47 "Congressman" May Have Just Broken the Law
Posted by Bill Mac (+74) 6 years ago
Regardless of which "Party" is tied to this, behavior this egregious is a direct threat to the principle of "separation of power". A principle that our system of government is built on.

I pray that political ideology / fanaticism will never be allowed to trump The Bill of Rights, The U.S. Constitution or the framework of our Democracy.
Scary stuff

http://thedailybanter.com...diplomacy/
Top
+5
-2
founder
supporter
Posted by Amorette Allison (+11757) 6 years ago
The folks in Iran apparently called it political propaganda--which is what it was.
Top
+2
-1
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+9193) 6 years ago
Oddy's going to come along any moment now and tell us how anarchism and insurrection are deeply held conservative values, and who gives a poop anyways because Iran is worse than hitler (but not worse than obama, oddy's got STANDARDS)
Top
+4
-4
founder
supporter
Posted by Tom Masa (+2042) 6 years ago
Impeach all 47 for treason
Top
+5
-3
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+14950) 6 years ago
Look boys and girls, we can sit around and yell "treason" or we can get into action and do something about this situation. I propose that Mr. Daines be recalled. Montana Annotated Code 2-16-603 allows for recall of public officials for the following offenses:

"2-16-603. Officers subject to recall -- grounds for recall. (1) Any person holding a public office of the state or any of its political subdivisions, either by election or appointment, is subject to recall from office. 
(2) A public officer holding an elective office may be recalled by the qualified electors entitled to vote for the elective officer's successor. A public officer holding an appointive office may be recalled by the qualified electors entitled to vote for the successor or successors of the elective officer or officers who have the authority to appoint a person to that position. 
(3) Physical or mental lack of fitness, incompetence, violation of the oath of office, official misconduct, or conviction of a felony offense enumerated in Title 45 are the only grounds for recall. A person may not be recalled for performing a mandatory duty of the office that the person holds or for not performing any act that, if performed, would subject the person to prosecution for official misconduct."

It is very clear that Mr. Daines has committed treason, which is official misconduct and he has violated his oath of office.

As I am no longer a registered voter in the state of Montana, I cannot legally start or sign the petition for recall. If I were, I would lead the Calvary to remove the senator.

Here is the basic petition form to be followed:

RECALL PETITION

" To the Honorable ............, Secretary of State of the State of Montana (or name and office of other filing officer): We, the undersigned qualified electors of the State of Montana (or name of appropriate state-district or political subdivision) respectfully petition that an election be held as provided by law on the question of whether ..............., holding the office of ..............., should be recalled for the following reasons: (Setting out a general statement of the reasons for recall in not more than 200 words). Each signer certifies: I have personally signed this petition; I am a qualified elector of the state of Montana and (name of appropriate political subdivision); and my residence and post-office address are correctly written after my name to the best of my knowledge and belief. 
(2) Numbered lines must follow the language in subsection (1). Each numbered line must contain spaces for the signature, post-office address, and printed last name of the signer. Each separate sheet of the petition must contain the heading and reasons for the proposed recall as prescribed in subsection (1). "

Montanans need to send a clear message to Mr. Daines that we are disgusted and outraged by his treasonist, unpatriotic, anti-American behavior against the country and the President of the United States. This man needs to be held accountable for his dis-daine-ful and despicable action. Let's show the rest of the country that Montana won't tolerate such utter fukcing bullsiht from our elected officials.

Who's in... ???

[Edited by Richard Bonine, Jr. (3/10/2015 10:11:33 PM)]
Top
+3
-3
Posted by Oddjob (+194) 6 years ago
What a laugh.

All this hand-wringing, political theater and much ado about nothing over one of the most obscure statutes in the U.S body of law. The "Logan Act", with a track record of maybe one prosecution and zero convictions in the last 216 years. This is nothing more than air cover for all the serious illegal crap going on in D.C.

Obama shreds the Constitution on a weekly basis with his pen and his phone and not a peep. The ex_Secretary of State operates her own private communication service for her whole tenure in office and never sends a email containing classified information. Not a peep.

At the very least, she should be tried for fraud, for taking the taxpayers money and doing nothing but wasting air.

