[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!

The GOSPEL of the ALIENS | Fallen Angels | Giants | Anunnaki

The IMAGE of the BEAST Revealed (REV 13) - WARNING: Not for Everyone

WEF Calls for AI to Replace Voters: ‘Why Do We Need Elections?’

The OCCULT Burger king EXPOSED

PANERA BREAD Antichrist message EXPOSED

The OCCULT Cheesecake Factory EXPOSED

Satanist And Witches Encounter The Cross

History and Beliefs of the Waldensians

Rome’s Persecution of the Bible

Evolutionists, You’ve Been Caught Lying About Fossils

Raw Streets of NYC Migrant Crisis that they don't show on Tv

Meet DarkBERT - AI Model Trained On DARK WEB

[NEW!] Jaw-dropping 666 Discovery Utterly Proves the King James Bible is God's Preserved Word

ALERT!!! THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION WILL SOON BE POSTED HERE


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Corrupt Government
See other Corrupt Government Articles

Title: Trump's former campaign manager had plan to benefit Putin government
Source: PennLive
URL Source: http://www.pennlive.com/nation-worl ... anager.html#incart_river_index
Published: Mar 22, 2017
Author: Christian Alexandersen
Post Date: 2017-03-22 10:16:22 by Willie Green
Keywords: None
Views: 2802
Comments: 33

President Donald Trump's former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, secretly worked for a Russian billionaire to advance the interests of Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to the Associated Press.

The AP reported Wednesday that Manafort proposed an ambitious political strategy a decade ago to undermine anti-Russian opposition across former Soviet republics. Manafort's ties to the Russian government were the subject of many questions during the recent U.S. House Intelligence Committee with FBI Director James Comey.

The AP found that Manafort proposed in a confidential strategy plan as early as June 2005 that he would influence politics, business dealings and news coverage inside the United States, Europe and the former Soviet republics to benefit the Putin government, even as U.S.-Russia relations under Republican President George W. Bush grew worse.

Manafort pitched the plans to Russian aluminum magnate Oleg Deripaska, a close Putin ally with whom Manafort eventually signed a $10 million annual contract beginning in 2006, according to interviews with several people familiar with payments to Manafort and business records obtained by the AP. Manafort and Deripaska maintained a business relationship until at least 2009, according to one person familiar with the work.

"We are now of the belief that this model can greatly benefit the Putin Government if employed at the correct levels with the appropriate commitment to success," Manafort wrote in the 2005 memo to Deripaska. The effort, Manafort wrote, "will be offering a great service that can re-focus, both internally and externally, the policies of the Putin government."

The AP obtained documents that laid out Manafort's plans, including strategy memoranda and records showing international wire transfers for millions of dollars. How much work Manafort performed under the contract was unclear.

The disclosure comes as Trump campaign advisers are the subject of an FBI probe and two congressional investigations. Investigators are reviewing whether the Trump campaign and its associates coordinated with Moscow to meddle in the 2016 campaign. Manafort has dismissed the investigations as politically motivated and misguided, and said he never worked for Russian interests.

In a statement to the AP, Manafort confirmed that he worked for Deripaska in various countries but said the work was being unfairly cast as "inappropriate or nefarious" as part of a "smear campaign."

"I worked with Oleg Deripaska almost a decade ago representing him on business and personal matters in countries where he had investments," Manafort said. "My work for Mr. Deripaska did not involve representing Russia's political interests."

Manafort worked as Trump's unpaid campaign chairman last year from March until August. Trump asked Manafort to resign after AP revealed that Manafort had orchestrated a covert Washington lobbying operation until 2014 on behalf of Ukraine's ruling pro-Russian political party .

White House spokesman Sean Spicer has said that Manafort "played a very limited role for a very limited amount of time" in the campaign. That claim comes even though Manafort led the presidential campaign during the crucial run-up to the Republican National Convention.


Poster Comment:

Trump is a useful idiot for Putin.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Willie Green (#0) (Edited)

Making peace with Russia is, of course, good for Putin. But it is also very, very good for us.

We are a nation hurtling towards insolvency and bankruptcy. We got that way by becoming a world empire after World War II. But our position of pre- eminence has decayed. We no longer can AFFORD to maintain that empire, and even if we could, long experience has taught most of us that there was no BENEFIT of having the empire sufficient to offset the loss of American life, limb and treasure to maintain it.

