4461-ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? | View Thread

'I've been watching the Clintons work for 30 years. That's all the evidence I need,' my dad told me months ago about the Russia story. The evidence is increasingly proving him right.

"It's all a hoax." That's what my 62-year-old father, a Cruz-Rubio supporter, has been telling me since the very first time the media uttered, "Trump may have colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election."

I wasn't so sure he was right. After news broke indicating Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort had met with Kremlin-linked lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya in June 2016 to get "dirt" on the Clinton camp, the situation for Trump looked worse than ever.

"It's a hoax," my father reassured me. "Maybe Trump Jr. did meet with the Russian lawyer, but there was no collusion. This is a plan put into place by the Clintons. You'll see."

"How can you possibly know that?" I responded. "You have absolutely no reason to believe it's a hoax."

"I've been watching the Clintons work for 30 years. That's all the evidence I need," he answered.

In the rollercoaster ride since word of the Veselnitskaya meeting first reached the public, there have been numerous ups and downs. Like most Americans, I've been left wondering exactly how far the Trump team was willing to go to win the 2016 election. Were they really open to trading away American interests, as the Clintons appeared to have done many times, to capture the White House?

Although there remains a possibility someone on the Trump team struck a deal with Russian operatives in an effort to win the election, new revelations about the role the Clintons may have played in the infamous Christopher Steele dossier seem to suggest a large portion-and perhaps all-of the Trump-Russia narrative was invented by the Clintons, the Hillary Clinton campaign, or their sycophants.

Comment: Russians don't control American people and there is no way they can influence US elections. They can expose the lies and hypocrisy of elite through meager means they have, but it is up to the US voters to make a decision on who should be their president.

The Steele Dossier Included Clinton Campaign Gossip

On Tuesday, Fox News reported that a recently unclassified (but still heavily redacted) memo from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) claimed, "Clinton associates were 'feeding' allegations to former British spy Christopher Steele at the same time he was compiling the controversial anti-Trump dossier paid for by the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign."

We already know Steele's work on the dossier was being funded by Democrats and the Clinton campaign in the middle of the 2016 election, and a recent memo made public by the House Intelligence Committee says the FBI relied on Steele's memo to obtain an important Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant from a federal judge.

The House memo also claimed the FBI did not disclose to the court that Democrats and Clinton had paid for the dossier. Further, the House memo showed the FBI relied in part on a news story to corroborate the findings of the Steele dossier, even though that report had also been based on information fed to reporters by Steele himself.

That's Nowhere Near the End of It, Either

As damning as all this is-and it's clearly damning-there's even more evidence pointing to the Clintons' involvement in the FBI's investigation and the creation of the dossier. On Jan. 30, The Guardian reported its sources claim the FBI has also relied (and may still be depending on) a second dossier, this time written by Cody Shearer, a long-time Clinton associate who has ties to past Clinton campaign efforts to destroy opponents. Those efforts include California Gov. Jerry Brown (D), who ran against Bill Clinton for the Democratic Party presidential nomination in the 1990s; Ross Perot, also a Clinton opponent from the 1992 election; and Gennifer Flowers, who accused Bill Clinton during the 1992 primaries of having an affair with her.

Additionally, although it's unclear how many people connected to the Clintons may have been "feeding" information to Steele for his dossier, we know Obama State Department official Jonathan Winer received from Clinton associate Sidney Blumenthal in September 2016 at least some of Shearer's information and passed it along to Steele, who was then still working closely with the FBI. Winer also admitted he passed the information to another State Department official, who then gave it to Secretary of State John Kerry.

Blumenthal's role in both dossiers is not an insignificant detail. Not only is Blumenthal an extremely close ally to Hillary Clinton, he is also closely linked to Shearer. Shearer worked with Blumenthal to help tear down Clinton opponents in the 1990s, and reportedly helped Blumenthal provide Hillary Clinton intelligence about the Libyan revolution in 2011.

According to Winer, who wrote an opinion article about his experiences for the Washington Post on Thursday, Steele said at the time Winer gave him the information from Blumenthal that the Shearer report and his own research had a lot of similarities. But, of course, there's no way to know Winer is telling the truth. He was, after all, an important member of Obama's State Department who says Blumenthal is an "old friend."