These "protests" and accusations of "treason" are a joke and a bad one at that.

Yeah, Richard. The people of Montana should spend a lot of time and effort on a recall petition against Daines for possibly violating an unenforceable statute. Never mind how much luck some of the most powerful Unions and Democrat PACs on the planet had against Walker. At least they had a reason to be mad.
Top
+4
-4
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+9193) 6 years ago
oddjob jumps in to defend the indefensible. Whether or not it's treason or mere insurrection, the larger picture is that you can't have a political party attempting to negotiate foreign policy to undercut the executive branch. Once that becomes the norm, we might as well start calling ourselves Western Somalia.

Christ almighty, you 'conservatives' are a bunch of wasted orgasms. Party first. Procreate the country, unless we get our way.
Top
+4
-3
Posted by Oddjob (+194) 6 years ago
Yes, Bridgier. I have my own thoughts on wasted orgasms.

And being the open-minded, fair and balanced individual that you are, I'm sure you felt the same way when Pelosi was interfering in Foreign Policy with Bashar Assad in Syria and McGovern was boot-licking the Castro brothers.
Top
+2
-2
Posted by gypsykim (+1556) 6 years ago
Richard Bonine, I'll sign the petition.

The forty seven are all traitors and should be tried for treason.
Top
+3
-3
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17321) 6 years ago
I agree. What if Nancy Pelosi sent a similar message to Saddam Hussein in 2002? WTF Oddjob?
Top
+2
-2
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+14950) 6 years ago
I alway thought the idea of making comparisons was to use similar items or issues. Treason is a whole hell-of-a-lot  more serious than whether Mrs. Clinton used a dot gov email address or Compuserve.

Quit comparing oranges to "horseapples" for crying out loud. At least make sure your comparison is in the "fruit" category.

+ One bazillion to Bridgier for his thoughts about wasted orgasims. Dead on.
Top
+3
-2
founder
supporter
Posted by Tom Masa (+2042) 6 years ago
Toss Oddjob in with the "47"
Top
+3
-3
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+14950) 6 years ago
This is a start:

https://petitions.whiteho...t/NKQnpJS9

I still believe that Daines needs to face a recall.
Top
+2
-2
Posted by Elizabeth Emilsson (+797) 6 years ago
Sen. Daines and Sen. Cory Gardner from Colorado should be recalled as Jr. Senators. We need to get them out before they get too entrenched like Lindsay Graham and John McCain.
Thanks for form for recall, Richard.
Top
+3
-2
Posted by redmondroughneck (+73) 6 years ago
I guess the congress decided to use their phone and pen, just like the President.
Top
+3
-3
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17321) 6 years ago
I am often asked why I remain a member of the Republican Party. My stock answer has become that it's the party of Lincoln and Eisenhower and I would like very much to return it to similar hands and am working, however infinitesimally well, to do so. Leaving the party would accomplish nothing in that regard. I also contend that there are still sane and sober people -- in the minority to be sure -- remaining in my party.

Over the past few days, I have been publicly corroborated by seven such people: Susan Collins of Maine, Jeff Flake of Arizona, Lamar Alexander and Robert Corker of Tennessee, Thad Cochran of Mississippi, Dan Coats of Indiana, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. These seven senators refused to join the other 47 Republican members of the Senate who made fools of themselves by seeking blatantly to undermine the president's and the P5+1's (China, Russia, Britain, and France, plus Germany) diplomacy to stop Iran's acquiring a nuclear weapon.


- Lawrence B. Wilkerson
Colonel, U.S. Army (Retired)

http://www.huffingtonpost...48470.html
Top
+5
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17321) 6 years ago
Top
+4
-2
Posted by Kacey (+3159) 6 years ago
I believe Joni Erst, being a current member of the military qualifies for a court martial.

If anyone cares to read more about psycho Cotton here are a few links.

Be warned...it may scare you. The man is severely unbalanced.

http://www.dailykos.com/s...acebook_sf

http://www.dailykos.com/s...acebook_sf

http://www.theatlantic.co...ar/380307/

http://www.liberalamerica...om-cotton/
Top
+2
-1
Posted by Wil Nelson (+81) 6 years ago
Article 2, Section 2 of the US Constitution states in part "He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur".....