The people voted for peace with Russia, and alliance with Russia to defeat Islamic terrorism. That is what the people want. Yes, that means that an adversary, a nation that some think is THE enemy, will now be treated as a friend. It means the Russians will "get away" with something we said they would not. It means that Putin will be bolstered. It means that we will not get our way, and that an "enemy" will win a long-standing fight with us, just as Fidel Castro survived and ruled until his death, and his brother still does.

It means that we will, in a sense, back down and lose on a past policy. SO WHAT?

Even if that past policy was "morally right", WE ARE GOING BANKRUPT. Our nation is going to ECONOMICALLY COLLAPSE and we are going to have starvation and lawlessness and shortened lifespans if we continue to pursue the policies of the past. We didn't win, and we need to cut our losses, not blight our future with stubbornness about a past defeat.

Of course there are those absolutely entrenched in those anti-Russian positions, and they can spout great moral arguments. The same was true in the old Soviet Union, determined as they were to continue with the Cold War against the USA, EVEN THOUGH their economy was rusting out from the excess burden of a cold war whose needs outstripped their economy.

We have swapped places with them. We don't HAVE to bankrupt ourselves and our future by continuing a futile Cold War with Russia. What we have to do, FOR OUR OWN SAKE, is to cut our losses, make peace and get on with it. That will massively unburden our economy and put us in a better position to grow back to health.

The French and British really hated each other for 1000 years, but even they figured out that unending buildup for war was just exhausting them both in a world where there were more important threats to face than each other. Even they learned. They had to lose their empires and be bombed flat and invaded, or nearly so, to get it, but they got it. And today, their people are better off on both sides of the Channel for having gotten it.

The American people get it. Trump campaigned on good relations with Russia, and the people voted for that. The people who reject that lost, and now they are trying to criminalize relationships with the Russians. It is not criminal to have business and political ties to Moscow. It has not been criminal since the USSR fell. That's a fact, but the hellbent Cold Warriors, like McCain, act as though it's a criminal offense to make deals with Russia and to try to work on better relations. That is not true. It is no more criminal to have ties to Russia than it is to have ties to Israel, or Britain, or France, or China.

John McCain and his ilk will never accept that. The Democrats are hellbent on impeaching Trump over non-crimes.

But the rest of us need to wake up and note that there is NOTHING WRONG with having business and personal ties to Russia. It isn't illegal. And wanting the US to ally with Russia is what is BEST FOR AMERICA. We elected Trump to do that, and he will do that.

Unfortunately, it looks as though the bitter-enders will have to be investigated, sued, and perhaps prosecuted before the end of it, because they won't go down without a fight. Idiots.

Don't be an idiot like them. Peace and friendship with Russia is very much in America's interests.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-03-22   11:31:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Vicomte13 (#1)

Putin is a criminal. It is NOT in America's best interest to make peace with a criminal.

Willie Green  posted on  2017-03-22   11:53:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Willie Green (#2) (Edited)

Putin is a criminal. It is NOT in America's best interest to make peace with a criminal.

So is the Chinese leadership. So is the Saudi Royal family. So is the leadership of Pakistan, and Turkey. So is every oil despot on the planet.

Name me an uncorrupt African President.

Shall, we, therefore, cut off our allies? No?

For that matter, every person who had sex underage, or ever smoked a joint, or drank underage, or sped, or who cheated at all on his or her taxes is also a criminal.

So what?

It's easy to be a criminal in a world full of laws.

Putin has not been charged by any international tribunal. He's not a criminal in any way that matters.

Good relations with Russia are more important than moral squeamishness. We do not hold foreign leaders to the same standards that we hold people we date, and we shouldn't, because the things at stake are much, much higher. We cannot afford to use foolish excuses such as "Putin is a criminal" to resist doing what is in America's best interests.

Stalin was a mass murdering thug. It was crucial for America that we ally with him, so we did.

Mao Tse Tung was a mass killer also. It was crucial for America's geostrategic position that we nevertheless open to China and put that aside.

Putin's not a criminal. But if he is, so what? Russian-American peace and cooperation are more important than the personal morality of the foreign leader. If Putin is a criminal, it is irrelevant.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-03-22   13:42:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Willie Green (#0)

Capitalism

is such a bad thing

Dnc communism

is much better

love
boris

If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !

BorisY  posted on  2017-03-22   13:57:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Vicomte13 (#3)

Shall, we, therefore, cut off our allies? No?

You're barking up the wrong tree, boob...
I don't consider the Chinese, the Saudis, the Pakis, Chad/Gambia/Rwanda/Nigeria/Uganda/Zambia or any country in South or Central America to be our "allies"

The NATO countries are our allies... along with the Aussies, Kiwis, Japs & South Koreans... and the Canadians... and that's about it...

