Gyroscopic Investing

stuper1 wrote:In my humble opinion, the biggest acute threat to US security by far is that Islamic terrorists get ahold of a nuclear weapon and detonate it in a large US city. I hope and pray that our people are much more focused on trying to stop that than worrying about Russia or North Korea attacking us. We should definitely be working with Russia to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists, because Russia has the same concern.

Simonjester wrote: or from N Korea by way of Iran for a pallet load of cash that they got from ...somewhere...

stuper1 wrote:

Kriegsspiel wrote:

stuper1 wrote:The whole idea that Russia is a credible threat to the U.S. is laughable on its face, and thus it seems obvious to me that it's just another bogeyman manufactured by the establishment media on behalf of the military-industrial complex.

In capability, or intent?

Seems like a curious statement, regardless.

Both. What is their annual budget for military spending versus ours? Of course, they still have nuclear weapons, and so do we. Mutually Assured Destruction still applies.

Regarding intent, are we seriously afraid that Putin is going to invade America? It's just laughable.

Of course, they are tinkering around the edges to try to get an advantage militarily and/or economically, but we do the same to them, and every other major country in the world does it too, even to their allies.

The Cold War is over. We aren't fighting the specter of worldwide Communism anymore, although even that was mainly just a pretense.

We actually have a lot in common culturally with Russia. There is no reason for us to be in conflict with them.

Kriegsspiel wrote: Americans had a lot in common with Germany and Italy in the 1940s too

stuper1 wrote:

Kriegsspiel wrote: Americans had a lot in common with Germany and Italy in the 1940s too

There was no need for a war with Germany and Italy in the 1940s either. War is a racket.

kriegsspiel wrote:LOL, yes. They wouldn't charge into our teeth like retards. Russia is not capable of invading and occupying the US like they did with Crimea

Two simple questions: How did the FBI's Russia investigation start? And was it started because the Trump "dossier" was presented to somebody at the FBI?

Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) asked FBI director Christopher Wray those questions at a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, but he got no answers:

"How did the Russia investigation start?" DeSantis asked Wray. "Did (FBI counterintelligence agent)Peter Strzok -- was he -- did he start it?"

Wray answered, "I'm not aware of who started the investigation within the FBI."

DeSantis followed up: "Was it started because the dossier was presented to somebody in the FBI?"

"I don't have the answer to that question," Wray said.

Libertarian666 wrote: Wray is either lying or totally incompetent.

Either way, he must be fired.

Libertarian666 wrote:

Maddy wrote:Further to Moda's request for a "source" establishing the absence of evidence sufficient to initiate an investigation, the following testimony provided by FBI Director Christopher Wray at a House Judiciary Committee hearing yesterday would seem to pretty much settle the issue:

Two simple questions: How did the FBI's Russia investigation start? And was it started because the Trump "dossier" was presented to somebody at the FBI?

Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) asked FBI director Christopher Wray those questions at a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, but he got no answers:

"How did the Russia investigation start?" DeSantis asked Wray. "Did (FBI counterintelligence agent)Peter Strzok -- was he -- did he start it?"

Wray answered, "I'm not aware of who started the investigation within the FBI."

DeSantis followed up: "Was it started because the dossier was presented to somebody in the FBI?"

"I don't have the answer to that question," Wray said.

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/su ... ump-russia

Wray is either lying or totally incompetent.

Either way, he must be fired.

But we know the answer to this question, don't we?

moda0306 wrote:Trump has no problem with the CIA, permanent war, gangster global capitalism, etc, as long as it's doing what he sees as being "in our interests" as they murder, torture, lie, steal, and secretly manipulate the public. He just wants to use these tools for less globalist aims. He's no enemy of the deep state. He just wants to use its power somewhat differently.

Libertarian666 wrote:

Maddy wrote:

moda0306 wrote:Trump has no problem with the CIA, permanent war, gangster global capitalism, etc, as long as it's doing what he sees as being "in our interests" as they murder, torture, lie, steal, and secretly manipulate the public. He just wants to use these tools for less globalist aims. He's no enemy of the deep state. He just wants to use its power somewhat differently.

I'd be surprised if Trump fully understands, at this point, what the deep state is and what its objectives are. No doubt his learning curve has been steep, but he's had neither the time nor the experience to know what's really at stake, who's really running the show, and little information or control he has over anything. It may be that the oligarchy will, in the end, play him like a fiddle (as they have every president in recent history), but I think it's too early to brand him one way or another.

I think he understands exactly what the deep state is and what its objectives are.

If he can stay alive and avoid being railroaded out of office I believe he will go down as a great President.

moda0306 wrote:Trump has vociferously advocated for torture, imperialistic war and theft, murdering family-members of alleged "terrorists," and an expanded police state.

moda0306 wrote:Trump has vociferously advocated for torture, imperialistic war and theft, murdering family-members of alleged "terrorists," and an expanded police state.

I'd love to see tech's evidence that he's any sort of reliable threat to the deep state.

But I know we won't get it.