What the 47 said is essentially true............
Top
+2
-3
admin
moderator
founder
Posted by MilesCity.com Webmaster (+10001) 6 years ago
Wikipedia wrote:
...

Throughout U.S. history, the President has also made international "agreements" through congressional-executive agreements (CEAs) that are ratified with only a majority from both houses of Congress, or sole-executive agreements made by the President alone. Though the Constitution does not expressly provide for any alternative to the Article II treaty procedure, Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution does distinguish between treaties (which states are forbidden to make) and agreements (which states may make with the consent of Congress). The Supreme Court of the United States has considered congressional-executive and sole-executive agreements to be valid, and they have been common throughout American history.

...

Presidents have regarded the Article II treaty process as necessary where an international accord would bind a future president. For example, Theodore Roosevelt explained:

The Constitution did not explicitly give me power to bring about the necessary agreement with Santo Domingo. But the Constitution did not forbid my doing what I did.

...

A sole-executive agreement can only be negotiated and entered into through the president's authority (1) in foreign policy, (2) as commander-in-chief of the armed forces, (3) from a prior act of Congress, or (4) from a prior treaty.

...

http://en.wikipedia.org/w...aty_Clause

Furthermore...

Wikipedia wrote:
...

In United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 299 U.S. 304 (1936), Justice Sutherland, writing for the Court, observed,

[T]he President alone has the power to speak or listen as a representative of the nation. He makes treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate; but he alone negotiates. Into the field of negotiation the Senate cannot intrude; and Congress itself is powerless to invade it. As Marshall said in his great argument of March 7, 1800, in the House of Representatives, 'The President is the sole organ of the nation in its external relations, and its sole representative with foreign nations.'

...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act
Top
+4
-1
Posted by Oddjob (+194) 6 years ago
So, I take it from all the feigned outrage here that you are all perfectly content with the crazy Mullahs in Tehran having the Bomb?

I must say, I'm a bit taken aback.

None of you seemed like the "pro-nuke" type to me.
Top
+3
-4
supporter
sponsor
Posted by Hannah Nash (+2495) 6 years ago
Because the President and other First World allies joining together to form policy and negotiations with Iran (to prevent violence and bombs) is just silly...

Let's go to war instead.
Let's send "propaganda" letters instead.
Let's attempt to undermine and/or sabotage International Peace Talks & Agreements, because we have zero respect for any of that garbage.

Screw negotiations, peace talks, International Agreements, diplomacy, etc. 'Merica don't need none of that Diplomacy when we've got some warmongering to do.
Top
+5
-1
Posted by redmondroughneck (+73) 6 years ago
I am just glad to see that at least we have 47 people in government with some guts.
Top
+1
-5
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17321) 6 years ago
Redmond Roughneck, you are an idiot.
Top
+6
-1
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+14950) 6 years ago
So, I take it from all the feigned outrage here that you are all perfectly content with the crazy Mullahs in Tehran having the Bomb?

I must say, I'm a bit taken aback. 

None of you seemed like the "pro-nuke" type to me.


1. My outrage is REAL, not feigned in any manner

2. I am not content with anyone have "the bomb"

3. We don't win anything by killing the children on the other side of the conflict

4. They don't win anything by killing our children on this side of the conflict

5. Please name the last country Iran attacked or invaded. They haven't attacked anybody in like 300 years. How many countries have we attacked in the last 30. At some point we ought to consider that we are the problem and reason why their isn't peace.

6. Yes, the President's approach is different where we actually sit down and talk to the other side. Let's give it a chance before we go banging the war drum.
Top
+5
-1
Posted by Donald Mullikin (+140) 6 years ago
MilesCity.com Webmaster wrote:

Wikipedia wrote:
...

In United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 299 U.S. 304 (1936), Justice Sutherland, writing for the Court, observed,

[T]he President alone has the power to speak or listen as a representative of the nation. He makes treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate; but he alone negotiates. Into the field of negotiation the Senate cannot intrude; and Congress itself is powerless to invade it. As Marshall said in his great argument of March 7, 1800, in the House of Representatives, 'The President is the sole organ of the nation in its external relations, and its sole representative with foreign nations.'

