Russia is expected to sail its only aircraft carrier through the English Channel later this month amid strained relations between London and Moscow over the Syria crisis.
Royal Navy chiefs and their Nato allies are drawing up plans to escort up to eight Russian warships
...including an ocean-going tug...
which are due to leave port imminently to join the country’s air strike campaign against Syrian rebels.
Admirals believe the Kremlin will use the voyage as an opportunity for a show of strength as it passes Britain, and expect the carrier’s aircraft to launch flying drills off the British and French coasts.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2016 11:10 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11131 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
They will need air-cover, hopefully the RAF is up to the task. I mean it's shades of the channel dash. You know.. On 2nd thought meet them with fire-fight tugs and fireworks, maybe a royal barge with a band. The English could do this, ring the bells along the route? Hell yes, invite to Portsmith for a tour of the Victory, give them a Peek at the Queen Elizabeth and a good dinner.
I'm sorry this song sounds so smutty,
But skippers, stay close to your buddy!
He'll help you with plugging
(and maybe some tugging)
When littoral combat gets muddy.
[Chicago Tribune] Excerpt - "He seems to ignore their advice," Hayden said. "Why would you assume this would change when he is in office?"
The Trump campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
Several former intelligence officials interviewed this week believe that Trump is either willfully disputing intelligence assessments, has a blind spot on Russia, or perhaps doesn't understand the nonpartisan traditions and approach of intelligence professionals.
#1
Interesting assessment General Hayden. Would you care to comment on President Obama's interest in the 'President's Daily Breifing (PBD)' conducted by the CIA?
Has President Obama's attention to the PDB "changed" since he came into office? Feedback from the CIA is rather lacking in this regard. Enlighten us if you would.
..."or perhaps [Trump} doesn't understand the nonpartisan traditions and approach of intelligence professional."
Please sir, let me give you a quick mental image of DNI Jim Clapper, testifying before congress. Would the response to tragic events in Benghazi shed any light on the "nonpartisan traditions and approach of intelligence professionals ?"
Trump doesn't accept the advice of the intelligence agencies? That's the friggin story? C'mon, give me a break.
The story is what is contained in those DNC files--however they were obtained. The files show the collusion between the press, government, and Hillary's campaign to rig the election against Sanders as well as the Pubs. Why the hell would one believe anything coming from the Federal government at this point in time? Thought Hayden was a Hillary supporter.
#12
Also, I would like to nominate "the nonpartisan traditions and approach of intelligence professionals" as Snark of the Day.
Posted by SteveS
Ditto SteveS. I had to read it two or three times before I could believe it. The graphic is from Powell's 5 Feb 2003 'WMD Trailor' presentation at the UN. That's Director Tenet seated directly behind Powell. I'm not faulting Powell, he didn't prepare the PPT's. My point is, the Klingons knew full well the trailers had nothing to do with WMD.
An increasing number of North Koreans are defecting from Russia where some 20,000 of them labor in often inhuman conditions, a source said Tuesday.
The source said about a dozen North Korean workers at a single construction site in Russia have recently told South Korean authorities that they want to defect. Altogether some 40 North Koreans including loggers in Siberia have defected and are staying in a shelter in Russia.
Workers typically escape in groups of three or four. They are reportedly motivated by appalling working conditions and relentless pressure from the North Korean regime to cough up more hard currency.
Another source in China said since the severe flooding of the Duman River last month, the regime has been forcing workers overseas to donate US$100 to 150 each to a flood relief fund. "This kind of extortion is causing more North Korean workers overseas to defect," the source added.
Most of the North Koreans in China and Russia know about the recent defection of senior officials overseas.
"The North is sending more officials to China and Russia to keep watch on workers there, but it seems difficult for the regime to prevent expat workers from defecting," a government official here said.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11124 views]
Top|| File under: Commies
[Guardian] A former contestant on the Apprentice, Summer Zervos, on Friday accused Donald Trump of groping or aggressively kissing her on two separate occasions in 2007, when she met the businessman in private for what she thought were going to be discussions about job opportunities.