Willie Green  posted on  2017-03-22   15:03:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Willie Green (#5)

The NATO countries are our allies... along with the Aussies, Kiwis, Japs & South Koreans... and the Canadians... and that's about it...

Well you are pretty much correct on this. At least you're not always completely wrong.

A K A Stone  posted on  2017-03-22   15:10:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: Willie Green (#5) (Edited)

Ah yes, the Japanese, with war criminal Hirohito as their Emperor, still, four decades after Pearl Harbor and the Rape of Nanking and all of the war crimes - a key ally nevertheless. Because in international statecraft and geostrategy, the personal failings of the leader and the past history of the nation are small beer.

There are interests, and those interests must be tended to or our own people will suffer exceedingly.

The US is hurtling towards bankruptcy. We cannot AFFORD another cold war with Russia. It is madness. The USSR is long gone. Russia is not an existential threat to us or Europe anymore. There is no reason for us to doom our future to one of penury by insisting on a debilitating new cold war...over what? Sevastopol? A Russian city, full of Russians, who VOTED - TWICE (first when the USSR broke up, and then again in 2014) to be part of Russia.

We're going to destroy the future of our own country over THAT? Seriously? It's insane.

Trump campaigned on good relations with Russia and alliance to take out the Muslim terrorists. He won. The minority who still want to fight a cold war are trying to block the will of OUR people to have a better future by making peace with Russia. They need to be cast aside in favor of American interests, which are peace with Russia, and alliance with the Russians against the Islamic fanatics. THAT is what is in American interests.

Some people will never accept that, just as some people will never accept reopening relations with Cuba. Oh well. Those people are on the wrong side of the issue, and they will have to lose. They should change their minds, but if they won't, then they have to be shoved aside and disregarded.

Right now, they're trying to bring down the President. Instead, they need to be brought down and, where they have leaked classified information, be prosecuted for their felonies and crushed.

No official has the right to commit a felony in order to pursue his own narrow-minded view of what the national interest is. The people determine the national interest by elections, and they voted for Trump.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-03-22   19:29:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Vicomte13 (#7)

The US is hurtling towards bankruptcy. We cannot AFFORD another cold war with Russia.

Baloney... We still have the largest economy on the face of the planet... a dozen times bigger than Russia...

And if our economy tanks, so what? Everbody else goes down the drain too... and end up being worse off than we are, just like they are now..

Willie Green  posted on  2017-03-22   19:43:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: Willie Green (#0)

Making peace with Russia is treason. We need war and now!

A Pole  posted on  2017-03-23   9:36:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Vicomte13, Willie Green (#7)

We cannot AFFORD another cold war with Russia. It is madness.

Yes, what is needed is the HOT war.

A Pole  posted on  2017-03-23   10:13:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: A Pole (#9)

War can wait... We need to rid ourselves of the erratic nutjobs first.

Willie Green  posted on  2017-03-23   10:19:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Willie Green (#8)

Baloney... We still have the largest economy on the face of the planet... a dozen times bigger than Russia...

And if our economy tanks, so what? Everbody else goes down the drain too... and end up being worse off than we are, just like they are now..

Yes, we "still" have the biggest economy on earth, measured in nominal dollars. Measured in Purchasing Power Parity (which is a better measure, because it accounts for the lower costs of labor in most of the world, China is 4 trillion per year larger than us (and opening the lead).

The European Union is a government, if not a country, and it is a trillion and a half larger than us.

Our economy is not twelve times larger than Russia's, it is four times larger. And our nuclear arsenal is only the same size.

If our economy tanks, three hundred million Americans suffer, people do not live up to their potential, lives are shortened, dreams are shattered...and for WHAT?

For an insane game of "Risk" played by mental children against a Russia that is not a threat? It's stupid.

Why, exactly, would we want to go down the drain and blight all of our lives to engage in a purposeless and expensive cold war with a country on the other side of the world from us?

It is senseless.

Back when the Soviet Union had massive armies and a political theology of worldwide Communist revolution - and was in armed occupation of half of Europe, and fomenting revolution in Africa, Latin America and Asia - there was a very good reason to have a Cold War with the USSR.

But - newsflash! - the Soviet Union disappeared 26 years ago. Russia isn't Communist, it isn't fomenting revolution all over the world, it does not have massive armies breathing down our necks, and it isn't in armed occupation of half of Europe anymore. And the Russians have a common enemy with us: Islamic terrorism.

