search results matching tag: fort

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (177)     Sift Talk (7)     Blogs (7)     Comments (259)   

TX VS POTUS

newtboy says...

Sad that an entire party can’t read or is willing to discard the constitution at the first inconvenience.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause

This is an armed rebellion, make no mistakes. Similar to the actions that ignited the civil war, states trying to exert authority over the federal government in direct contradiction to the constitution. Don’t be surprised if Texas guard members attack a federal fort next.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Walker- paid for at least one abortion probably many more, so by his definition he’s a baby murderer, liar, philanderer, self admitted total shit for brains moron, wife and child abuser, mental defective, suicide case, attempted murderer, kidnapper, deadbeat father x 4 or more, police impersonator, fake businessman, fake graduate,….the list never ends. He is absolute proof that the right has zero morals, ethics, standards, or anything besides a blind lust for power.
I can only imagine the never ending jabs and accusations from you if he was a Democrat….and they would be well deserved.

Oz - puppy torturer and murderer, liar, quack, and snake oil salesman who made millions by selling fake miracle cures to morons and now wants to buy a senate seat. More proof that morals, ethics, standards, and honesty are 100% lacking in the right….but we knew that after Marmalade Mussolini.

Which party is the party of death, debauchery, and criminality again? ROTFLMFAHS!!

Edit- forgot Tina Forte, AOC’s opponent that calls AOC a “crime surge creator” while hiding the fact that Forte’s family are a major crime organization , her repeatedly convicted husband Joey Snapple and her son are recently convicted illegal gun and drug traffickers that used her failing beverage company to run guns and drugs, she is often found with terrorist Proud Boys, and was at the Jan 6 failed coup. Sure sounds like she’s much more of a crime surge creator all by her self. Funny enough, she was a hard core anti marijuana advocate until her husband was busted with $150000 in illegal marijuana among other illicit drugs and illegal guns, now she wants it decriminalized and conviction records expunged. No….she won’t abuse her office for personal gain….never.

Why it's hard to be Republican w/a mind and heart

newtboy says...

Talk about being delusional. Trump HAD nuclear secrets (and/or other national secrets of the same highest possible level secrecy classification and danger levels never to be kept or read outside secure facilities designed to safeguard such sensitive information.) kept them unsecured in publicly accessible areas of his public club filled with foreign nationals…and thinks it’s fine he stole and exposed them. That’s delusional.

If he still any, he should absolutely be shot for treason at first sight by any and every patriot regardless of party, right?

What can’t he hold? Anything not actually officially declassified on Jan 20, 2020.
This includes all top secrets and nuclear secrets he cannot declassify himself, and 700 pages of classified documents he did not declassify before stealing them on his way out the door. His claim “anything I took was automatically declassified” is nonsense. That’s not how declassification works at all….you know that.

Where can’t he hold it? In boxes in the hallway outside the unlocked basement in his club where foreign nationals are allowed to wander freely, where Chinese and now Russian spies are KNOWN to have penetrated carrying bags of surveillance and recording equipment, spyware ready to install, etc. Even frat boys have just wandered in off the beach to these areas. It makes Clinton’s server look like Fort Knox. For the highest classification documents, they can only be kept at hardened secure locations designated for that purpose…not a closet, basement, hallway….not even a fire safe.

There’s no enlightening you. You prefer to live in the dark. It’s easier to make up lies and convince yourself of nonsense if you never look at reality. Any facts you dislike you simply discard, thinking your magic mantra, “fake news”, protects you from reality. Any lies you find comforting you simply believe and absolutely refuse to consider reality. It’s a serious mental issue, and if Reagan hadn’t defunded national mental health care, you would be institutionalized, but the right prefers the insane to be among us because they tend to vote Republican.

This answer has nothing to do with the Majestic Spaghetti Monster….I don’t know what you mean….

…but stupid elitists are on the right, they’re the ones who took millions in ppp loan forgiveness (often for fraudulent ppp loans for employees they didn’t have) but claim $10k to poor people trying to become educated will ruin the nation, turn us communist, bankrupt us, etc.. It’s fine if billionaires get handouts of multiple trillions, not a peep of concern then, but not those struggling with crushing debt from fake schools like Trump’s that stole their money for a completely worthless piece of paper and zero education….the same millionaires up in arms over the poor getting $10k took hundreds of thousands to millions despite making the equivalent of over $250k (and millions if they cheat, which the ALL did, insider trading is the norm from the right).