I am dreadfully sorry folks. I sincerely hope I am wrong, but I believe he's finished. Truth or fabrication, he cannot escape the burden of assumed guilt concerning these sexual abuse claims. Likewise, he cannot overcome the bias of the media, the betrayal and desertion of the republican party, an extremely low level of support in the Black and Latino communities, or a full-time POTUS/FLOTUS/Bill Clinton - HRC campaign road show. The obvious break-down of the 'Rule of Law' (Attorney General/FBI) has also negatively impacted his chances of success.
The so-called Electoral College is clearly not working in his favor. He's losing the battle for female votes, the NEA, Federal Employees Union, and other organized labor groups are queued up against him. The hard-core ROE v. Wade crowd will never support him. The anti-gun lobby and the entitlement crowd are strongly non-supportive. As an accomplished wealthy white male, Class discrimination haunts him.
I would recommend we belay the Trump bashing. I doubt any of the republican slate could have done much better, some possibly worse. There is a larger dynamic at play here, something theatrical in nature involving great sums of money and global power. It may just spell the end of our perceived democratic process.
The canary is no longer chirping and sits motionless in an egg laying position on the bottom of it's cage. If the bird were not a male, I wouldn't give it a second thought. Only divine intervention will save this race.
#1
Besoeker, sorry I disagree. Almost every other Republican would have beaten Hillary, and even Donald had the chance to do so.
We shouldn't blame it all on the media. The media actually was beginning to lick blood with all those mails, foundation corruption and health issues.
But every time the media was about to get down to business with Hillary's failures, the Donald stepped in with some stupid speech or action. And the campaign didn't stop him. They must have know that Hillary would play the sex card. Because the Hillary campaign vetted Trump much better than the Republicans.
Trump was about to take the lead before the first debate, then he walked right into the Machado trap. Had he prepared for it (and that something like this would come up was a no brainer), he could easily have saved his campaign.
He could just have said: Sorry Alicia, lo siento mucho, I know I have been a jerk sometimes, that actually came with the media career, and if you inspect my past you'll find a lot more examples of me being a jerk. That was then. IÄm glad that despite my words you turned out to be a fabulous businesswoman.
I do no longer do all those crap. I have a wonderful family, an adorable wife, and all my passion is for America.
Can I go back to explaining now what I will do if you elect me President?
That's all. And further attempts would be fruitless, because as we have seen, all the jerk stuff he did happened at least a decade ago. He doesn't do this now, obviously.
Instead he doubled and tripled down with stupid Twitter rants and interviews. He lingered in his "safe" space at Fox News (Hannity) and got fooled by his successful rallies. He saw thousands of cheering supporters and thought that these would turn into millions of voters just like that.
He completely forgot to get out the vote, to make all those traditional non-voters vote. The non-voters were his chance to win in a landslide. The blue collar men, the hardworking women.
He blew it. Bigly.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
10/15/2016 0:52 Comments ||
Top||
#2
As usual, you make some valid points EC. I must ask however, if none of the republican candidates could come even remotely close to defeating Trump in the primary, how could they possibly hope to conquer the Clinton machine ?
Whichever way the race goes, I am certain the outcome will be debated for many years.
We do 'live in interesting times.' I hope we survive them.
#4
First: It's a lot easier to beat 16 competitors. Trump had the best strategy for that (not that I liked it much). I thought Marco Rubio would have been a strong contender. But Kasich, a sound if boring Republican, would have beaten Hillary, too. Ted Cruz maybe not. Jeb! never really showed up despite all that money thrown at him.
Actually I thought Hillary would be hard to beat a year ago. But Bernie Sanders showed how vulnerable she was.
Trump antagonized too many minorities. He could have made a strong case against illegal immigration but he forgot to bring the LEGAL immigrants along for the ride.
And let's face it: Trump was always about Trump. The "only I, and I alone can fix it" was over the top. America doesn't work that way.
