just me
Well-known member
- MBTI
- infj
terrorist action of israel vs apathy
- Thread starter myself
- Start date
Skarekrow
~~DEVIL~~
- MBTI
- Ni-INFJ-A
- Enneagram
- Warlock
I don’t need you to spell it out. If you can’t defend what you post here in any other way than “changing the subject” and taking the pretend high road…inferring that certain people are “questionable”, and then backtracking when you are called out then why even post?
Skarekrow
~~DEVIL~~
- MBTI
- Ni-INFJ-A
- Enneagram
- Warlock
For those of you who cannot seem to understand the reasons and cannot empathize with being a human...
Why Are Humans Violent? The Psychological Reason We Hurt Each Other
Terror management theorists explain how when we feel small and humiliated, we'll do anything to feel big.
By Kirk Schneider
From the crises in the Middle East to mass shootings in U.S. schools to the reckless striving for wealth and world domination, there is one overarching theme that almost never gets media coverage–the sense of insignificance that drives destructive acts.
As a depth psychologist with many years of experience, I can say emphatically that the sense of being crushed, humiliated and existentially unimportant are the main factors behind so much that we call psychopathology.
Why would it not follow that the same factors are at play in social and cultural upheavals?
The emerging science of “terror management theory” shows convincingly that when people feel unimportant they equate those feelings with dying–and they will do everything they can, including becoming extreme and destructive themselves to avoid that feeling.
The sense of insignificance and death anxiety have been shown to play a key role in everything from terrorism to mass shootings to extremist religious and political ideologies to obsessions with materialism and wealth. Just about all that is violent and corrupt in our world seems connected to it.
So before we rush to judgment about the basis of violence in our world, we would do well to heed the terror management theorists and consider missing pieces of the puzzle.
Economic, ideological and biological explanations take us only so far in unpacking the bewildering phenomenon of slaughtering people in cold blood, or playing recklessly with their health, safety or livelihoods.
Granted, some violence is defensive and perhaps necessary to protect the lives of sovereign individuals and states. But too often violence is provocative, and when it becomes so betrays a common thread of psychological destitution–the sense of insignificance, the sense of not counting, of helplessness, and of emotional devaluation.
We have stories daily about both lone gunmen and soldiers who seek vengeance and “prestige” to cover over their cultural and emotional wounds. Correspondingly, such stories parallel the kind of psychopathy of some in the corporate sector who speculate, pollute and militarize at will.
How do we prevent such terrorizing cycles from continuing to arise?
How do we transform people who feel so utterly estranged and stripped of value that they are willing to do virtually anything to redress perceived injustices?
That transformation is not likely to occur through political or military coercion (as is now being contemplated in Iraq), nor through the ingestion of pills nor anger management programs (as was the case with several mass shooters), nor through the usual hand-wringing about stricter gun laws and increased diplomacy, which are imperative, but don’t go far enough.
What is needed is no less than a “moral equivalent of war,” to echo the philosopher William James, but at a fraction of the cost. The rampant sense of insignificance needs to be addressed at its root, and not with simplistic bromides.
This means that alongside providing affordable short-term public mental health services, we also need to provide affordable long-term, in-depth mental health services.
Such services would emphasize the transformative power of deeply supportive, subtly attuned relationships over short-term palliatives and would likely be life-changing (as well as life-saving) in their impact.
We could (and should) also provide cadres of group facilitators to optimize encounters between people in power. These encounters could include heads of state, members of diplomatic corps and legislators.
Such facilitators could be schooled in well-established approaches to mediation, such as nonviolent communications, and would likely be pivotal in the settlement of intractable disputes. While the most hardened extremists may be unreachable, there are many others who might surprise us and engage the opportunity.
There is no theoretical reason why such practices would not work with the appropriate adaptations; we see these practices work every day in our clinics and consulting rooms, and often with the most challenging personalities.
The range of violent upheaval in the world is alarming. The quick fix, militarist solutions to this problem are faltering. In many cases, they are making situations worse (as we have seen with recent military operations).
The time for a change in societal consciousness is at hand. By focusing our resources on the root of the problem, the many people who feel they don’t count, we not only bolster individual and collective lives, we provide a model that others will find difficult to ignore.
