America goes to the polls

Shhhhhhh......you are not supposed to be mentioning that.

Well worth reading:

http://www.infowars.com/bloggers-compared-to-isis-during-congressional-hearing/

Washington has its knickers in a twist at the very idea of anyone reading or watching non-Langley-approved media.

Quote:

Beyond the inflammatory rhetoric, the real story revolves around the fact that Washington was caught off guard by the rapid growth of RT, with Hillary Clinton and others having acknowledged the fact that the U.S. is “losing the information war,” which is why they are now desperately trying to denigrate the Russian broadcaster.

Without a doubt, RT puts out pro-Russian propaganda, but it also broadcasts truths about geopolitics and U.S. foreign policy that Americans will never see on mainstream corporate networks, precisely because those networks are also engaged in propaganda.

There’s no mystery behind why RT has become so big – telling the truth is popular – but because Washington finds it impossible to compete on that basis, it has been forced to resort to ad hominem attacks and ludicrous comparisons to ISIS in a desperate bid to level the playing field.

As linguist Noam Chomsky said, “The idea that there should be a network reaching people, which does not repeat the US propaganda system, is intolerable” to the US establishment.

People know perfectly well where RT - and AJ - stand. But they don't broadcast outright lies, unlike CNN or the BBC.

I sat and watched the BBC lie, and lie, and lie again during the Referendum campaign - just as they are doing now during the election.

I sat and watched RT and AJ broadcast accurate, in-depth reports on the subject.

So, which station does Washington think I am going to trust most about other matters?

Peter Pomerantsev, of the London-based Legatum Institute, followed up by claiming that conspiracy theories were no longer “fringe” and were now driving the success of Jean-Marie Le Pen in France, before lamenting the fact that conspiracy theories were challenging the “global order” and threatening to undermine global institutions.

'Global order? Global institutions'? They aren't even trying to hide it now.

My God!!  

Their arrogance is breathtaking, frankly, Lily. And remember the people you posted about earlier?


A team of Hillary Clinton “super volunteers” warned a New York Times reporter on Wednesday against using words about Clinton that they deem to be “sexist.

Clinton has her panties in a bunch because she can't censor the rest of the world quite so easily.

Boo hoo.  The little people have made her angry.  

It's the arrogance of it...

How very dare the little people blog about how horrid we are! How very dare they look elsewhere for sources of information! Why aren't they doing what we tell them? How dare they upset our global order!

The global order that has taken years to get to this point.....

Yes, and now it's all collapsing in front of them.

Hooray for that!   

http://www.infowars.com/u-s-recruited-entertainment-corporations-to-help-in-propaganda-war-against-islamic-state-and-russia/


The latest Wikileaks trove reveals a close relationship between the Obama administration, the State Department and the transnational entertainment corporation Sony.

I take it that's the same Sony that produced a woefully unfunny movie about North Korea and then claimed it was 'hacked' by North Korea? And Washington and the US MSM then said how terrible it was that North Korea had 'hacked' Sony? Just as if they were following a script?

That Sony?

There is only the one here, Bonny.  

http://nypost.com/2015/04/17/calling-her-hillary-is-now-sexist/

Now that Hillary is officially in the running, prepare to start hearing the s-word. Don’t like her politics? Sexist! Disagree with her positions? Sexist! Still have issues with Benghazi? Sexist!
The s-bomb will be dropping left and right over the next 18 months during an election season that’s bound to witness a violent collision of culture and politics. Obama’s exit will end the age of racial politics just in time for Hillary to usher in the era of gender politics.
But for many of her female supporters, the gender war has already begun, and the first big battle is being fought over her name.
You see, if you do what I just did and call her “Hillary,” that makes you sexist now, too.
Since we’re used to calling presidents and candidates by their last names (i.e. Obama, Bush), some are claiming that calling Hillary “Hillary” is too informal and therefore disrespectful and therefore demeaning and therefore, of course, sexist.
One sweet soul on Twitter wrote: “It’s Hillary CLINTON you f - - - s, not ‘Hillary!’ ”
Oh, boy, er . . . girl. This will be a long 18 months............... more moonbattery at link.