And how was he going to fix it? Without Congress? No way. Also, his promises were also vague. Very vague. Make America great again? Great slogan, but not much beef. He needed to develop a few convincing ideas, engage Republican senators and representatives, present them to the people in a way everyone could understand and appreciate.
Second Amendment? He could not make the case how Hillary would abolish it. He needed to remind the people how Hillary would do it: Appoint Supreme Court judges who would then reverse DC v Heller. The liberal Supreme Court would shred Judge Scalia's landmark ruling, that the right to keep and bear arms didn't just apply to the militias, but to the people. The Court would simply say, that Scalia was wrong, we revert that, the Second only applies to state militias. Since these do no longer exist, the Second no longer applies to anyone. Here goes your right, without Congress being able to do anything about it.
EXPLAIN this, in clear and simple words. America, this is how Hillary will abolish the Second without even doing anything herself.
And the First will follow, once a liberal Supreme Court gets into the "hate speech" thing. Again, explain what could happen.
Trump always shot with pellets, never with a bullet.
And last: Hillary is an (elderly) woman. Treat her with all the respect you treat an elderly woman with (it doesn't matter whether she deserves it). Make your point, be polite, turn her weapons against her. Always let other women go for the attack.
Don't call her Crooked Hillary, don't threaten to throw her into jail. This just rallies women against you, the male bully, the chauvinist pig.
No, politely ask at the debate: Mrs Clinton, you kept info on your server that is so highly classified that I can't even mention the content. Would you be so kind to explain to the American people why you think you didn't break the law while people who did a lot less harm are sitting in jail now?
Clinton Foundation: Look for the most egregious cases of corruption and hammer then home. Again, bullets, not shrapnel. Always stay on the message.
And her health? God, no ad attack. No, do a friendly announcement like that:
"I'm dismayed to learn that Mrs Clinton isn't feeling well. I understand that the fight against Bernie Sanders has been brutal. Please take all the rest you need and get well again. I will refrain from any political attack in that time."
It's easy. Know your enemy. And of course, pick up everything Bernie Sanders said and try to win over his supporters. You have a common enemy: The banksters. Just skip the socialist crap.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
10/15/2016 2:32 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I must ask however, if none of the republican candidates could come even remotely close to defeating Trump in the primary
They came very close, but they were hamstrung by a message that works better at election time than in the GOP primary, where immigration restriction and import restrictions were key issues of 2016. Trump had the smallest margin of victory (1441 delegates, 44.9% of the popular vote) for a GOP nominee going back a good long while. Both McCain (1575, 46.7%) and Romney (1575, 52.1%) had it wrapped up around the same time Trump did (May), with their opponents bowing out by March and April, respectively.
The problem wasn't Clinton's machine or even Trump's own foibles - it's that Trump is not making a serious run for office. A serious run would require massive ad expenditures to sway voters who are non-political and don't make a special effort to look at candidates issue-by-issue. He hasn't raised the money and he sure as heck isn't spending his own.
While Clinton was saturating Olympic coverage with ads, Trump wasn't even a blip on the radar. Clinton ads are a fixture on network TV, whereas Trump is non-existent. From what I see, Trump's tweets are being drowned out by network TV editorializing against him and saturation anti-Trump ads. And he is spending a lot of time giving speeches to his supporters - which is good for GOTV - to the faithful. But where's the outreach to uncommitted voters who make their decisions based on what they see in the media, whether through ads or network news? What do they know of Trump other than scandal coverage and Hillary's ads, if Trump doesn't run ads selling them on why they should vote for him or against Hillary?
#6
Around this time in 2012, Romney was running a point behind in the polls. He lost by 4. The Donald is running 6 points behind. Without ads to take his message directly to voters, he is finished. Non-committed voters aren't going to show up at his rallies - they don't go to political rallies, period. Romney's campaign (including PAC's) spent $1b to lose by 4 points against the left's Reagan. Trump is about to lose by 10 points against the left's least charismatic crook in a good long while. And the difference is surely that Trump will spend $300m in the campaign vs Clinton's $1b. This is a rerun of McCain's 2008 campaign, but worse - McCain was only outspent 2 to 1.