Elitist?! 😂 again, we live with 2 people on under $40k in California….near poverty level. Hard to be elitist and in poverty at the same time. Elitists are people making $250k, another million in insider trading profits, and $3 million in forgiven loans who complain poor people shouldn’t get $10k rebates, but they should get more tax breaks. That’s an elitist stupid answer, it came directly from your Republican representatives like MTG.

I’m not rich, I’m stable. We have no debts, property taxes of only $1250, and I grow over 50% of our food. We live better than most middle class, including international vacations almost yearly, 4 cars, all the top notch organic produce we can eat, a swimming pool size koi pond, Solar, an orchard, no government handouts, etc. all on poverty level income. I’ve never shirked a debt, not once. I’ve never even walked away from an obligation. If you were capable of taking in new information, you would know all that because I’ve told you repeatedly.

bobknight33 said:

Talking about being delusional.. Trump has nuclear secrets..... That delusional.

Exactly what documents can't a EX president hold personally ?

Please enlighten me witty you stupid elitist MSM answer.

How Trump's Campaign Tries To Supress The Black Vote

BSR says...

Brad Parscale being handcuffed

Fort Lauderdale Police released segments of bodycam video showing officers handcuffing former Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale. It is not clear what occurred in the moments not shown in the edited three-minute compilation provided by FLPD.


These kids play outside no matter how cold it gets

ant says...

I remember loving the cold snow in PA back in the 80s. Cancel(l)ed school days, snow forts and balls, sleds, etc. As an old fart, I'm cold in my <70F degrees room. LOL!

Massive Load

bremnet says...

It's a fractionation tower (fractionation column, spliltting tower etc. - lots of different names) for separation of components of natural gas or light ends of distillation or cracking processes for hydrocarbon refining. Hard to tell specifics, but if for Shell in Fort Saskatchewan (the Scotford site), one might guess given length and layout could be debutanizer or perhaps depropanizer for synthetic crude refining (looks too short for a de-C3, but hard to tell on its own).

Payback said:

Being Edmonton, I'd expect some sort of oil refinery boiler.

moonsammy (Member Profile)

siftbot says...

Congratulations! Your comment on Horrific Tornado, Fort Walton Beach, Florida | Apr 22, 2018 has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 1 Badge!

BSR (Member Profile)

BSR (Member Profile)

eric3579 (Member Profile)

Cop Pepper Spraying Teenage Girl

vil says...

So some of you Americans honestly believe this is the correct way to police a neighborhood community? Or are you all trolls?

This is close to incarceration for jaywalking or shooting someone for wearing a hoodie and being black.

Look at how many officers and what effort and time it takes to solve the case of a scratched car at a crossroads scene and how they manage to make a meal of it.

At 3 minutes into the video they are exactly one competent cop, two calm sentences and one phone call to parents away from not having to deal with the ensuing fracas. Even if they did everything by the book they will be remembered as assholes.

The message the girl gets is she should have tried harder to get away sooner because cops are pigs (even when they try to do things right and have a camera).

Policing a community is much easier (or only possible?) if people want to cooperate and trust the policemen to not be arrogant douchebags waiting for 15yr old girls to "make their day".

Possession of marihuana - she should be glad to be alive. Go watch Fort Apache, the Bronx one more time.

Jim Jefferies tells Piers Morgan to Fuck Off

MilkmanDan says...

I'm with @Chairman_woo . YES, Hillary was the "lesser of two evils" option.

Maher and the rest are upset because they think that "lesser of two evils" is an overly simplistic take on the actual degree to which either of them would have actually been evil. Fair enough, sorta. Piers Morgan is essentially just arguing semantics while the big picture just sails over everyone's heads.

Trump is a buffoon. A bull in a china shop. YES, he's doing blatantly evil/stupid things. Subtlety is not his forte. When he does bad things, we're going to find out about them.

Hillary is a vastly more savvy politician. Machiavellian, one might say. I think there's a very real argument to be made that her track record of (barely) weaseling out of very questionable actions and generally getting away with stuff that has sunk lots of other politicians suggests that it might be reasonable to be quite afraid of what Hillary has done / could do that we wouldn't find out about.


