with Ali Akbar Salehi, who got his Ph.D. from MIT in nuclear engineering. Once he was done with his studies, Salehi moved back to Iran for an administrative career at the Sharif University of Technology. During the interview, Salehi declared:
“I have a lot of respect…for the people of the US and I’ve always said this: I do not consider the US as a country. I think the US belongs to the whole human kind. It’s a human heritage. I don’t think history will be able to produce another country like the US Because it’s a country that has served humanity so much, in terms of technology, in terms of science…Most of my professors were from the US Even my bachelor’s degree is from the American University of Beirut. Again I had a lot of US professors there. I feel indebted to them. This is part of my religion. You know, whoever teaches you something, you are indebted to them for your life. So my respect goes for the entire US people. But you see this is different when it comes to the actions of their government.”[20]
This certainly does not correspond with neoconservative ideology. What makes it even more interesting is that Salehi was appointed by Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Khamenei, two rulers the neoconservatives have labeled as irrational. Khamenei even declared: “Certainly there are conditions where our ties with the United States could be normalized.”[21]
Prior to Ahmadinejad, Mohammed Khatami, then president of Iran, made several attempts to reach out to the US. In a 1998 CNN interview, he claimed “an intellectual affinity with the essence of American civilization,” a reference to Alexis de Tocqueville. He further declared that both America and Iran are intrinsically religious and that both countries ought to find common ground for fruitful dialogue and relationship. He even apologized for “the 1979-1981 hostage crisis” that “left Americans with negative feelings toward the Islamic Republic.”[22] But the Zionist machine shut him down.
Yet Iran never gave up on engaging America on a fruitful relationship. In 2003, the Iranian government re-energized the peace talks and even made it clear that Iran would allow full transparency of their nuclear program. They also vowed to fight terrorism “including decisive action against any terrorists—above all Al-Qaida—on Iranian territory.” They further agreed to cooperate “for actively supporting political stabilization and the establishment of democratic institutions and democratic government representing all ethnic and religious groups.” Iran also made it clear that the United States must take action against terrorist organizations such as the MEK, which the US was supporting at the time.[23]
But the US once again turned all those opportunities down precisely because the neoconservative/Zionist machine allows no peace talks. As Leverett puts it, “The proposition that the Islamic Republic is implacably and unreasonably hostile to the United States is, of course, a staple of neoconservatism.”[24] I have thoroughly discussed many of these fundamental and profound issues in the book.


veteranstoday--2020-12-04--Let’s Stop Talking About Herd Immunity

Let’s Stop Talking About Herd Immunity

Herd Immunity Without a Vaccine : No Way !
Health Editor ’ s Note : We are seeing the back side of Trump ’ s choice for ‘ pandemic situation advisor.
’ Atlas had no background in epidemiology , immunology , virology , or infectious diseases .
Not a good choice at any time let along during a raging viral pandemic .
He resisted mask science and insisted that the U.S. must forgo public health to end harm to the economy .
Atlas also thought that the solution to this pandemic was to basically do nothing as increasing numbers of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
To do nothing but wait for enough of the population to develop an immunity to coronavirus by contracting the virus is not a viable/sensible/humane way to arrive at an end to the COVID-19 pandemic .
People get sick , and if they recover , will often have lasting negative effects of their infection .
Oh , and then there are the numbers who do not recover and die .
Gone , wiped off the face of the earth .
Herd immunity kills people when we need a way to stop the dying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ along , herd immunity is only achievable when we have an effective vaccine .
Eliminating easy targets for COVID-19 ( any human ) will put us on the road to be rid of this pandemic .
Waiting for at least 60 % of the population to contract COVID-19 , spread it to others , and possibly die is not a viable solution .
Vaccinations will decrease chances of contracting coronavirus , spreading it to others and perpetuating the continued existence of this virus .
COVID-19 can not replicate on its own and thus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of itself .
When there are no human cells to hijack , the virus will become unable to maintain itself and will be gone .
I suggest you read this article so you fully understand that Trump and his Atlas were going to lead us down the garden path of ‘ death.
’ ……Carol

Herd Immunity Without a Vaccine: No Way!
Health Editor’s Note: We are seeing the back side of Trump’s choice for ‘pandemic situation advisor.’ Atlas had no background in epidemiology, immunology, virology, or infectious diseases. Not a good choice at any time let along during a raging viral pandemic. He resisted mask science and insisted that the U.S. must forgo public health to end harm to the economy. Atlas also thought that the solution to this pandemic was to basically do nothing as increasing numbers of U.S. citizens sicken and some eventually die.
To do nothing but wait for enough of the population to develop an immunity to coronavirus by contracting the virus is not a viable/sensible/humane way to arrive at an end to the COVID-19 pandemic. People get sick, and if they recover, will often have lasting negative effects of their infection. Oh, and then there are the numbers who do not recover and die. Gone, wiped off the face of the earth.
Herd immunity kills people when we need a way to stop the dying. As I have been saying all along, herd immunity is only achievable when we have an effective vaccine. Eliminating easy targets for COVID-19 (any human) will put us on the road to be rid of this pandemic. Waiting for at least 60% of the population to contract COVID-19, spread it to others, and possibly die is not a viable solution.
Vaccinations will decrease chances of contracting coronavirus, spreading it to others and perpetuating the continued existence of this virus. COVID-19 cannot replicate on its own and thus uses human body cells to make more of itself. When there are no human cells to hijack, the virus will become unable to maintain itself and will be gone. I suggest you read this article so you fully understand that Trump and his Atlas were going to lead us down the garden path of ‘death.’……Carol