Kirk Schneider is president-elect of the Society for Humanistic Psychology of the American Psychological Association, and author of “The Polarized Mind: Why It’s Killing Us and What We Can Do About It.â
Why Are Humans Violent? The Psychological Reason We Hurt Each Other
Terror management theorists explain how when we feel small and humiliated, we'll do anything to feel big.
By Kirk Schneider
From the crises in the Middle East to mass shootings in U.S. schools to the reckless striving for wealth and world domination, there is one overarching theme that almost never gets media coverage–the sense of insignificance that drives destructive acts.
As a depth psychologist with many years of experience, I can say emphatically that the sense of being crushed, humiliated and existentially unimportant are the main factors behind so much that we call psychopathology.
Why would it not follow that the same factors are at play in social and cultural upheavals?
The emerging science of “terror management theory” shows convincingly that when people feel unimportant they equate those feelings with dying–and they will do everything they can, including becoming extreme and destructive themselves to avoid that feeling.
The sense of insignificance and death anxiety have been shown to play a key role in everything from terrorism to mass shootings to extremist religious and political ideologies to obsessions with materialism and wealth. Just about all that is violent and corrupt in our world seems connected to it.
So before we rush to judgment about the basis of violence in our world, we would do well to heed the terror management theorists and consider missing pieces of the puzzle.
Economic, ideological and biological explanations take us only so far in unpacking the bewildering phenomenon of slaughtering people in cold blood, or playing recklessly with their health, safety or livelihoods.
Granted, some violence is defensive and perhaps necessary to protect the lives of sovereign individuals and states. But too often violence is provocative, and when it becomes so betrays a common thread of psychological destitution–the sense of insignificance, the sense of not counting, of helplessness, and of emotional devaluation.
We have stories daily about both lone gunmen and soldiers who seek vengeance and “prestige” to cover over their cultural and emotional wounds. Correspondingly, such stories parallel the kind of psychopathy of some in the corporate sector who speculate, pollute and militarize at will.
How do we prevent such terrorizing cycles from continuing to arise?
How do we transform people who feel so utterly estranged and stripped of value that they are willing to do virtually anything to redress perceived injustices?
That transformation is not likely to occur through political or military coercion (as is now being contemplated in Iraq), nor through the ingestion of pills nor anger management programs (as was the case with several mass shooters), nor through the usual hand-wringing about stricter gun laws and increased diplomacy, which are imperative, but don’t go far enough.
What is needed is no less than a “moral equivalent of war,” to echo the philosopher William James, but at a fraction of the cost. The rampant sense of insignificance needs to be addressed at its root, and not with simplistic bromides.
This means that alongside providing affordable short-term public mental health services, we also need to provide affordable long-term, in-depth mental health services.
Such services would emphasize the transformative power of deeply supportive, subtly attuned relationships over short-term palliatives and would likely be life-changing (as well as life-saving) in their impact.
We could (and should) also provide cadres of group facilitators to optimize encounters between people in power. These encounters could include heads of state, members of diplomatic corps and legislators.
Such facilitators could be schooled in well-established approaches to mediation, such as nonviolent communications, and would likely be pivotal in the settlement of intractable disputes. While the most hardened extremists may be unreachable, there are many others who might surprise us and engage the opportunity.
There is no theoretical reason why such practices would not work with the appropriate adaptations; we see these practices work every day in our clinics and consulting rooms, and often with the most challenging personalities.
The range of violent upheaval in the world is alarming. The quick fix, militarist solutions to this problem are faltering. In many cases, they are making situations worse (as we have seen with recent military operations).
The time for a change in societal consciousness is at hand. By focusing our resources on the root of the problem, the many people who feel they don’t count, we not only bolster individual and collective lives, we provide a model that others will find difficult to ignore.
Kirk Schneider is president-elect of the Society for Humanistic Psychology of the American Psychological Association, and author of “The Polarized Mind: Why It’s Killing Us and What We Can Do About It.â
Skarekrow
~~DEVIL~~
- MBTI
- Ni-INFJ-A
- Enneagram
- Warlock
I believe this video is significant within the context of this discussion because the very same thing is going on in Palestine right now. Only this time it isn’t the US, it is Israel…no matter how the players change, the indiscriminate killing of enemy civilians is immoral and wrong.
