Tags: Anderson Cooper, Assad, Chinese Communist Party, Chris Wallace, Clinton, dictators, Hillary, Hitler, Kim Jong Un, Lester Holt, Martha Raddatz, Michael Morell, Mike Vickers, moderators, Mussolini, Presidential Election debates, Putin, Trump, Trump's tax forms
The Presidential Election Debate on September 26 will be moderated by Lester Holt,
that on October 9 will be moderated by Martha Raddatz and Anderson Cooper,and that on October 19 will be moderated by Chris Wallace.
Here are three questions that every moderator of a Presidential Debate should ask Trump.
Why hasn’t Trump released those of his tax forms that are not being audited?
If they will be released, when?
Trump admires Putin.
Putin supports Assad, the dictator of Syria.
Does Trump support Assad?
Trump admires Putin’s way of controlling Russia, and of suppressing dissent.
Putin’s techniques are completely contrary to the US Consititution.
Which of Putin’s techniques would Trump adopt, and which would he reject?
A moderator who does not ask these questions is not exercising due diligence.
An addendum to this post:
Mr. Trump, you have expressed your approval of the forcefulness of so many dictators:
– the Chinese Communist Party, for its brutal suppression in June 1989 of the demonstrating students in Beijing and in other cities;
– Kim Jong Un .
Please name the dictators – present (such as Assad) or historical (such as Saddam Hussein) – whose forcefulness you don’t approve. How do the dictators you do approve differ from those you don’t approve?
Mr. Trump, an op-ed by defense and intelligence experts Michael Morell and Mike Vickers says that “At the Comander-in-Chief Forum on Sept. 7, you [Trump] said that as long as Putin says nice things about you, you will say nice things about him.” If we were back in the 1930s, would you have said “As long as Hitler says nice things about me, I’ll say nice things about him”? After all, Hitler would have liked your isolationism, so he would indeed have said nice things about you.
Fact: Of all of the dictators, past and present, Trump most resembles Mussolini.
If you want to comment on this post, or just want to add your name as endorsing or disputing its assertions, go here. To avoid cluttering the ‘latest postings’ page, WordPress includes the mechanism for commenting only on the page for the individual posting, never on the page that shows all of the recent postings. So click here, scroll to the bottom of the post, and submit your comment.
Tags: al-Assad, Assad, biological warfare, British Parliament, chemical warfare, civilians, Geneva Convention, non-combattants, nuclear terrorism, Syria, terrorism, torture, treatment of captured soldiers
If we do not physically punish the al-Assad regime for its use of chemical weapons:
=> All treaties on the use of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, on the use of torture, on terrorism, on the treatment of civilians, and on the treatment of captured enemy soldiers, become meaningless.
=> The U.S. and others should immediately begin stockpiling chemical and biological weapons, and radioactive contaminants, and methods for delivering them, because others will do so.
The stakes couldn’t be higher. We must physically punish the al-Assad regime.
As for the vote in the British Parliament, those who voted against action have learned nothing from Chamberlain’s mistake in Munich.
If you wish to comment on this post but do not see a box where you can submit a comment, that is because WordPress includes the mechanism for commenting only on the page for the individual posting, never on the page that shows all of the recent postings. So click here, scroll to the bottom of the post, and submit your comment.
Tags: al-Assad, Assad, Egypt, Gaza, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Israel, Syria, Turkey
Why Gaza Now?
The timing is suspicious.
Israel had done nothing new to provoke Hamas.
Yet suddenly Hamas started firing rockets into Israel. Hamas seems to be asking for a violent defensive reaction by Israel.
Why Gaza now?
Here is a guess: the primary instigators reside well north of Gaza.
The civil war in Syria has stressed Hezbollah and Iran, as well as Syria. Hezbollah has developed a split between those within it who side with Assad and those within it who side with the rebellion. Also, because Hezbollah had previously wholeheartedly sided with Assad, it has lost the support of large parts of the public in Lebanon, as well as elsewhere in the Arab world. For the same reason, Iran has lost a lot of outside sympathy.
So the guess is that Hezbollah and Iran told Hamas to heat things up.
The goal was to divert attention away from Syria, Iran, and Lebanon, by drawing the world’s gaze towards Gaza and Israel.
The goal was also to reunite Hezbollah, by re-focusing on its traditional enemy. The hope was also to thereby win back for Hezbollah some of the support of the Lebanese public.
Evidence for this guess is contained in a headline to an article by Annne Gearan on page A9 in the November 20, 2012 print edition of the Washington Post: “Israel-Hamas fighting put U.S. at odds with Turkey, Egypt”. (That was the headline in the print edition. The headline in the online edition always differs from that in the print edition.)
Russia and China, too, must be delighted by the sucess of this new ploy.