#7
"Non-committed voters aren't going to show up at his rallies - they don't go to political rallies, period."
It might have been a bit different with Trump rallies, but of course GET TO KNOW your fans, place volunteers who help with registering etc.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
10/15/2016 3:05 Comments ||
Top||
#8
And yes it seems that Trump was never able to pony up a billion. He may not have had all that money he claims to have, at least not in cash.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
10/15/2016 3:09 Comments ||
Top||
#9
OTOH there is no need to despair. This great country will survive 4 years of Hillary (she'll never get a second term).
Keep the House, focus on the Senate races, direct all your money there.
With a Republican Congress Hillary's hands will be mostly tied.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
10/15/2016 3:12 Comments ||
Top||
#10
It might have been a bit different with Trump rallies, but of course GET TO KNOW your fans, place volunteers who help with registering etc.
Two types of voters are needed to win elections. Rallies energize the party faithful, increasing the participation rate. Non-political / independent voters are persuadable, but don't really follow the news that closely. Them, you need to reach through ads. You can't necessarily sway them to vote for you, but you can hope to persuade them not to vote against you. Stateside, they're at least 20% of actual voters. Election victory depends on winning at least half of them.
That's what ads are for - to tell them what's in it for them if the candidate these ads promote wins the election. GOP candidates are always at a disadvantage because the media runs editorials disguised as news stories that attack the GOP. And then there are the Democrats' ads. A GOP presidential candidate who doesn't run ads will lose and lose badly. It's not even so much to have a positive effect for the GOP candidate as to counteract the barrage of negative news coverage by the left-wing media as well as Democratic ads.
#11
I must also say that Democrats are good at ads. They really employ professionals.
The few ads from Trump I have seen were gloomy, not uplifting.
And that "apology video" from Trump Tower? Who for crying out loud was in charge of that?
ISIS does better hostage movies.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
10/15/2016 3:22 Comments ||
Top||
#12
EC. Our people are becoming a corrupt people. If Hildebeast becomes president and successfully with stands all challenges to the results, this nation continues its fall from Grace and the Deplorables will be the target of the rath of Hildebeast. Islamic Jihad will reign supreme against the Deplorables. This is going to be bloody.
Posted by: Pearl Flomons5711 ||
10/15/2016 3:45 Comments ||
Top||
#13
EC: Your comment, "But every time the media was about to get down to business with Hillary's failures, the Donald stepped in with some stupid speech or action." is a sure indication that you do not comprehend just how viciously the dominant left-wing American media works.
#15
There is a cancer in this country and it is not the fault of Donald Trump. Trump merely pulled back the shroud on something very pernicious and ugly. The cancer is the left/Progressives and their agenda for the fundamental transformation of the country. They have infiltrated and corrupted every institution in the country.
#16
That said, what is to be done about it?
Posted by JohnQC
Not certain John. The only other contemporary model is the financial implosion of the Former Soviet Union (FSU). The so-called 'Trump Revolution' appears to have been put down.
#19
Ah yes, destroy the opposition will to resist. The Left treats politics as just another war. Most others treat it as sideshow or at most an irritation of their attention. Remember, nothing matters to them but power. Everything else is expendable. As long as you treat it as anything else but war, they'll win. And they relish in so many who demand perfection ("Caesar's wife must be above suspicion") which they play so effective against the rubes.
#20
Wonderful gloom and despair. Only problem is, Trump doesn't needs ads and the rest of this shit --- because, for the first time since Reagan, a republican candidate runs on issues. If, more than half American voters are not sick and tired of all this sh*t, then to hell with you!
#21
Both my wife and I got groped by Donald Trump. We're not whining about. However, if there is any possibility of getting some boodle, we might whine?