What, then, is the basis for a new cold war? What is the basis for tanking our economy and condemning our own people to suffer poverty in order to ignite a new cold war with a nation that doesn't threaten us. It's insane and it's stupid.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-03-23   10:47:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Vicomte13 (#12)

Why, exactly, would we want to go down the drain and blight all of our lives to engage in a purposeless and expensive cold war with a country on the other side of the world from us?

Ask your buddy Trump... HE's the one proposing a massive $54 Billion increase in military spending while slashing peaceful domestic programs from the budget.

Willie Green  posted on  2017-03-23   11:34:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: Vicomte13 (#12)

If our economy tanks, three hundred million Americans suffer, people do not live up to their potential, lives are shortened, dreams are shattered...and for WHAT?

This is a very optimistic scenario, in a hot war, even limited one, it will be much worse. The warring countries will end up at best as Iraq or Libya.

A Pole  posted on  2017-03-23   13:11:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Willie Green (#13)

Ask your buddy Trump... HE's the one proposing a massive $54 Billion increase in military spending while slashing peaceful domestic programs from the budget.

He is proposing a military increase, yes, but it's not aimed at Russia. It's aimed at two things, really. The first is domestic employment, in the arms industry. The second is at China. He still wants peace with Russia.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-03-23   14:52:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: A Pole (#14) (Edited)

This is a very optimistic scenario, in a hot war, even limited one, it will be much worse. The warring countries will end up at best as Iraq or Libya.

There will be no hot war with Russia. There was none in 1948, when we had the nuclear monopoly, the belligerent Truman in charge, and the obdurate Stalin blockading Berlin.

There was none over Cuba.

There was none when the USSR reached parity in nuclear weapons.

And now they're not Communists, and we are no longer Red-baiting fanatics. The Russians aren't the Soviets.

There will be no hot war at all, and there SHOULD NOT BE a new cold war either.

Those days are past now, and in the past they must remain.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-03-23   15:01:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Vicomte13 (#16)

here will be no hot war with Russia. There was none in 1948, when we had the nuclear monopoly, the belligerent Truman in charge, and the obdurate Stalin blockading Berlin.

But there was a hot war in 1914, and the world looks similar now.

A Pole  posted on  2017-03-23   15:03:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: nolu chan, ConservingFreedom, Willie Green, hondo68, calcon, Deckard, TooConservative (#17)

"There will be no hot war with Russia. There was none in 1948, when we had the nuclear monopoly, the belligerent Truman in charge, and the obdurate Stalin blockading Berlin.

But there was a hot war in 1914, and the world looks similar now."

Another important point - we need to take into account Russian perspective.

Under Gorbachev and early Yeltsin, Russians fell in love with the West and believed that if they dismantle Soviet Union, withdraw troops from Germany, Poland and other East European countries, West will be their friend and will help them to join Western world as equal partner.

Their disappointment consisted of two main components, first - Western corporations looted Russia and help Russian gangsters to steal the rest. The second was that West destroyed Yugoslavia and ruing closest Russian friends - Serbs. At that moment coming to power someone like Putin was inevitable.

Today, Russians see themselves as a big Yugoslavia or Serbia, with one key difference - with a lot of nukes. They believe if they do not act tough they will end up exactly the same way.

The question is when pushed to the wall, will they chose to submit and avoid the nuclear war or they will take down their Western "partners" together with them?

Average/common Russians seem not to give a hoot. Popular song "Good Bye America":

A Pole  posted on  2017-03-23   17:45:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: A Pole (#18)

They're not going to be pushed to the wall.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-03-23   19:23:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: A Pole (#18)

It seems to me that there was a long period of good relations with Russia after the Cold War ended. It's only been the last couple of years that Hillary and McCain and their ilk, the D&R party neocons, have been trying to pump up the anti-Russia propaganda. There’s still a lot of residual sentiment for a peaceful and cooperative relationship with Russia, IMO.


The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party

"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul

Hondo68  posted on  2017-03-23   19:26:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: A Pole (#18)

The question is when pushed to the wall, will they chose to submit and avoid the nuclear war or they will take down their Western "partners" together with them?

Average/common Russians seem not to give a hoot.

The East made a similarly fateful choice once before.

There was no love lost between the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Church. By the 1450s there had been much anger, much skulduggery, much bad blood. The Orthodox had reasons to be angry for past acts, to be sure.

But the degree of hatred was excessive, and it clouded the Easterners' judgment to the point of suicide.