...

 



However, the Constitution doesn't grant the President the authority to negotiate without the advice and consent of the Senate and therefore the SCOTUS through any case brief or finding cannot give him that authority either. Why did members of the Senate feel they had to do what they did?  I am certain what these members of the Senate did had no traitorous intent or action in any context of the word.

Think about it, it was mentioned that the Senate did not address their Letter to any specific officiate within Iran, so they have not attempted to negotiate anything with anyone.

As the US Constitution requires the approval of no less than 2/3rds of the Senate, these 47 Senators have made it very clear that Mr Obama will not be able to garner that 66% out of the remaining 53 members of the Senate. 

Additionally, knowing how often Mr Obama has circumvented the Constitution over the past six years to achieve his own purposes, how can anyone claim that the Senate wasn't simply attempting to prevent him from doing what he himself has repeatedly done in the past?

<http://www.usconstitution...2Sec2.html>

[Edited by Donald Mullikin (3/17/2015 8:08:12 PM)]
Top
+2
-5
Posted by Donald Mullikin (+140) 6 years ago
Hannah Nash wrote:
...
Screw negotiations, peace talks, International Agreements, diplomacy, etc. 'Merica don't need none of that Diplomacy when we've got some warmongering to do.
 


No, but likewise, any negotiations, peace talks, etc. should be above board and within the construction of the US Constitution.

Not hastily entered into by a person who has yet to show a sliver of proper courtesy to the Country for which he is supposedly the leader. That is why I feel those members of the Senate did what they did, to prevent another travesty and violation of our US Constitution.

Don't understand my comment of he hasn't shown a sliver of respect or courtesy to Our Nation?

I have yet to see Mr Obama salute a Medal Of Honor recipient rather than disrespectfully hugging them as it they are all homosexuals.

I have yet to see Mr Obama give proper respect to the Flag of Our nation.

I have seen Mr Obama attempt to circumvent the US Constitution or outright attempt to violate it by Executive Order. Yet he claims (claims that cannot be confirmed via any enrollment documentation) that he is a Constitutional Scholar.

If anyone deserves the title of traitor, it is my personal opinion that Mr Obama should be so named.
Top
+3
-7
Posted by Donald Mullikin (+140) 6 years ago
Richard Bonine, Jr. wrote:

...
5. Please name the last country Iran attacked or invaded. They haven't attacked anybody in like 300 years. How many countries have we attacked in the last 30. At some point we ought to consider that we are the problem and reason why their isn't peace.



How soon people forget how Iran attacked the Republic of Kurdistan in 1946 at the end of WW 2.
Top
+2
-5
supporter
sponsor
Posted by Hannah Nash (+2495) 6 years ago
"I'll take Faux News Birther talking points for $100, Alex."
Top
+4
-3
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+14950) 6 years ago
I'm not a math whiz but that was 69 years ago and I said in the last 30. The point was looking at our own issues with invasion. By comparison Iran is a bunch of Boy Scouts.
Top
+2
-1
Posted by Donald Mullikin (+140) 6 years ago
Richard Bonine, Jr. wrote:
I'm not a math whiz but that was 69 years ago and I said in the last 30. The point was looking at our own issues with invasion. By comparison Iran is a bunch of Boy Scouts.

Let's look at what you did say.
Richard Bonine, Jr....
5. Please name the last country Iran attacked or invaded. They haven't attacked anybody in like 300 years.
Top
+3
-1
Posted by Donald Mullikin (+140) 6 years ago
Richard Bonine, Jr. wrote:

...
5. ...
How many countries have we attacked in the last 30. At some point we ought to consider that we are the problem and reason why their isn't peace.
 



Of those that as you say We attacked, how many harbored terrorists that attacked us first?