[video=youtube;vSKLVseJ9Xo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=vSKLVseJ9Xo[/video]
[video=youtube;vSKLVseJ9Xo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=vSKLVseJ9Xo[/video]
Skarekrow
~~DEVIL~~
- MBTI
- Ni-INFJ-A
- Enneagram
- Warlock
Researcher: Suicide terrorism linked to military occupation
Robert Pape, a University of Chicago political science professor and former Air Force lecturer, will present findings on Capitol Hill on Tuesday that argue that the majority of suicide terrorism around the world since 1980 has had a common cause: military occupation.
Pape and his team of researchers draw on data produced by a six-year study of suicide terrorist attacks around the world that was partially funded by the Defense Department's Defense Threat Reduction Agency. They have compiled the terrorism statistics in a publicly available database comprising some 10,000 records on some 2,200 suicide terrorism attacks, dating back to the first suicide terrorism attack of modern times – the 1983 truck bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, which killed 241 U.S. Marines.
"We have lots of evidence now that when you put the foreign military presence in, it triggers suicide terrorism campaigns, ... and that when the foreign forces leave, it takes away almost 100 percent of the terrorist campaign," Pape said in an interview last week on his findings.
Pape said there has been a dramatic spike in suicide bombings in Afghanistan since U.S. forces began to expand their presence to the south and east of the country in 2006. While there were a total of 12 suicide attacks from 2001 to 2005 in Afghanistan when the U.S. had a relatively limited troop presence of a few thousand troops mostly in Kabul, since 2006 there have been more than 450 suicide attacks in Afghanistan – and they are growing more lethal, Pape said.
Deaths due to suicide attacks in Afghanistan have gone up by a third in the year since President Barack Obama added 30,000 more U.S. troops. "It is not making it any better," Pape said.
Pape believes his findings have important implications even for countries where the U.S. does not have a significant direct military presence but is perceived by the population to be indirectly occupying.
For instance, across the border from Afghanistan, suicide terrorism exploded in Pakistan in 2006 as the U.S. put pressure on then-Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf "to divert 100,000 Pakistani army troops from their [perceived] main threat [India] to western Pakistan," Pape said.
Based on his findings, Pape does not advocate a "cut and run," precipitous withdrawal from Afghanistan but what he calls "off-shore balancing." In Afghanistan, he recommends a two-to-three-year plan, that
would in the first year freeze the number of U.S. forces in the country while intensifying political and economic development efforts, in particular, in Afghanistan's Pashtun south and east, followed by a U.S. military drawdown over two to three years – similar to the strategy in Iraq.
Pape and his colleagues will give an all-day presentation Tuesday at the Capitol Hill Visitor Center Congressional Auditorium, in an event co-sponsored by the University of Chicago Project on Security and Terrorism and the New America Foundation (Pape speaks at 10:15 a.m., and the event will be streamed at Steve Clemons's blog, The Washington Note.). His findings are also coming out in a book, co-authored with James Feldman, called "Cutting the Fuse: The Explosion of Global Suicide Terrorism and How to Stop It," published this month by the University of Chicago.
Robert Pape, a University of Chicago political science professor and former Air Force lecturer, will present findings on Capitol Hill on Tuesday that argue that the majority of suicide terrorism around the world since 1980 has had a common cause: military occupation.
Pape and his team of researchers draw on data produced by a six-year study of suicide terrorist attacks around the world that was partially funded by the Defense Department's Defense Threat Reduction Agency. They have compiled the terrorism statistics in a publicly available database comprising some 10,000 records on some 2,200 suicide terrorism attacks, dating back to the first suicide terrorism attack of modern times – the 1983 truck bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, which killed 241 U.S. Marines.
"We have lots of evidence now that when you put the foreign military presence in, it triggers suicide terrorism campaigns, ... and that when the foreign forces leave, it takes away almost 100 percent of the terrorist campaign," Pape said in an interview last week on his findings.