So Here's the Quick and Dirty Summary

Piecing all this together is difficult, but the broad strokes are as follows:

Much of the Trump-Russia collusion evidence comes from the Steele dossier.
The Steele dossier was created during the 2016 election, at the behest and funding of Democrats and Hillary Clinton's campaign.
Grassley and Graham's memo and Winer's op-ed show Steele was given some information from at least one source tied directly to the Clintons.
The FBI is likely using a second dossier in its investigation, one authored by Cody Shearer.
Shearer has close ties to Blumenthal and the Clintons.
Top officials at the FBI and Department of Justice, including members of the team working on the Trump-Russia collusion investigation, had ties to the Democratic Party; or the dossier; or expressed their dislike of Donald Trump, a conflict of interest for their work; or all three. For instance, DOJ official Bruce Ohr's wife worked for Fusion GPS, which paid Steele to make the dossier while it was being created.
The FBI used the Steele dossier and maybe even information from Shearer to get a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump campaign team, but it failed to tell the FISA court of the dossier's connection to the Clintons or that Blumenthal's information reached Steele.
The vast majority of "evidence" supposedly linking Trump to Russia resulted directly or indirectly from the FISA warrant and the investigation that followed.

The evidence above doesn't prove the Trump campaign didn't "collude" with Russian officials, but it certainly makes my father's "hoax" argument a heck of a lot stronger. Did Steele use Shearer's information to craft his dossier? Is it possible the Russian sources giving information to Shearer and Steele were part of an elaborate Kremlin misinformation campaign?

Comment: Mueller's investigation in identifying Russian collusion costed millions of tax payer dollars. It couldn't find any proof of collusion, instead it found that Hillary Clinton colluded with entire American establishment to cheat the US voters. It is still difficult for MSM authors to to accept that truth that Russian collusion is myth.

The four stages of acceptance:

1. This is worthless nonsense.
2. This is an interesting, but perverse, point of view.
3. This is true, but quite unimportant.
4. I always said so.

Did the FBI also rely on the Shearer information, in addition to the Steele dossier, when making their FISA application? Who are all the sources feeding information to Shearer and Steele? Regardless of the answers to those questions, one thing is certain: Clinton associates were far too involved in this investigation to not look closer.

It looks like I owe my father an apology. Perhaps there is wisdom in experience after all-especially when dealing with the Clintons.

