Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TideGlider who wrote (962619)	9/9/2016 10:32:33 AM
From: jlallen	1 Recommendation Recommended By locogringo Respond to of 1574198

Once you realize that in dealing with Rat you are dealing with a mental defective...its becomes less annoying for a while....but even that has its limits.

To: TideGlider who wrote (962619)	9/9/2016 10:37:00 AM
From: FJB	1 Recommendation Recommended By locogringo Respond to of 1574198

Pakistan Expels 3 Million Afghan “Refugees” - Pakistan has started expelling all 3 million illegal immigrant Afghans back to their home country—in cooperation with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The fact that the UNHCR is involved in the repatriation process proves that Afghanistan is a “safe” country and that all “asylum seekers” from there are bogus. According to a report in the Pakistan Today newspaper, the UNHCR has announced that “Afghan refugees are being facilitated during repatriation to their homeland.” The UNHCR said that Afghan refugees living in Pakistan are being provided every possible facility while returning to their homeland. Those willingly returning are also being provided with a cash resettlement grant. Two special centers have been set up in Peshawar and Quetta cities of Pakistan to facilitate Afghan refugees, the UNHCR added. The Afghan government has also announced that it will provide land and other basic needs to their nationals returning Afghanistan, and that the repatriation process is already underway. Pakistan’s States and Frontier Regions Minister, Dr. Abdul Qadir Baloch, has said that the Afghans have been given until the end of this year to leave Pakistan, and after that, “action will be taken against those living illegally in the country.” This cut-off date has most recently been extended to March 2017. So far this year, at least 100,000 Afghans have already voluntarily returned home from Pakistan. The BBC has reported that the UNHCR and Pakistani authorities have admitted they were not prepared for the sudden rush of “refugees” choosing to return to Afghanistan, and that they could not handle the influx. In December 2015, Pakistan set a six-month deadline for the Afghan “refugees” to leave. That date was extended for another six months in June. At the same time, the Pakistani government closed the main Afghan-Pakistan border crossing in Torkham, and banned all Afghans from crossing over without travel documents. The UNHCR—funded of course by Western taxpayers—has doubled its “repatriation package” from $200 to $400 per head for returning “refugees.” There are two important lessons to be learned from the Pakistan government’s move to expel the Afghans. Firstly, as mentioned above, it proves that Afghanistan is a safe country and therefore that all the Afghans claiming to be “refugees” in Europe are lying; and Secondly, the silence of the controlled media and liberal establishment over the mass expulsions is in marked contrast to their shrill opposition to any European state such as Hungary which also does not want to be invaded by aliens. If any European nation announced the mass expulsion of three million invaders, the controlled media would be up in arms. But because it is a nonwhite nation taking these steps, the media is silent—and their silence is evidence once again of the inherently anti-white nature of the establishment and controlled media. Afghan asylum seeker Afghanistan Breaking fake asylum seekers fake refugees Featured Pakistan

To: TideGlider who wrote (962619)	9/9/2016 10:40:02 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Respond to of 1574198

I guess you missed the sanctions. Would you rather that Obama had gone boldly where no president had gone before, and stopped Russia by force of arms? "What I would give for the transcript of what Obama would after the election when he would have flexibility" What most of us would give for the e-mails and phone records between people in the Trump campaign and people in Ukraine and Russia. Manafort would be a good person to start with. Then Comrade General Flynn should prolly come next. Moscow’s Five-Star Treatment of a Three-Star Army General aim.org

To: TideGlider who wrote (962619)	9/9/2016 2:12:11 PM
From: FJB	3 Recommendations Recommended By locogringo Old Boothby TideGlider Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574198