I'm not pleased with either one of them being the President. But honestly, I think that it will likely be easier to overcome and repair the damage done by "big dumb animal" Trump than it would have been to track down and discover all the cunning little traps, pitfalls, and closed-door deals that a President Hillary could have got done.

Chairman_woo said:

{snip}
Genuinely struggling to call it between who would have been most disastrous.

Trump was probably worse for America, I suspect Clinton might have been worse for the rest of the world. Not that it matters what any of us think in hindsight.
{snip}

No single terror attack in US by countries on Trump ban list

bcglorf says...

If he was on America soil, I'd agree with you. If he was living in a European apartment, I'd agree with you. Heck, if he was living in Russia I'd agree with you.

The reality is he was supporting mass killing from within a lawless part of the world were no police or courts would touch him. He was living were the only force capable of serving any manner of arrest warrant was military.

And yes, he was supporting those mass killings. We know now that he was running a charity funnelling money to terrorists even before 9/11. We know that not 1, but 3 of the 9/11 hijackers attended his sermons, even spanning two different mosques. One of those being the same mosque he met with the Fort Hood shooter. It's not exactly rocket science to put together that his 'work' with the CIA, FBI and any other organisation opposing terror wasn't honest or open from the very start. It's pretty clear his jihadists teachings came first, not after.

As you say, anywhere within the reach of the law; courts, arrest warrants and due process all protect the public well enough.

Back the original CNN clip, I dare say I must at least insist that it's not disingenuous to point to Anwar as an example of terrorism on American soil by Yemeni dual citizen.

And after all that, Trumps order is still stupid. Just because you can find such examples doesn't count as me supporting his order. I just don't see what the need is to deny facts just because Trumps order doesn't look bad enough without trying to deny reality to make it even more worthless.

enoch said:

@bcglorf
you left out that anwar had worked for the CIA and NSC as a consultant,and that in his earlier days as an imam was critical of al qeada and was very pro-american.

look,i am not arguing the fact that anwar did become radicalized,nor am i denying that his shift in attitudes (which was mainly due to americas handling of the iraqi war) had become not only critical,but had gone from condemnation to calls for violence,and praise for violence.

which brings us to the fort hood shooter nidel hasan who was an avid fan of anwar al awlaki,and DID have a correspondence with awlaki.which when examined,was pretty fucking one sided.it was apparent that hasan was attempting to get in the good graces of awlaki who,evidenced by the email correspondence,had no real relationship with hasan.though awlaki did praise hasan,and his violent actions.

so i do not get where 'the emails are closed".just google nidal hasan and anwar al awlaki emails,and you can go read for yourself.

and as for these emails as justification..i really do not see your logic in this respect.

so if someone becomes a huge fan of mine,and emails me constantly because we met ONCE and now they think we are buddies and share common interests (which,maybe we do),and that person perpetrates a violent act.

am i responsible for that act?

and here is where the crux of the discussion REALLY is:
maybe i AM responsible.
maybe i am guilty of inciting violence.
maybe i should be held accountable,because not only did i keep this mans violent intentions to myself,which resulted in death,but then praised his actions afterwards as being the will of god.

there are ALL possibilities,and they are valid questions.
they are legal questions,and maybe there should be a legal accountability.

should the proper pathway to a legal conclusion be:
a.a remotely piloted drone that targets my phone and launches a missile murdering (assasinating0 me,along with innocent by-standers?

or.

b.working with the yemeni government to bring me into a secure facility to be questioned,and possibly charged with inciting violence and prosecuted in an international court of law?

do you see what i'm saying?

the question isn't if anwar al awlaki,as a prominent imam,was vocally against american foreign policy,or that he openly supported violence in the form of terrorism.

the question is:
how do you address that situation,and prosecute the legalities?

because as scahill posited:how do you surrender to a drone?

could anwar al awlaki be guilty of EVERY charge the US accused him of?
quite possibly.
but we will never know because he was assassinated,as was his 16yr old son.

even your counter argument is speculation based on loose affiliations,and tenuous connections.

you will NEVER be able to supply a concrete,and verifiable accounting of anwar al awlaki's guilt,because you CAN'T..he was assassinated.

