Has the US election been rigged in Hillary Clinton’s favour as recent evidence has suggested? Perhaps
Has the mainstream media waged such a deceitful and rotten campaign against Donald Trump that they have already won the election for Hillary Clinton? Quite possibly.
Will Hillary Clinton be the most militant president in American history? Yes. Her record as Secretary of State is one covered in blood. Her policies of war upon war upon war may well plunge the world into a Third World War if indeed the war doesn’t begin prior to the inauguration of the next US president.
It is for these reasons that I give a full personal endorsement to Mr. Donald J. Trump, a candidate for peace in a time of war.
In times as serious as this, little else matters other than foreign policy. In the event of world war, the tax man will be as dead as the tax payer. Bombs do not know race from colour from creed. The rhetoric in which one finds comfort and the rhetoric which one finds irksome will be equally silenced.
The government of which Hillary Clinton has been a part, and the most hawkish part at that, is racing towards world war in Syria.
With America and her NATO allies including Turkey along with ISIS, Al Qaeda and their lookalikes on one side, and Syria and Russia on the other, the very terrorist groups who have brought death to the streets of Aleppo, Brussels, Baghdad, Paris, New York and beyond, are helping one nuclear superpower to wage war upon another.
If Hillary Clinton gets elected, not only will this policy remain in place, but it will expand exponentially.
Look too at the company she keeps. Just last week, Prince Turki al-Faisal of the kleptocratic, terrorist sponsoring, Islamic extremist exporting Saudi Arabia, jetted into America to tell Americans to vote for Clinton.
Can you just imagine Putin doing the same for Trump or anyone else?
Putin by the way hasn’t endorsed ANY US candidate and never would do. All he has ever said is that anyone who welcomes cooperation with Russia could only be viewed positively from a Russian perspective.
Hillary Clinton’s record shows that even amongst warmongers she has an unusually enthusiastic taste for death, no empathy for the dead, no measure, and no restraint.
A recent leaked conversation reveals that Hillary Clinton wanted to ‘drone’ Julian Assange whilst he is effectively imprisoned in the sovereign territory of Ecuador.
Assange is amongst the most important men of the last hundred years, a journalist who has risked his life to publish whistle-blower accounts which reveal that the Western establishment is not only as devious as many had suspected, but is in fact more devious than fathomable in one’s wildest dreams.
Hillary Clinton’s violent outbursts against Assange prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that her relationship with the truth is a bit like her husband’s relationship with her; superficial and ultimately a sham.
Turning to Donald Trump one must ask the following:
When has a contending US presidential candidate campaigned on a platform arguing for reconciliation and cooperation with Russia? The closest one gets is Robert Taft, whose last attempt to gain the Presidency was in 1952.
When has a contending US presidential candidate campaigned on a platform opposed to willy-nilly interventions into others countries? If one considers Ross Perot a contender, than one could point to his last attempt to become president in 1996.
Donald Trump has segregated terrorists who threaten the lives of anyone they can get their hands on, from regimes who don’t want to do business with the likes of Obama, the Clintons and the Bushes.
Donald Trump has said clearly that the constant tide of war is not to the benefit of the ordinary American, and by extrapolation to people throughout the world.
Donald Trump has proved to be both patriotic and critical, something many would have thought impossible in America under previous regimes.
One must acknowledge that for every irrational critic of Trump, there are also rational ones. I would like to address the most widespread rational criticisms of Trump.
—He may not mean what he says?
This could well be the case and if he doesn’t, I shall become his most unrelenting critic. However, I’m inclined to believe he does mean what he says.
Trump is a mainstream businessman. Ideology, let alone a wild ideology, does not build hotels, casinos and golf courses. Pragmatism, good sense and efficiency do.
Donald Trump’s foreign policy rhetoric is just that, pragmatic, sensible and efficient.
Unlike Hillary Clinton who has sold weapons of mass destruction, something which does require a touch of madness, Donald Trump has never made money on products which threaten world peace. I do not think he’s about to start now.
Hillary Clinton implies he’s some sort of traitor, he isn’t; he’s a trader and the shopping mall is preferable to the killing fields.
—He isn’t Ron Paul
No he isn’t. Ron Paul would be the ideal candidate in many ways, but he’s not running and even when he ran he was massacred by the establishment early on.
This is another reason why Trump is important. Few people who don’t have independent wealth AND a large public profile could have pulled off an anti-establishment campaign and travelled this far with it.
If people find Trump garish or brash, the answer is this is a necessity of marketing. People in America who have never voted know who Donald Trump is; many who have voted still have never heard of Ron Paul.
—He isn’t Bernie Sanders
Although Bernie Sanders does indeed have historically laudable anti-war credentials and is a deeply sincere man, he is finished.
His chance of achieving victory was stolen from him by Hillary Clinton’s ruthless, corrupt political machine.
Many accuse him of selling his soul to the DNC devil by endorsing Clinton. Maybe he did or maybe he feels frightened.
He is an old man, allow him to live his lattermost years in peace.
—He isn’t Vladimir Putin
—He has said some disturbing things about Iran
This is mere electioneering rhetoric designed to expose Obama’s secretive dealings with Iran, which included the undisclosed shipment of millions of dollars to Iran in cash.
Donald Trump is many things, but the man to invade Iran he is not.
—He speaks off the cuff
Good. He is human. He has a sense of humour. He seems good company.
When the world is about to plunge into world war, none of this ought to matter, but if it still does. I say it’s better to have a man relaxed and improvised in his speech than someone who is stiff, insincere and totally inhuman.
There are only two realistic choices for US President and there is a larger policy gap between them than there has been in any two-horse US presidential race since 1972, if not since 1952.
All I am saying is give peace a chance. All I am saying is give Trump a chance.