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 2/16/2018 6:15:14 PM
	Are the Clintons behind the whole Trump-Russia collusion story? Justin Haskins The Federalist Tue, 13 Feb 2018 00:00 UTC © Unknown 'I've been watching the Clintons work for 30 years. That's all the evidence I need,' my dad told me months ago about the Russia story. The evidence is increasingly proving him right. "It's all a hoax." That's what my 62-year-old father, a Cruz-Rubio supporter, has been telling me since the very first time the media uttered, "Trump may have colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election." I wasn't so sure he was right. After news broke indicating Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort had met with Kremlin-linked lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya in June 2016 to get "dirt" on the Clinton camp, the situation for Trump looked worse than ever. "It's a hoax," my father reassured me. "Maybe Trump Jr. did meet with the Russian lawyer, but there was no collusion. This is a plan put into place by the Clintons. You'll see." "How can you possibly know that?" I responded. "You have absolutely no reason to believe it's a hoax." "I've been watching the Clintons work for 30 years. That's all the evidence I need," he answered. In the rollercoaster ride since word of the Veselnitskaya meeting first reached the public, there have been numerous ups and downs. Like most Americans, I've been left wondering exactly how far the Trump team was willing to go to win the 2016 election. Were they really open to trading away American interests, as the Clintons appeared to have done many times, to capture the White House? Although there remains a possibility someone on the Trump team struck a deal with Russian operatives in an effort to win the election, new revelations about the role the Clintons may have played in the infamous Christopher Steele dossier seem to suggest a large portion-and perhaps all-of the Trump-Russia narrative was invented by the Clintons, the Hillary Clinton campaign, or their sycophants. Comment: Russians don't control American people and there is no way they can influence US elections. They can expose the lies and hypocrisy of elite through meager means they have, but it is up to the US voters to make a decision on who should be their president. The Steele Dossier Included Clinton Campaign Gossip On Tuesday, Fox News reported that a recently unclassified (but still heavily redacted) memo from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) claimed, "Clinton associates were 'feeding' allegations to former British spy Christopher Steele at the same time he was compiling the controversial anti-Trump dossier paid for by the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign." We already know Steele's work on the dossier was being funded by Democrats and the Clinton campaign in the middle of the 2016 election, and a recent memo made public by the House Intelligence Committee says the FBI relied on Steele's memo to obtain an important Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant from a federal judge. The House memo also claimed the FBI did not disclose to the court that Democrats and Clinton had paid for the dossier. Further, the House memo showed the FBI relied in part on a news story to corroborate the findings of the Steele dossier, even though that report had also been based on information fed to reporters by Steele himself. That's Nowhere Near the End of It, Either As damning as all this is-and it's clearly damning-there's even more evidence pointing to the Clintons' involvement in the FBI's investigation and the creation of the dossier. On Jan. 30, The Guardian reported its sources claim the FBI has also relied (and may still be depending on) a second dossier, this time written by Cody Shearer, a long-time Clinton associate who has ties to past Clinton campaign efforts to destroy opponents. Those efforts include California Gov. Jerry Brown (D), who ran against Bill Clinton for the Democratic Party presidential nomination in the 1990s; Ross Perot, also a Clinton opponent from the 1992 election; and Gennifer Flowers, who accused Bill Clinton during the 1992 primaries of having an affair with her. Additionally, although it's unclear how many people connected to the Clintons may have been "feeding" information to Steele for his dossier, we know Obama State Department official Jonathan Winer received from Clinton associate Sidney Blumenthal in September 2016 at least some of Shearer's information and passed it along to Steele, who was then still working closely with the FBI. Winer also admitted he passed the information to another State Department official, who then gave it to Secretary of State John Kerry. Blumenthal's role in both dossiers is not an insignificant detail. Not only is Blumenthal an extremely close ally to Hillary Clinton, he is also closely linked to Shearer. Shearer worked with Blumenthal to help tear down Clinton opponents in the 1990s, and reportedly helped Blumenthal provide Hillary Clinton intelligence about the Libyan revolution in 2011. According to Winer, who wrote an opinion article about his experiences for the Washington Post on Thursday, Steele said at the time Winer gave him the information from Blumenthal that the Shearer report and his own research had a lot of similarities. But, of course, there's no way to know Winer is telling the truth. He was, after all, an important member of Obama's State Department who says Blumenthal is an "old friend." So Here's the Quick and Dirty Summary Piecing all this together is difficult, but the broad strokes are as follows: Much of the Trump-Russia collusion evidence comes from the Steele dossier. The Steele dossier was created during the 2016 election, at the behest and funding of Democrats and Hillary Clinton's campaign. Grassley