Author Topic: [NEWS] CIA concludes with "high confidence" that Russia aided Annoying Orange in election  (Read 11934 times)

Globalism is the idea that the sphere of US responsibility and political influence should extend beyond our borders, both physical and metaphorical.
Erm... what? That's US Imperialism.

edit: Sorry, thought you said Globalization. You're right.

I think we're on the same page in the regards that the United States should respect the sovereignty of other nations and stop sticking its nose and money where it doesn't belong. The gunboat diplomacy and saber rattling of recent years doesn't sit well with me.


I don't see how that's relevant to the topic. If you don't support the US sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong, how could you support Russia doing the same on such a gargantuan scale?

The short answer is that I don't support Russian influence, but I do support any and all leaks exposing government corruption. It's morally grey in this case.

"Would you support this outcome if they helped Hilary Clinton win the election"

"Well obviously no but that didn't happen-"

"WELL ISN'T THAT BAD?"

"Well yeah but that's not what happ-

"SO WHAT IF THEY HELPED HILARY WIN?"

"plz stop"

To pull from Alexander Dugin's 'Foundations of Geopolitics' (written in 1997)

Quote
The book declares that "the battle for the world rule of [ethnic] Russians" has not ended and Russia remains "the staging area of a new anti-bourgeois, anti-American revolution." The Eurasian Empire will be constructed "on the fundamental principle of the common enemy: the rejection of Atlanticism, strategic control of the USA, and the refusal to allow liberal values to dominate us."

Military operations play relatively little role. The textbook believes in a sophisticated program of subversion, destabilization, and disinformation spearheaded by the Russian special services. The operations should be assisted by a tough, hard-headed utilization of Russia's gas, oil, and natural resources to bully and pressure other countries.

The book states that "the maximum task [of the future] is the 'Finlandization' of all of Europe".

...

The book emphasizes that Russia must spread Anti-Americanism everywhere: "the main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S."

In the United States: Russia should use its special forces within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism. For instance, provoke "Afro-American tribals". Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, tribal, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics."

Considering how much everyone hated Annoying Orange if there was dirt like with Clinton it would have been exposed a long time ago

its hilarious that people supporting this decision suddenly act like the fact that russia helped decide the outcome of the US election is totally ok.
but they didn't, even if it was the Russians who gave info to WikiLeaks (which they didn't), all they did was put information out there for the populous to decide what to do with it, it persuaded some people to vote Annoying Orange, and persuaded others to vote Hilary, much like the candidates own campaigns do the same.

if the russians had done this to Annoying Orange and helped clinton win, Annoying Orange supporters would be in an uproar about corrupt killary working with the enemy govt, not caring about the common man ect ect.
but they didn't so that doesn't matter lol, they don't have any reason to anyways, Hilary is far more corrupt than Annoying Orange so of course they would do this to Hilary.

cases like this aren't harmless whistleblowing, this is a foreign country pushing its own political agenda against the country (which plenty of Annoying Orange supporters ALSO seem to be against).
where the political agenda at

anyone?

because I sure as hell haven't seen a single lick of their "political agenda" flaunted on MSM or any news source for that matter.

my beef is with idiots praising russia for this like its just them "exposing corrupt govt".
How is them wanting to expose a corrupt government bad? Look at the sentence itself, "exposing a corrupt government", exposing said government is doing everyone a favor.

but Russia pushing their political agenda through leaking and hacking DNC and RNC servers is "whistleblowing". Those are big double standards.
but they didn't, there's no evidence they did, why are people saying this, oh yeah because that's the narrative the MSM is pushing atm to have a scapegoat.

I don't care about politics when it comes to this, this is a serious bipartisan concern. If Russia had done the same thing with Clinton's candidacy, I wouldn't be out there defending her. You can see the corruption from Annoying Orange's people; people from the RNC like Reince Priebus and Sean Spicer are already out there on the networks trying to deflect, and Annoying Orange's pick for Secretary of State is an ExxonMobil CEO with close ties to the Russian government. It's pretty clear who's in who's pocket, and regardless of whether you're a Democrat or Republican, you should be concerned about foreign governments meddling with elections.
no one was concerned about us destroying the middle east

no one was concerned about us installing military outposts in almost every single country in the world

no one was concerned about the superpower of America going to war with multiple countries over the past 100 years for resources and financial gain.

to all of a sudden say "we should be concerned about foreign governments meddling with elections" is really funny because that's all our country has been doing these past 100 years.


"the main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S."
oh funny that comes up, it's not like the United States is doing the exact same thing to Russia to combat the truth WikiLeaks have been putting out so it seems like it's a political agenda being pushed by a foreign nation rather than our insanely forgeted up and corrupt government being exposed.

who's ready for indefinite terms for overlord Annoying Orange

ah yes, the CIA

the bastion of freedom and democracy

the CIA takes shreds of evidence, picks the ones that fit the narrative convenient to the layers of bureaucracy between the brown townysts and the President, and collects a paycheck.

on the other hand, the FBI looks for the proof. note that the FBI actually refused to back up the CIA on this bs. the CIA is saying what they think their masters want to hear, but the FBI is holding out on this for the evidence

and the CIA were wrong not long ago, remember? you know, when all those american troops died due to the CIA saying weapons of mass destruction were in iraq and we needed to invade ASAP?
you're really funny lol

People who limit this to Hillary Clinton or her campaign are missing the point of why people are upset. Anybody who goes "yeah but we needed to expose Hillary" is putting party ideals over country.


People who limit this to Hillary Clinton or her campaign are missing the point of why people are upset. Anybody who goes "yeah but we needed to expose Hillary" is putting party ideals over country.
I don't know who said it, I think it was cappy, but this is a sort of grey area. It's great to expose corruption but if (and I don't believe they did because the only evidence we have is finger pointing) Russia did do it it's not right for them to meddle with another country's affairs.

The moment you try to justify illegal activity for any reason is the moment you give the middle finger to Justice.

The moment you try to justify illegal activity for any reason is the moment you give the middle finger to Justice.
if your basis of morality is the law, you're going to have a bad time. Slavery was legal at one point, but it didn't make it any less despicable. Conversely, marijuana is illegal but doesn't really hurt anybody. The laws aren't really great from the perspective of ethics.

For forgets sake, assassinating the president wasn't even a crime until after Lincoln's killing.

Morality and the law are two different things and should be treated as such.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2016, 05:18:18 PM by Cappytaino »