So, is it OK to call her The elderly wife of Monica Lewinsky's ex-boyfriend or is that too long? Maybe a simple Killary is better?

That's a decent article.  

Actually, Bonny, that is a good title for her.

No, I put that badly, Lily, it's not the article that's deranged, it's the Hillary fan club. Personally, I hope Americans exercise their First Amendment rights to call her anything they damned well feel like calling the vile woman.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-04-18/more-hillary-cronyism-revealed-cisco-used-clinton-foundation-cover-human-rights-abus

Another good one.

So is this:

http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-runs-white-house-and-row-over-ukrainian-benefactors-trade-322253.html

Enemies of Hillary Clinton waiting to discredit her bid for the White House are likely to seize on news that one of the biggest benefactors to the Clinton Foundation has been trading with Iran and may be in breach of US sanctions imposed on the country.

Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk, 54, has courted the Clintons for at least nine years – in the United States, the Alps and Ukraine.

Earlier this year, he was confirmed as the largest individual contributor to the Clinton Foundation, whose aims include the creation of “economic opportunity and growth”. He also has links to the Tony Blair Foundation and represented its biggest single donor in 2013.

Pinchuk became particularly friendly with Bill Clinton. In 2010, he invited the former president to his 50th birthday party in the French ski resort of Courchevel. In return, Pinchuk attended Clinton’s 65th in 2011, and was a guest at the inauguration of Clinton’s Presidential Library. The Clintons spoke at Pinchuk’s Yalta European Strategy conference, which seeks integration between Ukraine and Europe.

That's worked out well, hasn't it? I have NO doubt that the Clintons pictured themselves installed in one of those stunning old Tsarist palaces in Crimea when they were all in Yalta in 2013, scheming Satan knows what.

Something like this would suit Killary perfectly, keep the peasants at bay:

Bonny, you didn't put it badly, I knew what you meant.    Killary is very apt.

They are pretty much like the Blairs IMO.

Oh, they shouldn't complain about the Hillary moniker.  It's all over her campaign posters.  

A group of Nevada sex workers, Hookers For Hillary, have come out in favor of the Democratic contender for president

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3046087/Hookers-Hillary-Nevada-sex-workers-come-favor-Clinton-president-2016.html#ixzz3Xna4Ul5M
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Good news for Bill, anyway. He'll be wanting freebies.

(and Hillary).....

Yes, I've heard the stories....

Prostitutes really shouldn't associate with politicians, the girls will get a bad name. Like that poor Dutch dominatrix that was outed as also being a merchant banker.

Good point.  

Oh, I see Obama is making a statement about how he managed to get the hostages killed in some 'rescue mission' f*ck up.....

OMG, he droned them.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/04/23/white-house-american-italian-hostages-killed-in-us-counterterror-operation/

An American and an Italian held hostage by Al Qaeda were accidentally killed in a U.S. counterterrorism operation earlier this year, the White House said Thursday, in a stunning and tragic admission.

The White House also revealed that two American terror operatives were killed, but the revelation that hostages died -- in an apparent drone strike -- is leading to what President Obama called a "full review."

Obama, speaking from the White House, expressed "grief and condolences" for the deaths of the hostages, American development expert Warren Weinstein and Italian national Giovanni Lo Porto.

"I profoundly regret what happened," Obama said, offering his "deepest apologies" to the families.

The White House said they were both “accidentally killed” in the operation in January. A senior defense official told Fox News the hostages were killed in a drone strike.

"No words can fully express our regret over this terrible tragedy," the White House said in a statement.

"The operation targeted an al-Qa'ida-associated compound, where we had no reason to believe either hostage was present, located in the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan," the White House said.


Just like all those wedding parties, kids gathering firewood, etc., then?