and Graham's memo and Winer's op-ed show Steele was given some information from at least one source tied directly to the Clintons. The FBI is likely using a second dossier in its investigation, one authored by Cody Shearer. Shearer has close ties to Blumenthal and the Clintons. Top officials at the FBI and Department of Justice, including members of the team working on the Trump-Russia collusion investigation, had ties to the Democratic Party; or the dossier; or expressed their dislike of Donald Trump, a conflict of interest for their work; or all three. For instance, DOJ official Bruce Ohr's wife worked for Fusion GPS, which paid Steele to make the dossier while it was being created. The FBI used the Steele dossier and maybe even information from Shearer to get a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump campaign team, but it failed to tell the FISA court of the dossier's connection to the Clintons or that Blumenthal's information reached Steele. The vast majority of "evidence" supposedly linking Trump to Russia resulted directly or indirectly from the FISA warrant and the investigation that followed. The evidence above doesn't prove the Trump campaign didn't "collude" with Russian officials, but it certainly makes my father's "hoax" argument a heck of a lot stronger. Did Steele use Shearer's information to craft his dossier? Is it possible the Russian sources giving information to Shearer and Steele were part of an elaborate Kremlin misinformation campaign? Comment: Mueller's investigation in identifying Russian collusion costed millions of tax payer dollars. It couldn't find any proof of collusion, instead it found that Hillary Clinton colluded with entire American establishment to cheat the US voters. It is still difficult for MSM authors to to accept that truth that Russian collusion is myth. The four stages of acceptance: 1. This is worthless nonsense. 2. This is an interesting, but perverse, point of view. 3. This is true, but quite unimportant. 4. I always said so. Did the FBI also rely on the Shearer information, in addition to the Steele dossier, when making their FISA application? Who are all the sources feeding information to Shearer and Steele? Regardless of the answers to those questions, one thing is certain: Clinton associates were far too involved in this investigation to not look closer. It looks like I owe my father an apology. Perhaps there is wisdom in experience after all-especially when dealing with the Clintons. Comment: Why MSM is not talking about investigating Clinton and her cronies instead of beating the Russian collusion dead horse.? Lock them up! How Obama helped orchestrate the deep state coup Lock her up: Justice Dept. launches new probe into Clinton Foundation's pay-to-play scheme (sott.net)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 2/16/2018 11:13:38 PM
	In 3 Years, Cops Have Killed 450% More Citizens Than 4 Decades of Mass Shootings COMBINED FEBRUARY 15, 2018 By Matt Agorist A tragedy in Florida unfolded Wednesday afternoon when a psychotic former student terrorized a high school and the nation as he walked into the school and began shooting and killing students. The terrorist shooter killed 17 people. It is no surprise that the hashtag #GunReformNow is already trending on Twitter as politicians and advocacy groups alike—like every time before—begin milking this tragedy for their political agenda. Sadly, most people who call for gun control to realize what that actually means—only the government has the guns. Every time a lunatic, who is usually on some form mind-altering pharmaceutical, goes on a shooting rampage, the do-gooders in Washington, with the aid of their citizen flocks, take to the TV and the Internet to call for disarming the American people. The citizens who call for themselves and their neighbors to be disarmed, likely think no deeper than the shallow speeches given by the political blowhards, designed to appeal to emotion only. They do not think of what happens during and after the government attempts to remove guns from society. They also completely ignore the fact that criminals do not obey laws and making guns illegal would have zero effect on criminals possessing guns. In the perfect Statist world in which only the government has guns, we’re told that crime rates would plummet, people wouldn’t be murdered, gun violence would be brought to its knees, and a disarmed heaven on Earth would ensue. But how effective would disarming the citizens actually be at preventing gun violence, while at the same time keeping guns in the hands of government? One simple way to determine the outcome would be to compare mass shootings in America with those killed by police. It is entirely too easy to compare all senseless murders carried out by the State to those carried out by citizens, so we will zoom in with a microscope. However, just as a point of reference, in the 20th Century alone, governments were responsible for 260,000,000 deaths worldwide. That number is greater than all deaths from illicit drug use, STDs, homicides, and traffic accidents — combined. Now, on to the micro-comparison. According to a comprehensive database of all American mass shootings that have taken place since 1982, constructed by Mother Jones, there have been exactly 816 deaths attributed to mass shootings that have taken place on American soil. As Mother Jones notes, in their database, they exclude shootings stemming from more conventional crimes such as armed robbery or gang violence. Other news outlets and researchers have published larger tallies that include a wide range of gun crimes in which four or more people have been either wounded or killed. While those larger datasets of multiple-victim shootings may be useful for studying the broader problem of gun violence, our investigation provides an in-depth look at the distinct