Pape said there has been a dramatic spike in suicide bombings in Afghanistan since U.S. forces began to expand their presence to the south and east of the country in 2006. While there were a total of 12 suicide attacks from 2001 to 2005 in Afghanistan when the U.S. had a relatively limited troop presence of a few thousand troops mostly in Kabul, since 2006 there have been more than 450 suicide attacks in Afghanistan – and they are growing more lethal, Pape said.
Deaths due to suicide attacks in Afghanistan have gone up by a third in the year since President Barack Obama added 30,000 more U.S. troops. "It is not making it any better," Pape said.
Pape believes his findings have important implications even for countries where the U.S. does not have a significant direct military presence but is perceived by the population to be indirectly occupying.
For instance, across the border from Afghanistan, suicide terrorism exploded in Pakistan in 2006 as the U.S. put pressure on then-Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf "to divert 100,000 Pakistani army troops from their [perceived] main threat [India] to western Pakistan," Pape said.
Based on his findings, Pape does not advocate a "cut and run," precipitous withdrawal from Afghanistan but what he calls "off-shore balancing." In Afghanistan, he recommends a two-to-three-year plan, that
would in the first year freeze the number of U.S. forces in the country while intensifying political and economic development efforts, in particular, in Afghanistan's Pashtun south and east, followed by a U.S. military drawdown over two to three years – similar to the strategy in Iraq.
Pape and his colleagues will give an all-day presentation Tuesday at the Capitol Hill Visitor Center Congressional Auditorium, in an event co-sponsored by the University of Chicago Project on Security and Terrorism and the New America Foundation (Pape speaks at 10:15 a.m., and the event will be streamed at Steve Clemons's blog, The Washington Note.). His findings are also coming out in a book, co-authored with James Feldman, called "Cutting the Fuse: The Explosion of Global Suicide Terrorism and How to Stop It," published this month by the University of Chicago.
just me
Well-known member
- MBTI
- infj
You are not going to pull my strings.
just me
Well-known member
- MBTI
- infj
copy
Pape and his team of researchers draw on data produced by a six-year study of suicide terrorist attacks around the world that was partially funded by the Defense Department's Defense Threat Reduction Agency. They have compiled the terrorism statistics in a publicly available database comprising some 10,000 records on some 2,200 suicide terrorism attacks, dating back to the first suicide terrorism attack of modern times — the 1983 truck bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, which killed 241 U.S. Marines. unquote
How many tears would you cry had you been the one to send those Marines into Beirut as Peacekeepers? They could have gone wielding heavy artillery. They had to go. Peacekeepers. The mountains shook from the big sixteen inch guns after that. Jets hurried past. Beirut could have been the target, but they were not. Indignant sorrow filled the air instead of gas. Anger shook the mountains. One flyby could have ended it all. Restraint was shown more than ever, and it still wakes people up in the night. Don't talk to me about restraint and being careful.
I am without words to see it is thrown into a mix for statistics like this. Each person had a name.....and someone that loved them. The mastermind behind that attack was killed in Damascus. He had a name, and many of his kind call him a hero. The day he was killed did not bring any of them back, but there was a feeling of sorrow he had ever walked the face of the earth.
Pape and his team of researchers draw on data produced by a six-year study of suicide terrorist attacks around the world that was partially funded by the Defense Department's Defense Threat Reduction Agency. They have compiled the terrorism statistics in a publicly available database comprising some 10,000 records on some 2,200 suicide terrorism attacks, dating back to the first suicide terrorism attack of modern times — the 1983 truck bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, which killed 241 U.S. Marines. unquote
How many tears would you cry had you been the one to send those Marines into Beirut as Peacekeepers? They could have gone wielding heavy artillery. They had to go. Peacekeepers. The mountains shook from the big sixteen inch guns after that. Jets hurried past. Beirut could have been the target, but they were not. Indignant sorrow filled the air instead of gas. Anger shook the mountains. One flyby could have ended it all. Restraint was shown more than ever, and it still wakes people up in the night. Don't talk to me about restraint and being careful.