As the Turks came on, the hatred remained. "Better the turban of the Sultan than the miter of the Pope!" they said proudly.. They got their wish in 1453.

By 1454 they all would have accepted the miter of the Pope instead.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-03-23   19:33:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: Vicomte13 (#21)

As the Turks came on, the hatred remained. "Better the turban of the Sultan than the miter of the Pope!" they said proudly.. They got their wish in 1453.

By 1454 they all would have accepted the miter of the Pope instead.

They did survive Turks, and they would not survive Latins.

South of Italy was Greek Orthodox, where are they now?

A Pole  posted on  2017-03-23   20:15:02 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: A Pole (#18)

Their disappointment consisted of two main components, first - Western corporations looted Russia and help Russian gangsters to steal the rest. The second was that West destroyed Yugoslavia and ruing closest Russian friends - Serbs. At that moment coming to power someone like Putin was inevitable.

There was corporate looting but it seems to me that it was mostly smaller opportunist corporations involved (corporate carpetbagger types) rather than the big multinational corporations.

The extent of Western looting of the assets of the bankrupt Soviet state seems to me to have always been exaggerated. The main problem with those Soviet assets was that they weren't that high-quality or unique and they were located within a corrupt failed state with a very uncertain future.

Today, Russians see themselves as a big Yugoslavia or Serbia, with one key difference - with a lot of nukes. They believe if they do not act tough they will end up exactly the same way.

This, at least, is accurate enough. There is no doubt that Foggy Bottom and shadowy globalist types like Soros have repeatedly tried to engineer an overthrow of the Russian regime in ways similar to those of various Colour Revolutions around the world.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-03-24   14:44:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: Vicomte13, A Pole (#21)

By 1454 they all would have accepted the miter of the Pope instead.

Even so, that does nothing to excuse the absolute disgraces of the bishop of Rome and his lackeys. It is, in fact, a far greater condemnation of the entire corrupt Roman system.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-03-24   14:47:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: A Pole (#22) (Edited)

The fundamental difference is that all of the Southern Italians SURVIVED the Latins. They just converted. They weren't slaughtered or enslaved. Their girls and wives were not mass raped and herded into harems and brothels, their baby boys were not taken and forced into military service to kill Christians.

Hundreds of thousands of the Orthodox did not SURVIVE the Turkish and Muslim invasion. They were rounded up, tortured, executed, enslaved, murdered en masse. Millions of the Orthodox converted to Islam.

What happened in Italy was a change of color of Christianity. What happened in Turkey and Istanbul - former Asia and Cappadocia and Galacia and Constantinople, was a slaughter and a religious genocide.

Not comparable. Not comparable at all. That the Orthodox still make the comparison shows the depths of irrational, pathological, suicidal, self- defeating hatred that I referred to in my first message on the subject.

The Russians would, it was suggested, rather die, with all of their children, be completely snuffed out, rather than get along with America. That's stupidity incarnate.

I don't believe it. Just as I think that, had the raped slaves and dungeon victims of the Turks in 1454 had the choice, they would have GLADLY accepted the leadership of the Pope if that would get rid of the inhuman monsters that the Turks really were.

When people burn their logical faculties out with insane nonsense that treats their ideological opponents as the equal of child-eating demons, well, then they end up worse off than if they were reasonable.

I very seriously doubt that the women of Constantinople and Greece would have chosen the Turkish conquest over accepting the Pope's leadership, had they understood beforehand what the choices really were for their own selves and their children. I think most men would have resigned themselves to genuflect to Rome rather than have their wives and sons raped, and themselves flayed alive.

To compare the Pope to the Turk is blind.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-03-24   14:50:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: Tooconservative (#24)

Even so, that does nothing to excuse the absolute disgraces of the bishop of Rome and his lackeys. It is, in fact, a far greater condemnation of the entire corrupt Roman system.

Nor does anything excuse the wholesale mass murder and slaughter of Luther, or Knox, or the Calvinists. Those were some bad hombres back then on all side.

But the Pope's corruption was of a much softer variety of evil than the wholesale slaughter and slavery and permanent apostasy for most that came with the Turk. The Eastern Mediterranean was 100% Christian until the Muslim Arabs and Turks showed up. 95% of the people decided that Islam was better than Orthodoxy - because life is better than rape and torture. Half of Christendom was lost forever because of Christian division. Worth it? No. Not worth it.

A third of Germany perished in the wars of the Reformation. Worth it? Not hardly.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-03-24   14:53:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: Vicomte13 (#26)

Half of Christendom was lost forever because of Christian division.