phenomenon of mass shootings—from the firearms used to mental health factors and the growing copycat problem. If we were to compare the 816 citizens killed in mass shootings to citizens killed by police in the same time frame, the comparison would be off the charts. So, for the sake of simplicity, we will compare all of the mass shooting deaths in the last 35 years, to the number of citizens killed by police since the beginning of last year. Already, in 2018, American police have killed 153 people. When we add that to 1,189 people killed by police in 2017, that number is 1,342. This number is set to increase by one, on average, every 8 hours. When comparing the total number of mass shootings over the last 35 years to just the last 14 months of police killings the ratio is 1.6 to 1, citizens killed by cops vs. citizens killed in mass shootings. That is a massive difference. The comparison is staggering and should shock the conscience. But to truly get a perspective, lets go back three years and compare all of the citizens killed by cops since the beginning of 2015 to the number of mass shooting deaths. Since 2015, cops in America have killed 3,733 citizens. In a time period that is less than one-tenth the amount of time it took mass shooters to kill 816 people, cops have killed nearly 5 times as many citizens. As the blowhards spew their nonsense about grabbing guns from law-abiding citizens and those in government demand action, all of these people conveniently ignore the giant pink elephant in the living room — cops in America are killing citizens at an alarming rate! Ironically enough, those calling for taking guns from citizens are often times the ones most critical of police killings. How, exactly, they rationalize disarming the citizens and having only police, who kill far more people than gun owners, be the sole possessors of guns, is a mystery. Indeed, Radley Balko sums up the mental gymnastics of both parties perfectly in regard to the distorted realities held as “truth.” Radley Balko ✔@radleybalko Red: "We need guns to protect us from the government. Also, it is unpatriotic to second-guess when armed government employees kill people." Blue: "The government has a history of racism and oppression. Guns are instruments of death. Only government employees should have guns." 12:56 PM - Nov 9, 2017 3,382 1,786 people are talking about this Twitter Ads info and privacy In the United States, the overall homicide rate is 4.9 per 100,000 among the citizens. Thanks to independent watchdog groups like KilledByPolice.net, we have a total number of citizens killed by police. As noted above, last year, police killed 1,189 citizens. Given that America has roughly 765,000 sworn police officers, that means the police-against-citizen kill rate is more than 145 per 100,000. The police kill rate is nearly 30 times that of the average citizen, yet somehow people still call for disarming citizens and say nothing about the police. And no, the citizens are not becoming more violent. In fact, humanity is at its safest time in history—ever—and, in spite of the lunatic terrorists shooting up public places, violent crimes as well as all crime continues to drop, significantly. The next time your friends try to tell you that citizens should be disarmed, tell them what that really means; they only want government, who has a history of racism and violence, who kill indiscriminately, with zero accountability, and far more often, to be the ones with guns. (activist post.com)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 2/16/2018 11:48:46 PM
	Florida Pastor Arrested in Prostitution Sting 4:00PM EST 2/15/2018 JESSILYN JUSTICE Richard Cecil (Naples PD) A Florida pastor was arrested in a prostitution sting this week. Richard Cecil was a pastor at The Father's House in Fort Myers, but now runs a ministry out of his home, according to reports. Cecil's arrest report says the minister made phone contact with a person who later was identified as an undercover officer and arranged to meet at the hotel. He then allegedly negotiated performance of a sexual act for $200 and then was arrested, according to USA Today. Cecil denies the allegations and waived his arraignment, asking instead for a trial by jury. An NBC affiliate reports Cecil often prayed at the beginning of Lee County Commissioner's meetings in 2005-06. "Richard's extensive Hebraic insight, humorous, dynamic and engaging style endears him to a wide spectrum of pastoral engagements and ministry opportunities," according one Ohio church who invited the pastor to speak last year. An actor and judge were also arrested in the sting."Richard's extensive Hebraic insight, humorous, dynamic and engaging style endears him to a wide spectrum of pastoral engagements and ministry opportunities," according one Ohio church who invited the pastor to speak last year. "It's, there's no explanation. It's just horrible. It's definitely a shock, it's a shock to think all of these prominent men that are in our community that could get together and form this, is just unreal," Lynn Mackey, his former neighbor, says. Jessilyn Justice @jessilynjustice is the director of online news for Charisma.
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 2/17/2018 10:04:28 AM