and THAT is the point.

now let us take this a step further.
let us examine how this can be abused,and watching trump consolidate executive power by surrounding himself with departmental loyalist,loyal only to him,we can begin to see the beginnings of trumps "soft fascism".

now lets take how you made your argument,and supplant a different scenario,but using the same parameters.

do you SEE how easily the drone program could be used to quickly,and efficiently remove opposing political players from the board? dissenting and opposing voices simply painted as violent enemies of the state that were in need of removal,because of the "possibility" that they may one day actually incite or cause violence?

the state can now murder a person for simply what they say,or write but NOT what they actually DO.

anwar al awlaki didn't actually kill anyone,didn't perpetrate any acts of violence.he simply talked about the evils of american empire,the mishandling of the iraq war (which he was originally in support of) and praised those who DID engage in violent acts of terror as doing the work of god.

should he have been held accountable in some fashion?
i think there is case to be made in that regard,but instead of going through proper channels,and adhering to the protocols of international law,he was outright assassinated.

and just how easily this can be abused is incredibly frightening.

again,i understand we approach things from different angles,but you have to see the danger in this practice,and how easily it can be misused to much darker and sinister purposes.

"well,he said nasty things about us and had a lot of friends who were on the terror watch list"

is simply NOT a valid enough excuse to simply murder someone.

there are protocols and legal procedure for a REASON,and anwar al awlaki may certainly have been in breach of international law and therefor possibly SHOULD have been prosecuted under those terms.

but we will NEVER know,because he was killed.
by an american president.
a nobel peace prize winner and constitutional law professor.

anwar al awlaki was an american citizen,his SON was an american citizen,but due to those abominations:MCA of 2006 and the NDAA of 2012.obama had the power and authority to assassinate them both.

where was there right to face their accuser?
habeas corpus..gone...a legal right that dates back to 1205 a.d by the BRITISH..gone.
innocent until proven guilty....gone.
the right to provide evidence in your defense...gone.

all the president has to do..and DID in this case,is deem you an "enemy combatant" and BOOM..dead.

i really hope you reconsider your attitude in this case my friend,because this shit is fascism incarnate,and now trump has his chubby little fingers on the "fire" button.

god help us all......

No single terror attack in US by countries on Trump ban list

enoch says...

@bcglorf
you left out that anwar had worked for the CIA and NSC as a consultant,and that in his earlier days as an imam was critical of al qeada and was very pro-american.

look,i am not arguing the fact that anwar did become radicalized,nor am i denying that his shift in attitudes (which was mainly due to americas handling of the iraqi war) had become not only critical,but had gone from condemnation to calls for violence,and praise for violence.

which brings us to the fort hood shooter nidel hasan who was an avid fan of anwar al awlaki,and DID have a correspondence with awlaki.which when examined,was pretty fucking one sided.it was apparent that hasan was attempting to get in the good graces of awlaki who,evidenced by the email correspondence,had no real relationship with hasan.though awlaki did praise hasan,and his violent actions.

so i do not get where 'the emails are closed".just google nidal hasan and anwar al awlaki emails,and you can go read for yourself.

and as for these emails as justification..i really do not see your logic in this respect.

so if someone becomes a huge fan of mine,and emails me constantly because we met ONCE and now they think we are buddies and share common interests (which,maybe we do),and that person perpetrates a violent act.

am i responsible for that act?

and here is where the crux of the discussion REALLY is:
maybe i AM responsible.
maybe i am guilty of inciting violence.
maybe i should be held accountable,because not only did i keep this mans violent intentions to myself,which resulted in death,but then praised his actions afterwards as being the will of god.

there are ALL possibilities,and they are valid questions.
they are legal questions,and maybe there should be a legal accountability.

should the proper pathway to a legal conclusion be:
a.a remotely piloted drone that targets my phone and launches a missile murdering (assasinating0 me,along with innocent by-standers?

or.

b.working with the yemeni government to bring me into a secure facility to be questioned,and possibly charged with inciting violence and prosecuted in an international court of law?

do you see what i'm saying?

the question isn't if anwar al awlaki,as a prominent imam,was vocally against american foreign policy,or that he openly supported violence in the form of terrorism.

the question is:
how do you address that situation,and prosecute the legalities?