Oh I do love how people try to rewrite history while those who know the history are still living.
Top
+4
-3
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+14950) 6 years ago
Chew on this...

http://www.countercurrent...MlRZYkjrTQ

The following is a list of countries invaded by the US forces  (naval, military and ultimately air forces) since its inception in order of major incidents. This catalogue derives heavily form the work of US academic Dr Zoltan Grossman's article “From Wounded Knee to Libya : a century of U.S. military interventions”   [1], Gideon Polya's book ‘Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950” (that includes a brief history of all countries since Neolithic times) [2] and William Blum's book “ Rogue State ” [3]. This list includes instances of violent deployment of US forces within America (e.g. against demonstrators, miners etc), and includes small-scale bombing and military intervention operations, military evacuations of Americans and specific instances of explicit threats of use of nuclear weapons. The list does not include the 1801-1805 US Marine Barbary War operations against Barbary pirates based in Morocco , Algeria , Tunisia and Libya , and also ignores massive US subversion of virtually all countries in the world. 

(1) American Indian nations (1776 onwards, American Indian Genocide; 1803, Louisiana Purchase; 1844, Indians banned from east of the Mississippi; 1861 onwards, California genocide; 1890, Lakota Indians massacre), (2) Mexico (1836-1846; 1913; 1914-1918; 1923), (3) Nicaragua (1856-1857; 1894; 1896; 1898; 1899; 1907; 1910; 1912-1933; 1981-1990), (4) American forces deployed against Americans (1861-1865, Civil War; 1892; 1894; 1898; 1899-1901; 1901; 1914; 1915; 1920-1921; 1932; 1943; 1967; 1968; 1970; 1973; 1992; 2001), (5), Argentina (1890), (6), Chile (1891; 1973), (7) Haiti (1891; 1914-1934; 1994; 2004-2005), (8) Hawaii (1893-), (9) China (1895-1895; 1898-1900; 1911-1941; 1922-1927; 1927-1934; 1948-1949; 1951-1953; 1958), (10) Korea (1894-1896; 1904-1905; 1951-1953), (11) Panama (1895; 1901-1914; 1908; 1912; 1918-1920; 1925; 1958; 1964; 1989-), (12) Philippines (1898-1910; 1948-1954; 1989; 2002-), (13) Cuba (1898-1902; 1906-1909; 1912; 1917-1933; 1961; 1962), (14) Puerto Rico (1898-; 1950; ); (15) Guam (1898-), (16) Samoa (1899-), (17) Honduras (1903; 1907; 1911; 1912; 1919; 1924-1925; 1983-1989), (18) Dominican Republic (1903-1904; 1914; 1916-1924; 1965-1966),  (19) Germany (1917-1918; 1941-1945; 1948; 1961), (20) Russia (1918-1922), (21) Yugoslavia (1919; 1946; 1992-1994; 1999), (22) Guatemala (1920; 1954; 1966-1967), (23) Turkey (1922), (24) El Salvador (1932; 1981-1992),  (25) Italy (1941-1945); (26) Morocco (1941-1945), (27) France (1941-1945), (28) Algeria (1941-1945), (29) Tunisia (1941-1945), (30) Libya (1941-1945; 1981; 1986;  1989; 2011), (31) Egypt (1941-1945; 1956; 1967; 1973; 2013), (32) India (1941-1945),  (33) Burma (1941-1945), (34) Micronesia (1941-1945), (35) Papua New Guinea (1941-1945), (36) Vanuatu (1941-1945), (37) Austria (1941-1945), (38) Hungary (1941-1945), (39) Japan (1941-1945), (40) Iran (1946; 1953; 1980; 1984; 1987-1988; ), (41) Uruguay (1947), (42) Greece (1947-1949), (43) Vietnam (1954; 1960-1975), (44) Lebanon (1958; 1982-1984), (45) Iraq (1958; 1963; 1990-1991; 1990-2003; 1998; 2003-2011),  (46) Laos (1962-), (47) Indonesia (1965), (48) Cambodia (1969-1975; 1975), (49) Oman (1970), (50) Laos (1971-1973),  (51) Angola (1976-1992), (52) Grenada (1983-1984), (53) Bolivia (1986; ), (54) Virgin Islands (1989), (55) Liberia (1990; 1997; 2003), (56) Saudi Arabia (1990-1991), (57) Kuwait (1991), (58) Somalia (1992-1994; 2006), (59) Bosnia (1993-), (60) Zaire (Congo) (1996-1997), (61) Albania (1997), (62) Sudan (1998), (63) Afghanistan (1998;  2001-), (64) Yemen (2000; 2002-), (65) Macedonia (2001),  (66) Colombia (2002-), (67)  Pakistan (2005-), (68) Syria (2008; 2011-), (69) Uganda (2011), (70) Mali (2013), (71) Niger (2013). 

The human cost of these US interventions has been horrendous. A major component of war- or hegemony-related deaths is represented by avoidable deaths from violently-imposed deprivation. Since 1950 the UN has provided detailed demographic data that have permitted calculation of such avoidable deaths, year by year, for every country in the world. 1950-2005 avoidable deaths total 1.3 billion for the whole world, 1.2 billion for the non-European world and 0.6 billion for the Muslim world [2], the latter carnage being 100 times greater than the WW2 Jewish Holocaust (5-6 million Jews killed, 1 in 6 dying from deprivation) [4, 5} or the “forgotten” WW2 Bengali Holocaust in which the British with Australian complicity deliberately starved 6-7 million Indians to death for strategic reasons [6].  Currently 18 million people die avoidably each year in the Developing World on Spaceship Earth with the US in charge of the flight deck. 

Here is a summary of post-1950 avoidable mortality/ 2005 population (both in millions, m) and expressed as a percentage (%) for each country occupied by the US in the post-1945 era. The asterisk (*) indicates a major occupation by more than one country in the post-WW2 era (thus, for example,  the UK and the US have been major occupiers of Afghanistan , Iraq and Korea , leaving aside the many other minor participants in these conflicts). Data is also given for the US: US [8.455m/300.038m = 2.8%],  Afghanistan* [16.609m/25.971m = 64.0%], Cambodia* [5.852m/14.825m = 39.5%], Dominican Republic [0.806m/8.998m = 9.0%], Federated States of Micronesia [0.016m/0.111m = 14.4%], Greece* [0.027m/10.978m = 0.2%], Grenada* [0.018m/0.121m = 14.9%], Guam [0.005m/0.168m = 3.0%], Haiti* [4.089m/8.549m = 47.9%], Iraq* [5.283m/26.555m = 19.9%], Korea* [7.958m/71.058m = 11.2%], Laos* [2.653m/5.918m = 44.8%], Panama [0.172m/3.235m = 5.3%], Philippines [9.080m/82.809m = 11.0%], Puerto Rico [0.039m/3.915m = 1.0%], Somalia* [5.568m/10.742m = 51.8%], US Virgin Islands [0.003m/0.113m = 2.4%], Vietnam* [24.015m/83.585m = 28.7%], total = 82.193m/357.651m = 23.0%. 

Thus in the period 1950-2005 there have been 82 million avoidable deaths from deprivation (avoidable mortality, excess deaths, excess mortality , deaths that did not have to happen) associated with countries  occupied by the US in the post-1945 era. However the US has subcontracted a huge amount of violence to nuclear terrorist, democracy-by-genocide, racist Zionist-run Apartheid Israel for which the related data is as follows: Apartheid Israel [0.095m/6.685m =1.4%] - Egypt* [19.818m/74.878m = 26.5%], Jordan* [0.630m/5.750m = 11.0%], Lebanon [0.535m/3.761m = 14.2%], Occupied Palestinian Territories* [0.677m/3.815m = 17.7%], Syria* [2.198m/18.650m = 11.8%], total = 23.858m/106.854 = 22.3% i.e. Apartheid Israeli aggression has been associated in 1950-2005 with 24 million avoidable deaths in the countries  it has violently  occupied, a carnage similar to that caused by the German Nazis in Russia duringWW2. 

Except for the Global Avoidable Mortality Holocaust of over 1.3 billion avoidable deaths since 1950 and 18 million avoidable deaths per year, the above analysis does not take into account US subversion of virtually every country on earth. One visible expression of this subversion is the presence of US forces in hundreds of bases around the world. Thus the Saudi Arabia-occupied Bahrain dictatorship is not listed above but is a major base for the US Navy.      

According to Canadian geographer Professor Jules Dufour : “The US has established its control over 191 governments which are members of the United Nations. The conquest, occupation and/or otherwise supervision of these various regions of the World is supported by an integrated network of military bases and installations which covers the entire Planet (Continents, Oceans and Outer Space). All this pertains to the workings of  an extensive Empire, the exact dimensions of which are not always easy to ascertain. The main sources of information on these military installations (e.g. C. Johnson, the NATO Watch Committee, the International Network for the Abolition of Foreign Military Bases) reveal that the US operates and/or controls between 700 and 800 military bases Worldwide…In this regard, Hugh d'Andrade and Bob Wing's 2002 Map 1 entitled “ U.S. Military Troops and Bases around the World, The Cost of ‘Permanent War' ”, confirms the presence of US military personnel in 156 countries. The US Military has bases in 63 countries. Brand new military bases have been built since September 11, 2001 in seven countries. In total, there are 255,065 US military personnel deployed Worldwide. These facilities include a total of 845,441 different buildings and equipments. The underlying land surface is of the order of 30 million acres. According to Gelman, who examined 2005 official Pentagon data, the US is thought to own a total of 737 bases in foreign lands. Adding to the bases inside U.S. territory, the total land area occupied by US military bases domestically within the US and internationally is of the order of 2,202,735 hectares, which makes the Pentagon one of the largest landowners worldwide (Gelman, J., 2007).” [7].


References. 

[1]. Dr Zoltan Grossman, “From Wounded Knee to Libya : a century of U.S. military interventions”,  ” http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html . 

[2]. Gideon Polya, “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950”, now available for free perusal on the web: http://globalbodycount.blogspot.com.au/2012/01/body-count-global-avoidable-mortality_05.html .   

[3]. William Blum, “ Rogue State ”. 

[4]. Martin Gilbert, “Jewish History Atlas”. 

[5]. Martin Gilbert, “Atlas of the Holocaust”. 

[6]. Gideon Polya, “Jane Austen and the Black Hole of British History. Colonial rapacity, holocaust denial and the crisis in biological sustainability”, now available for free perusal on the web: http://janeaustenand.blogspot.com.au/  . 

[7]. Jules Dufour, “The world-wide network of US military bases”, Global Research: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-worldwide-network-of-us-military-bases/5564 .

[8]. “Afghan Holocaust Afghan Genocide”: https://sites.google.com/site/afghanholocaustafghangenocide/ .

[9]. Gideon Polya, “100 reasons why Australians must reject Gillard Labor”, Countercurrents, 24 June, 2013 : http://www.countercurrents.org/polya240613.htm .

[10]. Gideon Polya, “One million Americans die preventably annually in USA ”,  Countercurrents, 18 February 2012: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya180212.htm .
Top
+3
-1
moderator
founder
Posted by David Schott (+17052) 6 years ago
Donald Mullikin wrote:
"I have yet to see Mr Obama salute a Medal Of Honor recipient rather than disrespectfully hugging them as it [sic] they are all homosexuals."

That's one of the funnier things that's been written on these forums in a long time. Donald a homophobe? Shocking.

Top
+6
Posted by Wil Nelson (+81) 6 years ago
NY State Democrats are now indicating that congress has a roll if congressional imposed sanctions are to be lifted as a result of ongoing talks with Iran.
Top
+1
Posted by Donald Mullikin (+140) 6 years ago
Richard Bonine, Jr. wrote:

And here you were trying to tell me earlier that you were only limiting to 30 years.
You can't keep to even one statement can you? 
Then I would suggest that the US Government attacks on its own citizens is not an attack on Other Nations. (Not talking The American Indian Nations)
When it comes to that, I fully agree that in Our last 300 years, The Government of the United States has not played fair.
Problem is that far too many sheeple accept what the Government does without question. Then there are those who could care less about accurate history and attempt to revise that history to fit their points of view without concern for what is truth really is.


Let me know when you are ready to promote a truthful exchange without attempting to constantly change what you feel that is.
Top
+2
-3
Posted by Donald Mullikin (+140) 6 years ago
David Schott wrote:

Donald Mullikin wrote:
"I have yet to see Mr Obama salute a Medal Of Honor recipient rather than disrespectfully hugging them as it [sic] they are all homosexuals."

That's one of the funnier things that's been written on these forums in a long time. Donald a homophobe? Shocking.



That is supposed to be a Medal Of Honor recipient?

Please do not mix two differing subjects like Tree apples with road apples.
Show me where either of the Bush's hugged a Medal Of Honor recipient rather than saluting them!
I have traveled other countries enough to know that honoring customs and courtesies of foreign nations goes a long way toward making friends with those countries. Please don't try to make something of it that it isn't.

[Edited by Donald Mullikin (3/22/2015 6:47:45 PM)]
Top
+3
-2
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+14950) 6 years ago
Yes Donald, I did some further research and learn that my inital assement was underestimated. The US has a far worse record than I thought they did. 

The focus of my comments has been on trend and tendancy. The US is far more likely to invade and occupy other soveregienties than is Iran. The history I have shared clearly demonstrates that point.

I know you like to play "gotcha"... perhaps another time.
Top
+3
-2
moderator
founder
Posted by David Schott (+17052) 6 years ago
Donald, you're the one...

Donald Mullikin wrote:
"...hugging them as it [sic] they are all homosexuals."

As if men hugging equates to homosexuality. Quit playing the victim.
Top
+4
-2
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+9193) 6 years ago
At least you can't see if they're wearing yoga pants in that picture. Those are Donald's kryptonite, apparently.
Top
+3
-3
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17321) 6 years ago
Top
+3
Posted by Donald Mullikin (+140) 6 years ago
David Schott wrote:
Donald, you're the one...

Donald Mullikin wrote:
"...hugging them as it [sic] they are all homosexuals."

As if men hugging equates to homosexuality. Quit playing the victim.


I'm not playing victim, I am simply stating how I see the person who is supposed to be the Commander In Cheif is acting.

I also see Mr Obama as a predator victimizing those he should be honoring by dishonoring them with his disrespectfull acts. He and his serial groper of a VP are well suited for each other.

If people did that around here without express prior permission they would more often than not be jailed as sexual predators.

If you are condoning what they are doing because you do not see the wrong in it then maybe you should go join them and live out your life in complete disparagement of others without fear of being prosecuted.
Top
+1
-3
Posted by Donald Mullikin (+140) 6 years ago
Gunnar Emilsson wrote:


Funny statements with the sole exception that such a firearm is not being made.  If it weren't for that it would unfortunately seem very accurate.

What a shame that Ruger isn't making such a handgun. If they did, then maybe We could push for legislation that any person suggesting gun control have their firearms and the firearms of their body guards all confiscated and then replaced with these.
Top
+1
-2
Posted by Donald Mullikin (+140) 6 years ago
Richard Bonine, Jr. wrote:
Yes Donald, I did some further research and learn that my inital assement was underestimated. The US has a far worse record than I thought they did. 

The focus of my comments has been on trend and tendancy. The US is far more likely to invade and occupy other soveregienties than is Iran. The history I have shared clearly demonstrates that point.

I know you like to play "gotcha"... perhaps another time.


Of course you're right.
I see you as sitting there proclaiming that our Government has strayed so far from its Constitutional authority that the people should rise up and the take action against our present Government  to completely dissolve it replacing it with a less war-mongering society.
 
Proof of the need for this is seen when we view the past Congressional actions that put us:
* Smack dab in the middle of World War 2 that we were doing so well in staying the hell out of.
* Or the 1986 bombing of Libya
in retaliation to the  Berlin discotheque bombing by Libya.
 
NOT!
If you thought I was being anything but facetious, you are mistaken. I was simply pointing out how childish it was sounding.
Top
+1
-4
moderator
founder
Posted by David Schott (+17052) 6 years ago
Top
+1
-1
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+14950) 6 years ago
Here is a map of countries that John McCain wants to attack or invade. 

It's more than Iran has attacked or invaded. 
Top
+3
-1
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17321) 6 years ago
Did someone say humourless bastard?
Top
+3
-2
Posted by Donald Mullikin (+140) 6 years ago
Richard Bonine, Jr. wrote:
Here is a map of countries that John McCain wants to attack or invade. 


 


So now John McCain is the US Government? 

Wow, just Wow!
Top
+2
-2