Simonjester wrote: in all fairness candidate trump did "vociferously advocated for torture, imperialistic war and theft, murdering family-members of alleged "terrorists," and an expanded police state." i don't recall president trump advocating or following through on any of this hyperbolic election nuttery at all. this is certainly in keeping with how heat of the campaign bloviating is forgotten by most/all candidates... he has however(against all political norms) managed to follow through on some of his legitimate campaign promises which is an unorthodox precedent that i am happy to see set...

Simonjester wrote: between the lines.

dualstow wrote:Where is the best place to read about the so-called deep state?

Maddy wrote:

dualstow wrote:Where is the best place to read about the so-called deep state?

This is a very interesting and eye-opening multi-chapter work that delves into the Deep State's intimate connections to Hollywood, the music industry, pedophilia, the military-industrial complex, the U.S. intelligence apparatus, the occult, psychedelic drugs, and the hippy movement.
http://centerforaninformedamerica.com/laurelcanyon/

Simonjester wrote:
oooh i like that one, i read all the way through it a couple years ago, it was a strange and almost addictive read on the sixties and the counterculture... it put an entirely different spin on it for me as a post sixties child, it created a wonderful and healthy skepticism in me about a decade its music and culture that i was mostly just in awe of beforehand....

"What he's being accused of is treason. This has never happened before in America, that there is a Russia agent in the White House. And we have a whole array of allegations from Putin helped him get in the White House, to his associates are doing wrong things with Russians."

"There is no evidence there was any wrongdoing, and indeed Flynn should have talked to the Russian ambassador. That was his job. This is beyond belief now... This has become a national security threat to us in and of itself,"he explained.

"Two motives have driven this false narrative about Trump, that he is somehow a Kremlin agent. There have been two forces. One is the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party, which doesn't want to admit she lost the election... and that may be because she wants to run again.... At the same time, there has long been in Washington, let's call it the fourth branch of government -- the intelligence services, who have opposed any rapprochement or cooperation with Russia."

"Remember, in 2016, President Obama worked out a deal with Russian president Vladimir Putin, for military cooperation in Syria. He said he was going to share intelligence with Russia, the way Trump and the Russians were supposed to do the other day. Our Department of Defense said they wouldn't share intelligence, and a few days later, they killed Syrian soldiers ["by accident"] violating the agreement, and that was that," he explained.

"So we can ask: Who is making our foreign policy in Washington today?"

Host Tucker Carlson presses him to explain and Cohen says: "You and I have to ask a subversive question. Are there really three branches of government. Or is there a fourth branch of government? These intel services? What we know for a fact, Obama tried not very hard, but he tried for a military alliance with Putin in Syria against terrorism, but it was sabotaged by the Department of Defense and its allies in the intelligence services. Trump sais on the campaign trail, 'Wouldn't it be great to cooperate with Russia?' My answer is, it would be great. And Trump wants that to happen, but he is being thwarted. Every time he gets close, we get a new leak of a story."

Maddy wrote:I recently heard an excellent interview with Stephen Cohen, self-avowed liberal and professor emeritus of Russian studies at New York University and professor emeritus of politics at Princeton University. His view is that the recurring baseless accusations of treason against President Trump have become a serious security threat to the United States by obstructing the effort toward diplomatic rapprochement and fueling an international crisis of monumental proportion.

Those "progressives" who think Trump is the problem need a reality check and should give some thought to whose agenda they are, in reality, supporting.

"What he's being accused of is treason. This has never happened before in America, that there is a Russia agent in the White House. And we have a whole array of allegations from Putin helped him get in the White House, to his associates are doing wrong things with Russians."

"There is no evidence there was any wrongdoing, and indeed Flynn should have talked to the Russian ambassador. That was his job. This is beyond belief now... This has become a national security threat to us in and of itself,"he explained.

"Two motives have driven this false narrative about Trump, that he is somehow a Kremlin agent. There have been two forces. One is the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party, which doesn't want to admit she lost the election... and that may be because she wants to run again.... At the same time, there has long been in Washington, let's call it the fourth branch of government -- the intelligence services, who have opposed any rapprochement or cooperation with Russia."

"Remember, in 2016, President Obama worked out a deal with Russian president Vladimir Putin, for military cooperation in Syria. He said he was going to share intelligence with Russia, the way Trump and the Russians were supposed to do the other day. Our Department of Defense said they wouldn't share intelligence, and a few days later, they killed Syrian soldiers ["by accident"] violating the agreement, and that was that," he explained.

"So we can ask: Who is making our foreign policy in Washington today?"

Host Tucker Carlson presses him to explain and Cohen says: "You and I have to ask a subversive question. Are there really three branches of government. Or is there a fourth branch of government? These intel services? What we know for a fact, Obama tried not very hard, but he tried for a military alliance with Putin in Syria against terrorism, but it was sabotaged by the Department of Defense and its allies in the intelligence services. Trump sais on the campaign trail, 'Wouldn't it be great to cooperate with Russia?' My answer is, it would be great. And Trump wants that to happen, but he is being thwarted. Every time he gets close, we get a new leak of a story."

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... today.html