because as scahill posited:how do you surrender to a drone?

could anwar al awlaki be guilty of EVERY charge the US accused him of?
quite possibly.
but we will never know because he was assassinated,as was his 16yr old son.

even your counter argument is speculation based on loose affiliations,and tenuous connections.

you will NEVER be able to supply a concrete,and verifiable accounting of anwar al awlaki's guilt,because you CAN'T..he was assassinated.

and THAT is the point.

now let us take this a step further.
let us examine how this can be abused,and watching trump consolidate executive power by surrounding himself with departmental loyalist,loyal only to him,we can begin to see the beginnings of trumps "soft fascism".

now lets take how you made your argument,and supplant a different scenario,but using the same parameters.

do you SEE how easily the drone program could be used to quickly,and efficiently remove opposing political players from the board? dissenting and opposing voices simply painted as violent enemies of the state that were in need of removal,because of the "possibility" that they may one day actually incite or cause violence?

the state can now murder a person for simply what they say,or write but NOT what they actually DO.

anwar al awlaki didn't actually kill anyone,didn't perpetrate any acts of violence.he simply talked about the evils of american empire,the mishandling of the iraq war (which he was originally in support of) and praised those who DID engage in violent acts of terror as doing the work of god.

should he have been held accountable in some fashion?
i think there is case to be made in that regard,but instead of going through proper channels,and adhering to the protocols of international law,he was outright assassinated.

and just how easily this can be abused is incredibly frightening.

again,i understand we approach things from different angles,but you have to see the danger in this practice,and how easily it can be misused to much darker and sinister purposes.

"well,he said nasty things about us and had a lot of friends who were on the terror watch list"

is simply NOT a valid enough excuse to simply murder someone.

there are protocols and legal procedure for a REASON,and anwar al awlaki may certainly have been in breach of international law and therefor possibly SHOULD have been prosecuted under those terms.

but we will NEVER know,because he was killed.
by an american president.
a nobel peace prize winner and constitutional law professor.

anwar al awlaki was an american citizen,his SON was an american citizen,but due to those abominations:MCA of 2006 and the NDAA of 2012.obama had the power and authority to assassinate them both.

where was there right to face their accuser?
habeas corpus..gone...a legal right that dates back to 1205 a.d by the BRITISH..gone.
innocent until proven guilty....gone.
the right to provide evidence in your defense...gone.

all the president has to do..and DID in this case,is deem you an "enemy combatant" and BOOM..dead.

i really hope you reconsider your attitude in this case my friend,because this shit is fascism incarnate,and now trump has his chubby little fingers on the "fire" button.

god help us all......

No single terror attack in US by countries on Trump ban list

bcglorf says...

The 'tenuours connection' has not been debunked. The evidence president Obama had access to was enough to order Anwar's assassination from even.

Anwar al-Awlaki and the Fort Hood shooter met in person at the mosque Anwar was then an Imam at. Following that the shooter emailed Awlaki back and forth, but the contents of the email's has been kept closed. Anwar's praise and blessing of the attack immediately afterwards though is kind of telling.

That then combines with Anwar's past before that, where he was an Imam at 2 separate mosques attended by 3 of the 9/11 hijackers. One of those is the same mosque where he also met the Fort Hood shooter...

Or back even before that in the late 90's when he was running a charity that was later declared a front for funnelling money to terrorists.

That's an awful lot of coincidental contact with terrorists. Combine that with the fact he went full on cheer leader for it all once he left US soil seems to tell enough. He was an active participant and conspirator to at least Fort Hood, and possibly many more attacks on the US and it's allies.

I'm sorry to say it, but Jeremy Scahill is pretty guilty of selectively presenting and showing only the facts that fit his arguments and leaves out a mountain of other extremely relevant information that would be inconvenient to his narrative.

enoch said:

@bcglorf
the story of anwar al awlaki is a little more complicated than he simply said some bad stuff,and the tenuous connection to the fort hood shooter has already been debunked.

now maybe anwar was truly guilty of inciting violence,and maybe he is responsible in some fashion,but we will never know.

jeremy scahill has done some of the best work in regards to that particular story,and i found this lecture the most insightful:
https://videosift.com/video/jeremy-scahill-how-do-you-surrender-to-a-drone



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon