The Clinton's are masters at projecting. They accuse others of what they have done. This is and has been their tactic for over 30 plus years. Will they continue to be allowed to do it and will the public continue to be sucked in by it them? Stay tuned.
I still maintain Trump is going to come out on top because Hillary is yesterday.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
We have a stealth real estate daughter, Abby Nelson - Dagny and Blake's mother. By that I mean she does things and we are the last to know.
Lo and behold she is one of the featured speakers at a Real Estate Conference taking place in Nashville. Go girl!
Perhaps next time you will let us know in advance.
===
Dante Stephensen is a friend of mine of long standing. I helped him when he first got started in "Underground Atlanta" with a jazz club called "Down The Hatch."
He invited me to be an investor and financially I should have but I was then a general partner in a NYSE Firm, headquartered in Atlanta, and feared if something happened I would get bad publicity but I did help Dante establish a profit sharing plan for his employees.
Over the years, Dante moved "Down The Hatch" to Buckhead where it remained for several decades until real estate taxes forced him to shut down so a high rise condo could be built on the site. "Down The Hatch" was modeled after an old sailing ship and had some of the best Atlanta jazz players. They served wonderful drinks and great fondues.
Our son now hopes to open a similar jazz club in one of his rehabilitated sites in Beechview. (See 1 below.)
===
Good ideas that become bad ones because they are impossible to implement should be forgotten and not continued to be pursued. (See 2 below.)
===
Obama believes the best way to avoid confrontation is cower.
He will soon be gone but the impact of his cowardly policies will linger and eventually lead to war on some other president's watch who chose to reverse the course of Obama's feckless policies.
Ironically, should Trump become president it could happen on his watch not because of bellicosity but simply because he will not tolerate what Obama would and did. (See 3 below.)
===
Successful president picker chooses. (See 4 below.)
===
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1)
| |||
|
2)
Obama’s “Palestinian Land”
On September 20, 2016, US President Barack Obama spoke at the United Nations General Assembly in New York City. His passing comment on Palestinian Arab-Israel conflict underscored why peace did not advance, and his relationship with Israel worsened over his term.
US President Barack Obama addressing the United Nations
September 20, 2016
Obama’s UN remarks covered a lot of activities during his eight years in office, including the Iranian nuclear deal; opening relations with Cuba; and tackling climate change. He spoke about the Arab-Israeli conflict very briefly, but the remark was telling:
“…surely, Israelis and Palestinians will be better off if Palestinians reject incitement and recognize the legitimacy of Israel, but Israel recognizes that it cannot permanently occupy and settlePalestinian land. We all have to do better as leaders in tamping down, rather than encouraging, a notion of identity that leads us to diminish others.”
“Palestinian land.” What exactly is Palestinian land, according to the parties themselves? According to the United States? According to Obama?
Oslo Agreements
Since 1993, successive US governments have stood behind the Oslo Accords signed by both the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Israel, and its successor document, Oslo II signed in 1995. That document was the last agreement signed by the two parties to settle the “Question of Palestine.”
Oslo II clearly spelled out what was “Palestinian land” to be fully governed by the Palestinian Authority in regards to military and civil administration. That area is known as “Area A” in EGL (east of the Green Line) and the Gaza Strip. Israel handed over all of that land to the Palestinians over a decade ago.
“Area B” in EGL/west bank of the Jordan River, is a mixed territory, in which the Palestinian Authority has responsibilities for civil matters, and military matters are coordinated jointly. That land is neither “Palestinian Authority” nor “Israeli” exclusively.
“Area C” makes up the majority of EGL, and is “Israeli Territory,” in which Israel administers all matters, including civil and security responsibilities.
Map showing Areas A, B and C, east of the Green Line
The Israelis and Palestinians negotiated and agreed to the contours of these three blocks. The parties also worked on a plan for additional land to be transferred from “Israeli Territory” to “Palestinian Authority Territory” over the years 1995 to 2000. However, Yasser Arafat (fungus be upon him) rejected those negotiations at the last moment, and launched the Second Intifada in September 2000, as the interim Oslo II Accord was due to become permanent. As such, no additional transfer from Israeli Territory to Palestinian Authority Territory has occurred.
As every US administration has pushed for the two parties to negotiate a two-state agreement on the basis of the Oslo Accords, there is NO BASIS for Obama to refer to Area C as “Palestinian Land.” That land will continue to be Israeli land until such time as they agree to transfer parts of it to the PA.
As there is no Israeli “occupation” or “settlement” activity in the Israeli territory of Area C, Obama’s mischaracterization of Israeli actions in that land that they legally administer explains his comments and treatment of Israel since he took office in 2009.
Mandate of Palestine
It is also worth noting that international law, established in the 1920 San Remo agreement and the 1922 Mandate of Palestine, specifically gave Jews the legal rights to live and settle throughout Judea and Samaria (the entity known as EGL/West Bank did not even exist when five Arab armies illegally attacked Israel (1948-9) and Jordan annexed the region in 1950.)
The Palestine Mandate stated:
“secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion” (Article 1) Jews were to have full civil rights throughout Palestine, such as buying and building homes.
“The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power.”(Article 5) which Britain did anyway when it separated the east bank of the Jordan River to the Hashemite Kingdom, but which wasn’t a foreign power.
“The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.” (Article 6) specifically stating that Jews were to settle throughout Palestine, including lands that Obama believes Jews “occupy”.
“The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.” (Article 7) in which Jews do not only move and settle the land, but become citizens of the country if they live ANYWHERE in the land, including Judea and Samaria.
“No discrimination of any kind shall be made between the inhabitants of Palestine on the ground of race, religion or language. No person shall be excluded from Palestine on the sole ground of his religious belief.” (Article 15) clearly states that no person should be barred from living anywhere in the land just because they are Jewish – as if human rights law wasn’t enough.
International law – and human rights law – clearly allow Jews to live throughout EGL/the West Bank. The Oslo Accords signed between the parties specifically state that Israel controls all of Area C until such time as the parties negotiate the transfer of more lands.
The notion that Jews living in houses that they have every legal and moral right to live in, is somehow connected to Obama’s belief of a “permanent occupation of Palestinian land” is false, misleading and arguably anti-Semitic on every level.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3)
The Real Syrian ‘Moment of Truth’
Secretary of State John Kerry told the UN Security Council on Wednesday that “a moment of truth” had arrived in the efforts to enforce a ceasefire in Syria. He was addressing the fact that his Russian partners, on whom he and President Obama had placed so much trust and responsibility, were actively flouting the halt to fighting. The Russians and their client, the Assad regime, clearly have no intention of halting a war that they are winning. So Kerry is left making melodramatic pronouncements that no one can take seriously.
Kerry’s figure of speech was a reminder that, in fact, this moment of truth had already come and gone long ago for the administration with respect to Syria. It happened during the secret negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program when it became apparent to Tehran there was no concession Obama wouldn’t make to secure an agreement. It can be fairly said that everything that has happened in the region, both with respect to Washington’s effort to appease Iran and the Syrian catastrophe, has flowed from that moment.
The conceit of the administration’s policy was a belief that a rapprochement with Iran would end the nuclear threat and help beat back the rise of Islamists in Iraq and Syria. But an essential part of the effort involved America making its peace with the survival of Bashar Assad’s barbarous government in Damascus, whose ouster the president had repeatedly demanded. The retreat from that position—and the punting of responsibility for enforcing Obama’s empty threat about his crossing a “red line” with the use of chemical weapons to Russia—was part of a process during which the U.S. lost all leverage over Iran. The result was not only a weak agreement that will expire in a decade but also a Syrian civil war that morphed into the greatest human rights disaster of the 21st century.
That is why Kerry is left to vainly cry for cease-fires that do no good as the Russians and the Assad forces stop or bomb humanitarian convoys heading to areas not under their control.
It’s also why the Iranians are literally parading their contempt forthe United States. Rather than “get right with the world”—as the president said when justifying his policy—they are continuing to build up their military, illegally testing ballistic missiles, and spouting slogans about reducing the Israeli cities of Tel Aviv and Haifa to dust during an annual military parade. The banner proclaiming that message was a quote from Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and was apparently meant as a riposte to the new military aid agreement between Israel and the United States that was widely interpreted as an attempt by Obama to address the way the Iran deal had endangered both the Jewish state and neighboring Arab countries.
Moreover, the supposedly moderate Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, whose election was used to justify outreach to Tehran by the administration, is apparently on the outs with Khamenei and is likely to be defeated next year.Having secured its objective by the collapse of international sanctions, the richer and more secure Islamist government no longer has the need for a moderate façade.
Nor need they or the Russians fear that the U.S. is prepared to do anything but complain impotently when Obama and Kerry’s partners flout their attempt to do something about Syria.
The president has spoken of the nuclear deal as his chief foreign policy legacy and, in a sense, that’s very true. It has made Iran even more dangerous and only postpones the moment when it will get a nuclear weapon, while also ensuring that Tehran can count on a strategic axis of allies in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. Though Obama is taking his last bow at the UN posing as a peacemaker, an essential part of Obama’s legacy will be the way his nuclear deal enabled the descent of Syria into madness and bloodshed. The path to that horror was paved by a moment of truth that passed without notice at the time but which history will remember to the president’s eternal discredit.
Professor Alan Lichtman of American University has correctly predicted who will
Read more at http://www.americanactionnews.com/articles/this-professor-has-picked-the-president-correctly-for-the-last-32-years-guess-who-he-s-picking-now#kLee8HYtKEgxMjQx.99
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4)
This Professor Has Picked the President
Correctly for the Last 32 Years. Guess Who He's Picking Now
image: http://t.newsmaxfeednetwork.com/im.gif?sid=fcbf5e1527ae4974981f37814b4acf77_29f2e009
image: http://t.newsmaxfeednetwork.com/vi.gif?sid=fcbf5e1527ae4974981f37814b4acf77_29f2e009
Professor Alan Lichtman of American University has correctly predicted who will
win the White House for 32 years. And he thinks Trump will beat Hillary Clinton in
the 2016 election.
Using a 13 question paradigm of true/false statements, which Licthman calls “the
Using a 13 question paradigm of true/false statements, which Licthman calls “the
Keys to the White House,” Lichtman has correctly predicted every presidential
victory since 1984.
Lichtman’s paradigm is based off of historic campaign trends, and basically, if the
Lichtman’s paradigm is based off of historic campaign trends, and basically, if the
majority of statements are deemed “True,” the election favors the incumbent party
—in 2016, Hillary Clinton. If the majority of statements are deemed “False,” the
opposition party—Trump—has the edge.
Lichtman’s statements are:
Lichtman has deemed that the Democrats have, for sure, lost five “keys”: number
Lichtman’s statements are:
- Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections.
- Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination.
- Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.
- Third party: There is no significant third party or independent campaign.
- Short-term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.
- Long-term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.
- Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.
- Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.
- Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.
- Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.
- Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.
- Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.
- Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.
Lichtman has deemed that the Democrats have, for sure, lost five “keys”: number
1, 3, 7, 11, and 12. The sixth key, which would give the edge to Trump, is key
number 4: the third party candidate. Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party candidate
, might have been a Republican governor, but data shows he’s hurting Hillary
Clinton more than Donald Trump.
Assuming Johnson gets more than five percent in November—he’s currently
Assuming Johnson gets more than five percent in November—he’s currently
polling just above 10%—Lichtman says he “would be the sixth and final key
against the Democrats."
Lichtman admits that the polarizing nature of Donald Trump makes him the “most
Lichtman admits that the polarizing nature of Donald Trump makes him the “most
difficult election to assess” since he began predicting the presidency in 1984—but
still thinks he’ll ultimately “very narrowly” have the edge.
In November, the American people will either validate Lichtman’s theory once
In November, the American people will either validate Lichtman’s theory once
again—or prove it wrong for the first time since 1984.
Read more at http://www.americanactionnews.com/articles/this-professor-has-picked-the-president-correctly-for-the-last-32-years-guess-who-he-s-picking-now#kLee8HYtKEgxMjQx.99
No comments:
Post a Comment