The Trump Blitz Begins The GOP nominee is finally—relentlessly—arguing that Clinton is unfit for office. wsj.com Kimberley A. Strassel Sept. 8, 2016 7:01 p.m. ET Think of it as the moment when Donald Trump truly learned to throw a (campaign) punch. It came about three weeks ago, amid the latest swirl of stories on the Clintons’ ethics. Hillary Clinton had recently blamed her private email server on Colin Powell. Judicial Watch had released more emails that showed the Clinton Foundation begging the State Department for special favors on behalf of its donors. Bill Clinton had floated laughable plans to reform the foundation. The Trump campaign pounced. It began blasting out every new revelation about—or editorial-board comment on—Mrs. Clinton’s shady dealings. It unleashed surrogates, in particular the former prosecutors Rudy Giuliani and Chris Christie, to make the legal case against her. Mr. Trump devoted a significant portion of a speech in Texas to detailing the lies she had told about her server, and the pay-to-play allegations at the foundation. Within a few days the campaign had cut a web ad hitting her for “corruption” and calling the foundation a “slush fund.” Mrs. Clinton’s slip in the polls is a direct result of the latest flood of scandal. Less noticed is the skillful way that Team Trump is making those hits land. The Republican nominee’s campaign has been doing more right lately, though nothing more so than this. When it comes to the dissection of Mrs. Clinton’s misdeeds, the Trump campaign is firing on 16 cylinders. If attacking your corrupt opponent on corruption seems obvious, it wasn’t to Mr. Trump for a long time. The GOP nominee is a scrapper, and part of his draw was the expectation that he would speak bluntly about the Clintons. He did, though as voters would soon realize, only in fits and incomplete starts. He delivered a speech on her ethics in June—then never sustained the argument. He ignored prime opportunities (the State Department inspector general report; FBI Director James Comey’s press conference), flitting to other subjects instead. He seemed to think the occasional #CrookedHillary tweet was enough. This was frustrating if only because Mrs. Clinton’s venality is the concrete with which Mr. Trump must pave his road to the White House. This is a woman whom close to two-thirds of voters view as untrustworthy. She has based her entire campaign around the argument that she is more credible and competent to lead the nation—a claim utterly undermined by revelations about her foundation’s business model, her cavalier handling of classified information, and her inability to “recall” most of her tenure as secretary of state. Mr. Trump’s new approach is to unrelentingly hit all sides of that claim—making the case that Mrs. Clinton is “unfit” to hold the top job. Case in point: After Wednesday’s commander-in-chief forum on NBC, the Trump campaign detailed precisely why Mrs. Clinton should not be trusted with national security. Mr. Trump hit her during the forum, while a follow-up press release highlighted her bad judgment in using an “illicit” email server and the risk of a “hack of classified info”; noted how her drone emails would “undermine” security; and flagged her stumbling attempt to tell a vet in the audience why she should be held to a different standard on classified information than military officers. Good, smart stuff. The unrelenting pressure has put Mrs. Clinton in the spotlight and on the defense. That by consequence has somewhat sheltered the Republican nominee from attacks. Listening to Mrs. Clinton—the subject of an FBI investigation, the facilitator of the Crown Prince of Bahrain—on Wednesday drop a line about Mr. Trump’s “scams” and “frauds” was downright amusing. Sort of like watching Al Capone accuse Eliot Ness of having the occasional light beer. Also effective has been the campaign’s drumbeat about Mrs. Clinton’s refusal to hold press conferences. (“ Hiding Hillary: Day 278!”) Her longtime approach to scandals has been to ignore them and wait for the press to get weary. But the stories keep pouring out this time, and her refusal to address them has made her look shady, arrogant, slippery. She finally succumbed to pressure and took a few cursory questions from reporters Thursday, though none on the email or foundation. Mr. Trump’s new all-in-on-Hillary approach came about the same time as his staff shakeup. It is likely due in part to the presence of Breitbart’s Stephen Bannon and (more recently) Citizens United’s David Bossie. The press has focused on Breitbart’s fractious role in the conservative world, but Mr. Bannon and Mr. Bossie have both devoted careers to tracking and exposing Mrs. Clinton’s ethical troubles. Turning voters away from Mrs. Clinton is the groundwork. Mr. Trump still needs to give voters a reason to turn toward him. His sober approach of recent weeks is a start. A challenge will be to translate what has so far been campaign-engineered press releases and speeches into an on-the-fly prosecution of Mrs. Clinton during the presidential debates. Mr. Trump is right that Hillary is unfit to be president. Now, to keep proving it.