Donald Trump Not Wrong When He Said That Hillary “Has Killed Hundreds of Thousands of

[mick silver]

Donald Trump Not Wrong When He Said That Hillary “Has Killed Hundreds of Thousands of People” Donald Trump may be known for many things, but mincing words certainly isn’t one of them. While most of his inflammatory remarks — including an outright entry ban for all Muslims attempting to immigrate — have most of the U.S., if not the world, up in arms, his latest accusation (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/donald-trump/12048377/Donald-Trump-Hilary-Clinton-has-killed-hundreds-of-thousands-with-her-stupidity.html) that Hillary Clinton “has killed hundreds of thousands of people” might be closer to the truth (http://theantimedia.org/forget-hillarys-emails-heres-real-scandal-nobody-talking/) than many people realize.Hillary is a war hawk (http://theantimedia.org/forget-hillarys-emails-heres-real-scandal-nobody-talking/) of the highest order, and as Trump pointed pointed out, her record as Secretary of State under Obama evidenced the transformation of that hawkish attitude into prolific opportunity (http://www.salon.com/2015/09/10/what_hillary_clinton_wants_you_to_forget_her_disas trous_record_as_a_war_hawk/).In 2011, the U.S. invaded Libya using its favorite, tired ‘humanitarian’ excuse (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/aug/30/syria-chemical-attack-war-intervention-oil-gas-energy-pipelines) — and Hillary helped make it happen, becoming a “strong advocate” for intervention, as the Washington Post reported (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/hillarys-war-how-conviction-replaced-skepticism-in-libya-intervention/2011/10/28/gIQAhGS7WM_story.html). But military intervention had little to do with compassion for an oppressed populace, and far more to do with the economic threat posed by Qaddafi’s move away (http://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/markets/item/4630-gadhafi-s-gold-money-plan-would-have-devastated-dollar) from the petrodollar toward the gold-backed Dinar. As reported by (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/world/africa/scores-of-unintended-casualties-in-nato-war-in-libya.html?_r=0) the New York Times, NATO forces dropped some 7,700 bombs and missiles during their seven-month air campaign, and the number of civilian (http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2011/07/201172642328531686.html) casualties (http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/08/09/libya.zlitan/index.html) — though reported by NATO to be a low-ball 70 — could be far closer to 1,500, including a number of journalists, with scores injured and many others reported missing. Of Qaddafi, she ultimately told (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y) CBS, “We came, we saw, he died” — as did many innocent civilians.Hillary Clinton’s bellicose policies could further be summed up by her push (https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/10/16/clinton-embraces-obama-plan-for-troops-afghanistan/XbbBVwGGgqbSMLWgB54KgI/story.html) to send more troops to Afghanistan and spend yet more billions intervening the war-torn nation — a battlefield the National Interest characterized (http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/hillary-clintons-afghanistan-problem-9574) as “one of the most consequential foreign-policy decisions of President Obama’s first term in office.” That interventionist policy, called (http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/03/12/why-afghanistan-was-obamas-biggest-mistake/#sthash.HuHXUJow.dpbs) his “biggest foreign policy blunder to date” by Foreign Policy in 2012, had Clinton cheerleading the effort — despite a brutal attack by a rogue U.S. soldier that left 16 Afghan civilians dead. As Stephen M. Walt put it (http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/03/12/why-afghanistan-was-obamas-biggest-mistake/?wp_login_redirect=0), “the United States can’t fix that country, it is not a vital U.S. interest that we try, and we should have been gone a long time ago.”Fast forward to 2015, and Hillary’s at it again, supporting Obama’s recent decision to keep 5,500 troops in Afghanistan — past the end of his term. “We have invested a lot of blood and a lot of treasure in trying to help that country,” Clinton stated (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/17/hillary-clinton-supports-obama-keep-troops-in-afghanistan), “and we can’t afford for it to become an outpost of the Taliban and [Islamic State] one more time, threatening us, threatening the larger world.” Or, perhaps, threatening the West’s opium supply (http://theantimedia.org/rumors-persist-that-the-cia-helps-export-opium-from-afghanistan/)? Of course total civilian casualties in that country in the fourteen years since the U.S. invasion of 2001 may never be known, but with an estimated (http://www.wsj.com/articles/civilian-casualties-in-afghanistan-reach-record-high-1438754835) 1,592 dead in just the first half of 2015 alone — which is considered a low estimate by many — one has to call to question the human cost of continued U.S. presence, however eager Hillary may be for perpetual involvement.And then there’s Syria. With the U.S. embroiled in a complex web of military action in the Middle East — which, incidentally, led to the rise (http://truthinmedia.com/truth-in-media-the-origin-of-isis/) of the Islamic State Qaddafi warned (http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/03/09/libya-isis-and-the-unaffordable-luxury-of-hindsight/) about and the U.S. wanted (http://theantimedia.org/leaked-documents-prove-us-wanted-isis-to-emerge-in-syria/), that it now also claims (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/nov/30/kurdish-fighters-us-special-forces-isis-combat) to be fighting — the number of civilian casualties has reached unknown, and no less epic, proportions. It’s estimated (http://web.mit.edu/humancostiraq/) that the rate of death to displacement is typically around 1 to 5, and with 8 million or so refugees (http://www.worldvision.org/news-stories-videos/syria-war-refugee-crisis) fleeing war-ravaged Syria, that figure alone could trump Trump’s accusation. Hillary Clinton, of course, has been a strong backer (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/hillary-clinton-failure-to-help-syrian-rebels-led-to-the-rise-of-isis/375832/) of military action in Syria, despite questions (http://theantimedia.org/nations-100-times-more-likely-to-go-to-war-in-oil-rich-countries/) surrounding the U.S.’ true motives in that country — including securing the vast oil supply (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/aug/30/syria-chemical-attack-war-intervention-oil-gas-energy-pipelines).Also pertinent in the conversation of Hillary’s hawkishness is her support of Israel’s illegal occupation (http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/countries/middle-east-and-north-africa/israel-and-occupied-palestinian-territories) of Palestine — and its continued policy (http://theantimedia.org/obamas-human-rights-speech-ignores-illegal-israeli-occupation-of-palestine/) of human rights atrocities. And we can’t forget Iraq (http://www.bravenewfilms.org/watch_iraqforsale), of course, and her advocacy (http://swampland.time.com/2014/01/14/hillary-clintons-unapologetically-hawkish-record-faces-2016-test/) for troop retention there, ostensibly to prevent a resurgence of al-Qaeda — the same (http://theantimedia.org/un-report-confirms-israel-al-qaeda-rebels-syria/) fighters the U.S. and Israel now back in their supposed fight against the Islamic State — despite as many as two million civilian non-combatants who have already perished (http://pontiactribune.com/illegal-invasion-of-iraq-resulted-in-1-million-civilians-dead/) as a result of intervention there. Iran can’t be ignored as a possible site for military intervention, either. As Hillary asserted (http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/09/politics/hillary-clinton-iran-nuclear-deal/), she “will not hesitate to take military action if Iran attempts to obtain a nuclear weapon.”Confused? You aren’t alone. But one thing is clear: a Hillary Clinton presidency will only bring more of the same meddling, belligerence (http://theantimedia.org/the-war-on-terror-is-creating-more-terror/), and innocent death, causing growing resentment of the U.S. around the world — which inarguably places the U.S. at greater risk of terror attacks than any slam-the-door-shut (http://theantimedia.org/first-they-came-for-the-muslims/)-on-Muslims immigration policy Trump and his supporters vocally and contentiously advocate.The original source of this article is The Anti-Media (http://theantimedia.org/trump-not-wrong-when-he-said-that-hillary-has-killed-hundreds-of-thousands-of-people/)
Copyright © Claire Bernish (http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/claire-bernish), The Anti-Media (http://theantimedia.org/trump-not-wrong-when-he-said-that-hillary-has-killed-hundreds-of-thousands-of-people/), 2015