I am without words to see it is thrown into a mix for statistics like this. Each person had a name.....and someone that loved them. The mastermind behind that attack was killed in Damascus. He had a name, and many of his kind call him a hero. The day he was killed did not bring any of them back, but there was a feeling of sorrow he had ever walked the face of the earth.
- MBTI
- INTJ - A
- Enneagram
- 10000
Modern armies cannot, in my opinion, ever bypass the taking of all reasonable means to avoid non-combatant casualties.
Hamas is not a modern army, but nevertheless they should not be using civilians as human shields.
More troubling, is that Israel has a very advanced modern army and seemingly has no qualms targeting the so-called human shields of civilians, which Hamas has used. Indeed, I think the term "human shield" should not be used in this conflict for two reasons:
1. They are ineffective, and thus there is no shielding benefit - Israel will destroy targets irrespective of civilian casualties.
2. Hamas militants have no means of protecting themselves, other than hiding themselves; and in the West Bank, outside urban areas there are no defensive positions.
Israel should eventually be brought to account for the targeting of civilians.
**As a side-note** I think the United States should some day be brought to account for the targeting of civilians during the Second World War. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which had atom bombs detonated over them by the United States, had no significant Japanese military presence, but were purely civilian targets.
Hamas is not a modern army, but nevertheless they should not be using civilians as human shields.
More troubling, is that Israel has a very advanced modern army and seemingly has no qualms targeting the so-called human shields of civilians, which Hamas has used. Indeed, I think the term "human shield" should not be used in this conflict for two reasons:
1. They are ineffective, and thus there is no shielding benefit - Israel will destroy targets irrespective of civilian casualties.
2. Hamas militants have no means of protecting themselves, other than hiding themselves; and in the West Bank, outside urban areas there are no defensive positions.
Israel should eventually be brought to account for the targeting of civilians.
**As a side-note** I think the United States should some day be brought to account for the targeting of civilians during the Second World War. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which had atom bombs detonated over them by the United States, had no significant Japanese military presence, but were purely civilian targets.
- MBTI
- ISTJ
- Enneagram
- 9w1
Quit sticking your nose where it doesnt belong. Let them learn to sort thier own problems out. If they are going to kill each other, so what? They are on the other side of the world. (From me, at least). We definitely need to stop sending our money to them.
Skarekrow
~~DEVIL~~
- MBTI
- Ni-INFJ-A
- Enneagram
- Warlock
Don’t forget, the day after the Fat Man bomb was dropped the US also flew a 1000 bomber bombing mission over all the major cities of Japan where we dropped countless bombs on civilians with leaflets mixed in reading “Japan has surrendered!”.
It wasn’t just the atomic bombs…we’ve done a lot more than that…or even what I just mentioned.
- MBTI
- INFeJ
- Enneagram
- None
I don't feel so bad about this kind of thing. I am not particularly a fan of senseless killings, wars, etc. I don't know many of the facts about this but I find for myself it's at such a distance that I feel nothing about it. It's just another horrible thing happening in another part of the world. There seems to be no end to countries at war with each other or with themselves. I do think that allies and helping each other is important, but I also think that at some point people need to work things out for themselves. I know that's very passive of me, but it's just how I feel about it (or rather don't feel).
- MBTI
- .
- Enneagram
- .
that is simply not going to happen,
very few people get elected to national office with out pledging unfettered support for Isreal
The Israeli population is now more removed from the Palestinian people then ever before. They sigh and wish the Palestinian "problem" would go away as the Palistinians fume and pray for vengeance. This "problem" is going to be "solved" very nastily.
muir
Banned
- MBTI
- INFJ
http://investmentwatchblog.com/isra...sed-palestinians-as-human-shields-1200-times/
[h=1]Israeli High Court: Israeli Soldiers Used Palestinians as Human Shields 1,200 Times[/h]
August 4th, 2014
[h=3]Israel Has Frequently Used Palestinians as Human Shields[/h] Israelis frequently accuse Palestinians of using human shields.
That claim is highly questionable.
However, in 2005, the Israeli high court found that Israeli soldiers had used Palestinian civilians as human shields 1,200 times in the past 5 years. As Ynet reported at the time:
Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz on Tuesday demanded that the High Court review aruling it issued last Thursday in which it declared that the ‘human shield’ procedure employed by the IDF when detaining Palestinian terror suspects is illegal and violates international law.