As always you dissimulate. Half of Christendom was lost forever because of the corruption of the Roman pontiff and popular revulsion against allowing such charlatans claiming to lead the Christian churches. Period. Without those grossly corrupt popes, there would have been no division in Christendom.

If those popes were blameless, you would have a point. But they were obviously and hopelessly corrupt (and almost certainly atheists given how little they feared any final judgment of them) and therefore you're just a hack apologist for the whore of Rome.

No matter what Rome does, you defend it. You're a hack.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-03-24   15:07:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Tooconservative (#27)

As always you dissimulate. Half of Christendom was lost forever because of the corruption of the Roman pontiff and popular revulsion against allowing such charlatans claiming to lead the Christian churches. Period. Without those grossly corrupt popes, there would have been no division in Christendom.

If those popes were blameless, you would have a point. But they were obviously and hopelessly corrupt (and almost certainly atheists given how little they feared any final judgment of them) and therefore you're just a hack apologist for the whore of Rome.

No matter what Rome does, you defend it. You're a hack.

Well, back during the primary you told me that I was a person of low intelligence and low integrity because I supported Donald Trump, so you've never had a very high opinion of me.

Plus, you're one of those lunatic Catholic-haters, a bigot.

You hate Trump and you hate Catholics, so OF COURSE you hate me.

Interestingly, of late you seem to say nice things about Trump, so I guess your much self-vaunted "principles" blow with the political winds, making you the hack. I stick with what I think, and I'm never afraid to say it.

You're not afraid to say what you think either - as long as you're saying it to people you think are nobodies and it doesn't matter you can give full vent to your bigotry and your rage.

You are predictably anti-Catholic, in that you are consistent. Blaming the Catholic Church for the barbarism of the Muslims is a classic example of the stupidity that comes from your ilk. It's why you're marginals, and why you never get your way on anything important.

Meanwhile, I'm generally pretty happy, because what I think is best frequently does win. Trump, for instance. There was a moment when you were ready to emigrate on account of him. But he won and so now you're sliding back into the pack, like betas always do.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-03-24   16:28:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: Vicomte13 (#28)

I notice you don't even bother to deny my accurate observations, affixing the blame for the loss of Eastern Christendom where it belongs: Rome.

Instead, you skipped straight to ad hominem personal attacks. Fine. It reveals a lot about you and your positions and loyalties.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-03-24   16:35:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: Tooconservative (#29) (Edited)

I notice you don't even bother to deny my accurate observations, affixing the blame for the loss of Eastern Christendom where it belongs: Rome.

Instead, you skipped straight to ad hominem personal attacks. Fine. It reveals a lot about you and your positions and loyalties.

I didn't bother, because they're dumb. The Pope was responsible for the victory of Islam over Byzantium? Sheer idiocy.

I have always been as constant as the Sun. It's why you don't like me. I supported Trump before, and still do, and I still don't think much of Republicans (and looking at the health care fiasco, I'm still certain that I'm right).

You're just a snarling, nasty little cur.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-03-24   17:16:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: Tooconservative (#29)

On second thought, getting into a flame war is stupid. Go in peace.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-03-24   17:50:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Vicomte13 (#31) (Edited)

You're just a snarling, nasty little cur.

Vicomte13 posted on 2017-03-24 17:16:18 ET


On second thought, getting into a flame war is stupid. Go in peace.

Vicomte13 posted on 2017-03-24 17:50:01 ET

At least you got your insult in for 44 minutes before deciding to retreat strategically to a fallback blessed-are-the-peacemakers position.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-03-24   18:37:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: Vicomte13, TooConservative (#17)

But there was a hot war in 1914, and the world looks similar now.

"According to the report, Syria warned that Israeli strikes on Syrian military targets would be met with the firing of Scud missiles capable of carrying half a ton of explosives at IDF bases, while an attack on civilian targets would see Syria launching a counter strike on the Haifa port and the petrochemical plants in the area.

The report warned that Syria has over 800 Scud missiles and that Syria would not issue any warnings before the missile strikes because Israel does not warn before it hits.

On Wednesday, Israeli jets were reported to have carried out airstrikes near the Syrian capital of Damascus, hours after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to continue hitting weapons convoys and rebuffed claims Russia had ordered the strikes halted."

http://www.timesofisrael.com/syria-threatens-to-fire-scud-missiles-at-israel-report/

A Pole  posted on  2017-03-26   3:25:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com