	Mysterious enriched uranium particle detected in skies over Alaska Published time: 16 Feb, 2018 11:18Edited time: 16 Feb, 2018 12:44 © Berliner Verlag / Global Look Press Scientists have found a “highly unusual” particle enriched with uranium in the skies over Alaska’s Aleutian Islands. The source of the substance, which is typically used in nuclear fuel and bombs, is still unclear. The mysterious substance “containing a very small amount of enriched uranium” was found at an altitude of 7km (4.3 miles) above Alaska's Aleutian Islands, according to a report issued by the Journal of Environmental Radioactivity. It is the first time the group of US scientists has detected enriched uranium-235 in their 20-year study. They were making no special attempt to sample radioactive material, when they came across it during a routine flight to check atmospheric conditions in August 2016. Read more Lethal radiation amounts still detected at crippled Fukushima plant 7yrs after disaster “During 20 years of aircraft sampling of millions of particles in the global atmosphere, we have rarely encountered a particle with a similarly high content of 238U [uranium-238] and never a particle with enriched 235U [uranium-235],” an abstract from the article says, with the full study to be published in April. However, the radioactive element is not believed to have any significant impact on the atmosphere, especially given that it was alone and has a tiny size - 580 nanometers (around half the size of a red blood cell), according to Live Science, citing the article. The scientists are now struggling to find the prime source of the unusual finding and how it got there. The study only vaguely suggests that “the particle could have originated from a variety of areas across Asia” without elaborating. However, it is clear that the particle is "definitely not from a natural source," according to one of the authors, Dan Murphy, cited by Gizmondo. The researchers hope that the paper will facilitate their work as their colleagues might provide them with help on understanding where the bizarre particle came from. “We’re hoping that someone in a field that’s not intimately associated with atmospheric chemistry can say ‘a-ha!’ and give us a call,” Thomas Ryerson, one of the researchers from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), told Gizmodo. (RT)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 2/17/2018 10:16:53 AM
	US cold war-era nukes in Europe almost useless, pose ‘catastrophic terrorism’ risk - report Published time: 16 Feb, 2018 13:49 © Jörg Carstensen / Global Look Press The US plans to spend $10 billion upgrading 150 Cold War-era nuclear bombs stationed in Europe, even though the weapons may be more of a security liability than a strategic deterrent, according to a new report by arms experts. Assumptions about the safety and security of US nuclear weapons stored in Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Turkey have been undermined by “recent terrorist attacks and political instability,” the report, published by arms control advocacy group the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI), claims. Read more 'US govt faction sees nukes as tool for increasing pressure on Russia, China’ – watchdog chief A third of the B61 bombs in Europe under joint US-NATO control are believed to be stored at Turkey’s Incirlik Airbase – which was locked down and had its electricity cut during the 2016 coup attempt against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The Turkish commanding officer of the base was later arrested for his alleged role in the plot. Noting “just how quickly assumptions about the safety and security of US nuclear weapons stored abroad can change,” the report argues that “forward-deployed US nuclear weapons in Europe increase the risk of accidents, blunders, or catastrophic terrorism and invite pre-emption. Given these added risks, it is past time to revisit whether these forward-based weapons are essential for military deterrence and political reassurance.” Titled ‘Building a Safe, Secure and Credible NATO Nuclear Posture,’ the report goes on to state that the arsenal of B61 gravity bombs may have little or no strategic value because the weapons would be delivered by NATO dual-capable aircraft (DCA), and cannot be used unilaterally by the United States. “A number of former senior US officials and military leaders have made the point that US nuclear weapons based in Europe have virtually no military utility … The political complexities of the NATO decision-making process raise doubts that member states could reach consensus on nuclear signaling or use in a crisis,” the NTI report said. “It is hard to envision the circumstances under which a US president would initiate nuclear use for the first time in more than 70 years with a NATO DCA flown by non-US pilots delivering a US B61 bomb.” Read more Trump’s craving for more nukes a ‘rip off’ that only benefits military industrial complex The Obama administration came close to withdrawing the Cold War nuclear relics from Europe as part of a nuclear disarmament initiative, but the plan was shelved after relations with Moscow nosedived at the end of his last term. Instead, the administration opted for a $10 billion Pentagon program that over the next decade will upgrade the bombs to make them more accurate. President Donald Trump has embraced the plan. In a statement last month, Trump said that “we must modernize and rebuild our nuclear arsenal, hopefully never having to use it, but making it so strong and so powerful that it will deter any acts of aggression by any other nation or anyone else.” Released earlier this month, the US Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) cites Russia’s nuclear modernization as a leading motivator behind upgrades to US arsenals. Moscow says that allegations of a resurgent, “aggressive Russia” have “nothing to do with reality” and are being used as a pretext to pump more money into the US defense industry. (RT)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Menu

Forums

Are the Clintons behind the whole Trump-Russia collusion story?

In 3 Years, Cops Have Killed 450% More Citizens Than 4 Decades of Mass Shootings COMBINED

Florida Pastor Arrested in Prostitution Sting

Mysterious enriched uranium particle detected in skies over Alaska

US cold war-era nukes in Europe almost useless, pose ‘catastrophic terrorism’ risk - report

Like us on Facebook!