Sources at the Ministry of Defense said that Mofaz’ comments are not an attempt to subvert the Court’s decision, adding that the defense minister intends to use democratic means to revoke the ruling.
According to defense officials, the Israel Defense Forces made use of the ‘human shield’ procedure on 1,200 occasions over the last five years, and only on one occasion did a Palestinian civilian get hurt.
An 18-year-old Palestinian was killed in 2002 during one such operation.
Mofaz instructed the IDF to freeze the use of the ‘human shield’ and ‘early warning’ procedures in its arrest operations in the territories until the Court holds a new hearing on the issue.
In 2009, Wikileaks published an Israeli government memo stating:Sources at the Ministry of Defense said that Mofaz’ comments are not an attempt to subvert the Court’s decision, adding that the defense minister intends to use democratic means to revoke the ruling.
According to defense officials, the Israel Defense Forces made use of the ‘human shield’ procedure on 1,200 occasions over the last five years, and only on one occasion did a Palestinian civilian get hurt.
An 18-year-old Palestinian was killed in 2002 during one such operation.
Mofaz instructed the IDF to freeze the use of the ‘human shield’ and ‘early warning’ procedures in its arrest operations in the territories until the Court holds a new hearing on the issue.
Individual Palestinians also testified to IDF abuses such as looting, beatings, vandalism of property and the use of the local population as human shields. But by far the strongest reverbration in Israel was that created by the Israeli organization“Breaking the Silence”, which collected testimony from 26 unnamed IDF soldiers.All of the soldiers had been involved in Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip, andtestified to instances where Gazans were used as human shields, incendiary phosphorous shells were fired over civilian population areas, and other examples of excessive firepower that caused unnecessary fatalities and destruction of property.
The Nation noted last month:
Israeli soldiers have systematically used Palestinians as human shields. Since Israel’s incursion into the West Bank in 2002, it has used Palestinians as human shields by tying young Palestinians onto the hoods of their cars or forcing them to go into a home where a potential militant may be hiding.
And the Guardian pointed out:
Israel, meanwhile, does not have an unblemished record in the use of human shields. In 2010, two soldiers were convicted in an IDF military court of using an 11-year-old Palestinian boy as a human shield in its 2008-09 operation in Gaza. The pair ordered the child to search bags they suspected of being booby-trapped.
Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/isra...human-shields-1200-times/#G06hI6C5HwcELrBm.99
muir
Banned
- MBTI
- INFJ
The problem is that it is the support of the US that enables Israel to do what it is doing
This is because the US uses its veto in the UN security council to block any UN moves to stop Israeli war crimes and the US gives $3 billion a year to israel to buy weapons with (many place the actual figure as much higher than that)
This means that the US taxpaying, voting public is COMPLICIT in the war crimes
Not just the US citizens either as people around the world buy Israeli goods instead of boycotting israeli goods
So this issue is relevant to all of us. We all need to remove our support for israels illegal actions to remove the democratic mandate of our governments and force them to withdraw support. In turn the Israelis would then have to comply with the UN and the geneva convention
The reason our politicians support israel though is because the rothschilds who founded israel control our central banks...yours, mine and the one in the US as well
And THAT is definately an issue that affects you
Last edited:
muir
Banned
- MBTI
- INFJ
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/08/06/374284/us-leaders-completely-owned-by-zionists/
US politicians ‘completely owned’ by Zionists: Ex-US presidential candidate
A former US presidential candidate says he is “deeply ashamed” of American leaders and politicians who are “completely owned” by Zionists and “banker elites” who seek “tremendous economic chaos” and the “enslavement of masses of people.”
“I’m deeply ashamed of America’s leadership” because of their support for Israel’s latest military offensive against the Gaza Strip which has killed nearly 2,000 Palestinians, said Merlin Lloyd Miller, and independent film director, writer, and producer who was the 2012 US presidential nominee for the American Third Position Party.