#25
Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, John Kasich...none of them would have been any better in office than Hillary...might have been even worse. Remember, George W Bush left us with the mortgage meltdown which he had to have seen coming but did nothing about it. Bush left the border with Mexico wide open and endorsed the transfer of our jobs and industry to China. Bush got us involved in enormously expensive and futile wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. These days there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats. The Republican party is extinct. At least Trump put up a fight.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
10/15/2016 13:43 Comments ||
Top||
#26
Abu, let us remember something. Bush invaded Iraq & Afghanistan after Muslims killed several thousand people in NY. Clintons bombed sh*t out of Serbia (and restarted the war with Russia) because they were bored. And that was twenty years ago - before Hillary became demented.
#29
grom, Bush fought the wrong people after 911. He should have gone after the Soddies and the Paks. We know that now. I think he knew it then.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
10/15/2016 15:13 Comments ||
Top||
#30
The problem is that the Bushes and the Clintons are all in bed with the Soddies. Trump is not.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
10/15/2016 15:14 Comments ||
Top||
#31
@Shipman
Thanks, and sorry for the delay, we went hiking in the mountains today.
I run a business that trades with the U.S., also have lived in the U.S. for a while and I'm deeply involved in Transatlantic politics (Atlantikbrücke etc.).
Venezuela is a very interesting thing to watch, if you want to learn how fast socialists can ruin a prospering country.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
10/15/2016 15:51 Comments ||
Top||
#32
You mods are terrific!
Posted by: European Conservative ||
10/15/2016 16:04 Comments ||
Top||
#33
Bush fought the wrong people after 911. He should have gone after the Soddies and the Paks. ... I think he knew it then.
I disagree on two particulars.
(i) I don't think of George II as evil - just a well meaning idiot (like another George II).
(ii) Pakis are just the muscle. Saudis are brains & paymasters.
#37
“I am completely shocked and bewildered by my cousin, Summer Zervos, and her press conference today. Ever since she was on The Apprentice she has had nothing but glowing things to say about Mr. Trump,” John Barry, Zervos’ first cousin, said in the statement. He went on to say, “That was until Summer invited Mr. Trump to her restaurant during the primary and he said no. I think Summer wishes she could still be on reality TV, and in an effort to get that back she’s saying all of these negative things about Mr. Trump.”
[Fox] "The next step in this is going to be the need to use deadly force against the Iranians. I think it’s coming, it’s going to be a maritime confrontation and if it doesn’t happen immediately, I’ll bet you a dollar it’s going to be happening after the presidential election, whoever is elected."
--Admiral Stavridis on why a deadly confrontation with Iran is coming sooner or later
Admiral James Stavridis, former Supreme Allied Commander at NATO, joined Kilmeade & Friends to discuss the latest on the growing hostilities between the U.S., Iran & Yemen and why the next step is to use deadly force against the Iranians. Plus, Stavridis explains why we need to confront Russia in the cyber world and be more than defensive by showing the Russians we will not be a piñata.
#2
I’ll bet you a dollar it’s going to be happening after the presidential election, whoever is elected."
That statement surely involved a virtual Kilimanjaro of mental contemplation. Admiral, can I call you Jim? Yes, let me introduce you to State Dept spokesperson John Kirby. Perhaps you two know one another. Great minds and all of that.
A California university is reassuring anxious illegal immigrant students that they have nothing to fear from U.S. Border Patrol agents on campus, promising the school will refuse to enforce immigration law.
The campus-wide email was prompted by an upcoming career fair at which U.S. Customs & Border Patrol agents will be recruiting.
Last year, students protested the presence of CBP and ICE agents, heckling and harassing the officers as they tried to speak with students interested in joining the agencies.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Also, I would like to nominate "the nonpartisan traditions and approach of intelligence professionals" as Snark of the Day.
A California university is reassuring anxious illegal immigrant students that they have nothing to fear from U.S. Border Patrol agents on campus, promising the school will refuse to enforce immigration law.