http://www.globalresearch.ca/donald-trump-not-wrong-when-he-said-that-hillary-has-killed-hundreds-of-thousands-of-people/5495922

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/GlobalResearchCRG)

[mick silver]

Hillary Clinton’s ‘Freudian Slip’: “The Nuclear Option Should Not at All Be Taken off the Table”By Timothy Alexander Guzman (http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/timothy-alexander-guzman)
Global Research, December 08, 2015
Silent Crow News (http://silentcrownews.com/wordpress/?p=4483) 7 December 2015

Region: USA (http://www.globalresearch.ca/region/usa)
Theme: US NATO War Agenda (http://www.globalresearch.ca/theme/us-nato-war-agenda)
In-depth Report: Nuclear War (http://www.globalresearch.ca/indepthreport/nuclear-war)


http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/plugins/print-me/printme.png (http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-clintons-freudian-slip-the-nuclear-option-should-not-at-all-be-taken-off-the-table/5494380?print=1)

562
11 5

803

http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/H.-Clinton.jpg
Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “Freudian slip” in simple terms as “a mistake in speech that shows what the speaker is truly thinking.” According to ABC news, Hillary Clinton was at the ‘Brookings Institution’s Saban Forum 2015’ giving a speech with prominent Israeli’s and Secretary of State John Kerry present and made a comment on Iran’s nuclear program:

While responding to a question about comments she made about keeping military action against Iran on the table should they violate the terms of the nuclear agreement, which Clinton said “is not perfect,” She warned: “What I said and what I mean is that there will have to be consequences for any violation by Iran and that the nuclear option should not at all be taken off the table. That has been my position consistently.” The crowd erupted into gasps and chatter regarding what appeared to be Clinton suggesting a nuclear weapon could be used against Iran if they fail to comply. Moments later, a lone, muffled voice rose from the front row with a loud, but inaudible, interjection. “What? The military option,” Clinton said, correcting herself.
“Thank you, Justice Breyer,” she added, revealing the identity of the lone voice as none other than the Supreme Court Justice’s. “He’s a careful listener, that Justice Breyer — we like that about him,” Clinton said with a chuckle
Hillary “We Came, We Saw, He Died” Clinton sure loves to laugh at death and destruction. Clinton’s use of the“nuclear option” in her speech on Iran is a dangerous game. The former first lady and Secretary of State is a Democratic front runner for the White House. Clinton’s hawkish stance is troublesome knowing what her true intentions are. Zero Hedge published an article in May of this year which focused on an investigative report by theInternational Business Times (IBTimes) on Hillary Clinton and her foundation’s relationship with the arms industry:
Now, the IBTimes is out with a new investigative piece that looks at the relationship between foreign government and corporate donors to Clinton charities and weapons deals negotiated under Hillary Clinton’s State Department which, as it turns out, approved $165 billion in arms deals to nations who had previously given money to the Clinton Foundation.
Via IBTimes:

In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contributed at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, the philanthropic enterprise she has overseen with her husband, former president Bill Clinton. Just two months before the deal was finalized, Boeing — the defense contractor that manufactures one of the fighter jets the Saudis were especially keen to acquire, the F-15 — contributed $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to a company press release.
The Saudi deal was one of dozens of arms sales approved by Hillary Clinton’s State Department that placed weapons in the hands of governments that had also donated money to the Clinton family philanthropic empire, an International Business Times investigation has found. Under Clinton’s leadership, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments have given money to the Clinton Foundation, according to an IBTimes analysis of State Department and foundation data. That figure — derived from the three full fiscal years of Clinton’s term as Secretary of State (from October 2010 to September 2012) — represented nearly double the value of American arms sales made to the those countries and approved by the State Department during the same period of President George W. Bush’s second term…
The Clinton-led State Department also authorized $151 billion of separate Pentagon-brokered deals for 16 of the countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation, resulting in a 143 percent increase in completed sales to those nations over the same time frame during the Bush administration. These extra sales were part of a broad increase in American military exports that accompanied Obama’s arrival in the White House
Hillary Clinton is as hawkish as the Bush neo-cons. Remember she was the first “Democrat” to vote for the invasion of Iraq in 2003. As President of the United States, she will target Iran and others who oppose “America’s Democracy.”Will she become the first female U.S. President? There was Barack Obama, the first African-American President. What card the political and financial elite have this time? A woman in the White House would make sense for the elites who donated mass sums of money to her campaign including her son-in law’s firm Goldman Sachs (a powerful financial institution). The first African-American was elected; now the real possibility of a woman president can be a reality. It will satisfy women’s rights advocates and organizations as well as feminist activists. Who could argue against a woman who is as tough as a man in the White House?
Many in Israel support Hillary and so does the Saudi’s who donated millions of dollars to her foundation. All of the candidates including Donald Trump who calls the Iran Nuclear Deal, a bad deal will be a pro-war president. Trump was quoted as saying “Never, ever ever in my life have I seen any transaction so incompetently negotiated as our deal with Iran,” Trump said. “And I mean never” at a rally with another war hawk Ted Cruz to Stop the Iran nuclear deal this past September. Trump also said “We lose everywhere,” Trump continued. “We lose militarily. We can’t beat ISIS. Give me a break…We will have so much winning if I get elected you might get bored with winning.” Every President of the United States since 1776 has been about war, “peace” on the other hand has only existed for a mere 21 years since its inception according to a 2011 article by www.loonwatch.com (http://www.loonwatch.com/) titled ‘We’re at War! And We Have Been Since 1776: 214 Years of American War Making’ which lists every war the U.S. has been involved in.
Why would Clinton, Trump, Rubio or any of the presidential candidates ask for anything less except for more wars? Peace and prosperity is not on the agenda, war is. Hillary Clinton fits the job description as a war hawk and as a woman; she might be a little more hawkish than any of her political rivals. Let’s see, a woman who is out to prove that she is tougher than her male counterparts is a dangerous recipe for a nuclear war especially against Iran. Hillary Clinton is as dangerous as you can get.
The original source of this article is Silent Crow News (http://silentcrownews.com/wordpress/?p=4483)
Copyright © Timothy Alexander Guzman (http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/timothy-alexander-guzman), Silent Crow News (http://silentcrownews.com/wordpress/?p=4483), 2015

[mick silver]

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/dailystar/Comics/24-10-2015/7%20cartoonjpg_635812417192799572_main.jpg

[JohnQPublic]

Try millions of deaths.

7972