A month-long Israeli aerial and ground offensive that began July 8 in Gaza has left about 1,900 Palestinians dead, including 430 children, and left people across the impoverished enclave in desperate need of basic necessities of life.
US Secretary of State John Kerry stated on Wednesday that the Obama administration “fully supported” Israel during its conflict with the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. "No country can live with that condition and the United States stands squarely behind Israel's right to defend itself in those circumstances. Period," he said in an interview with BBC.
“I look at the politicians and I believe their completely owned by internationalists with a Zionist Agenda,” Miller said during a phone interview with Press TV on Wednesday. “There’s no humanitarian coming from our leadership, they have total disregard for the United States Constitution and it’s just creating tremendous hardship throughout the world now.”
“Unfortunately, in the next 12 months, I believe internationalists will try to create tremendous economic chaos throughout the world and ultimately lead us into a World War III, which could advance their new world order schemes and ultimately enslavement of masses of people,” Miller noted.
AHT/ISH
US politicians ‘completely owned’ by Zionists: Ex-US presidential candidate
A former US presidential candidate says he is “deeply ashamed” of American leaders and politicians who are “completely owned” by Zionists and “banker elites” who seek “tremendous economic chaos” and the “enslavement of masses of people.”
“I’m deeply ashamed of America’s leadership” because of their support for Israel’s latest military offensive against the Gaza Strip which has killed nearly 2,000 Palestinians, said Merlin Lloyd Miller, and independent film director, writer, and producer who was the 2012 US presidential nominee for the American Third Position Party.
A month-long Israeli aerial and ground offensive that began July 8 in Gaza has left about 1,900 Palestinians dead, including 430 children, and left people across the impoverished enclave in desperate need of basic necessities of life.
US Secretary of State John Kerry stated on Wednesday that the Obama administration “fully supported” Israel during its conflict with the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. "No country can live with that condition and the United States stands squarely behind Israel's right to defend itself in those circumstances. Period," he said in an interview with BBC.
“I look at the politicians and I believe their completely owned by internationalists with a Zionist Agenda,” Miller said during a phone interview with Press TV on Wednesday. “There’s no humanitarian coming from our leadership, they have total disregard for the United States Constitution and it’s just creating tremendous hardship throughout the world now.”
“Unfortunately, in the next 12 months, I believe internationalists will try to create tremendous economic chaos throughout the world and ultimately lead us into a World War III, which could advance their new world order schemes and ultimately enslavement of masses of people,” Miller noted.
AHT/ISH
- MBTI
- INFeJ
- Enneagram
- None
I understand everything behind it. I know Israel and the USA are in bed together. I think it's garbage that the US won't take a seat on the UN but so it goes. They won't be a super power for that much longer, the country is fucked.
I am not so much of a fan of the federal reserve or the central bank or not having a gold standard or any of that, but I also don't worry about it. I guess that's because I am secure and don't have anything to lose (no house, car paid in full, no family to support, next to no debts, good paying job, etc). I used to be afraid of all this kind of stuff but I just turned myself off it several years ago because the whole thing is depressing.
Ignorance is bliss.
dogman6126
Community Member
- MBTI
- ENFJ-wasINFJ
I just want to throw out there that none of us are in the situation of fighting the Hamas. And I'm not sure how many people speaking out in this thread have ever even been in a war. I haven't. However my dad was, and he has talked a bit about this topic. The Hamas is a terrorist organization that was pestering Israel. Israel had enough so chose to respond. Now let me ask you this. would you not respond to your fullest capacity in war? Of course you would. Also, in war, you don't always have time to fully think things through. Sometimes you must make a decision, and it's not always going to be the best one. Now, that being said, Israel also doesn't seem to be doing all they can to reduce such mistakes and therefore they are at fault for that. I don't blame them for the use of force or there determination to remove this threat. However, they have the capability to do more. But not always. There's plenty of cases where Israel warned an area that it was going to be bombed the next day or later that day, and the people choose or was forced not to leave. That's not isrsels fault in my opinion. Either people should leave or else they are fulfilling the basic law of natural selection. Or, it's the Hamas thhat where holding people there. It's Israel's fault for every time they bombed or attacked without warning. In my opinion both sides are at fault.