Wednesday, August 10, 2016

From the comfort of my living-room, all the talk about a Clinton "body count" seems silly. It smells of yet another Republican conspiracy theory.

But wait, at least one of the three people who died or were killed during the last three weeks was a Democrat!

I think it was Rachel Alexander who said: “Since the Democratic National Committee emails were leaked a few weeks ago, three people associated with the DNC have all been found dead under what could be questionable circumstances.”

Asked to please shut up 

I am not supposed to talk about the so-called "Clinton body count." Such talk is the kiss of death among my Democratic brothers and sisters. Yet truthfully, I have mixed feelings about the topic.

One of my friends stopped following me on Facebook today, partly because I have mentioned this topic. She said I was "worse than Fox News," which she knows I detest. This in turn made me go back and revisit the so-called "body count" allegations. to see if I had made a mistake, but I don't think I did. Here is what I found ... bodies! They were real. They are unsettling, unnerving. They call for answers. Even if only one of them died under suspicious circumstances it would be alarming, regardless of who the perpetrators are. And yet we know almost for certain that one was murdered, and the others are kind of like, "Do you smell a skunk in the woodpile?" Maybe yes, maybe no. But probably yes. So here they are, the bodies:

Seth Rich -- Seth was murdered, no evidence, no word from investigators, no established motive . It might be worth mentioning that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange (allegedly) "appeared to suggest" Tuesday that Seth was the source of Wikileaks' DNC fraud emails.

Nobody as  yet knows who shot Seth or why, although there are plenty of theories.

Sean Lucas -- Shawn had just sued the DNC for alleged fraud: On Aug. Sean had filed papers against the DNC and DNC head Debbie Wasserman. He also had filed a class-action law suit representing Sanders supporters, claiming he campaign had fraudulently taken money from them under the auspices of what was supposed to have been a neutral campaign. But on Aug. 2, Lucas/ girlfriend reportedly found him lying on the bathroom floor. though he had been in good health, he was now dead.

John Ashe -- John  was a former president of the United Nations General Assembly. Interestingly, he was scheduled to begin pretrial meetings involving shady financial dealings regarding a former Clinton crony, but On June 22, 2016 he was found dead. The cause of death was first reported as a heart attack, but then the story changed: Local police reportedly said “his throat had been crushed, presumably by a barbell he dropped while pumping iron.”"*

Three deaths

Three startling" deaths in a row surrounding Clinton's nomination are not proof of wrongdoing, and more satisfying explanations (for some or all of those deaths) could come out in time ... or maybe not.

Never mind that forty-something other people opposing a Clinton are said to have have died in unusual circumstances over the years. This is the fantasy stuff of of the Republican rubbish mill, am I correct? Only a hard core conspiracy theorist would suggest that most or all of them were ordered killed by the Clinton family or close associates, and I would certainly would not entertain that thought. Or at least I didn't until this evening..It does seem remarkable to me that these three died in this short time frame, and all were involved with testimonies or documentation or court cases that likely would have proven very damaging to Clinton, if only the individuals had survived.

Trying shoes on other feet

Let's face it: If these victims (Do you mind terribly if I call them that?). If they had been set to testify against Republicans and had died in exactly the same manner, would Democrats' responses been so casual, or even hostile to the question. Would they be so strongly insisting that all of this is nothing but a "fluke"?  Perhaps. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt. Scratch that question.

Mental imaging

Yes, I mean that:  I do not accuse Clinton of being linked to the deaths ... not yet. I have no proof, no evidence. So for now, sitting here in the relative safety of my living-room watching The Olympics, I consider her innocent, innocent before the law and deserving of the benefit of the doubt.

On the other hand, let's do a bit of creative thinking: Choose one of three roles and let's role play.

Please humor me: Imagine for a few seconds, that you are a fraud investigator like Seth Rich, with information suggesting fraud in the DNC, that you have just turned over to Wikileaks. **.

Or fantasize briefly that you are now an attorney like Sean Lucas, in the process of suing the DNC: on allegations of fraud

Or if you really want to trip out, pretend that, like John Ashe, you are suddenly an Ambassador set to attend pretrial meetings concerning what you believe are "shady financial dealings" of a former Clinton crony...

How does this change your perspective, if at all?

If you are like me, you might feel concerns about your prospects for a long and happy life.

Or, what if you were a candidate who really threatened Clinton's bid for the Presidency. What if you were a Bernie Sanders? Would you be a bit queasy?

I rest my case. This is not a court of law, and I am not accusing anyone of anything: I am just saying what my feelings would be in that kind of situation. What would your feelings be?

End

Comments are welcome: If you liked this post, please like and Share or Plus+
Thanks

Disclaimer: I am not claiming this is a conspiracy.  It does seem, however, like a set of "unusual" circumstances.


*News reports say Ashe would have testified in just days along with Chinese businessman, Ng Lap Seng.
Seng was accused of smuggling $4.5 million into the U.S. He also was.identified as  “the source of hundreds of thousands of dollars illegally funneled ... to the Democratic National Committee during the Clinton administration.”


**Assange strongly implied he had turned such information over to Wikileaks.

Main Source:
http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/3-dead-spark-new-interest-in-clinton-body-count/
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/3-dead-spark-new-interest-in-clinton-body-count/#2wrFr2zbG4d4kxAh.99

#sethrich #clintonbodycount #

Clinton Body Count is bogus, unless ..

From the comfort of my living-room, all the talk about a Clinton "body count" seems silly. It smells of yet another Republican conspiracy theory.

But wait, at least one of the three people who died or were killed during the last three weeks was a Democrat!

I think it was Rachel Alexander who said: “Since the Democratic National Committee emails were leaked a few weeks ago, three people associated with the DNC have all been found dead under what could be questionable circumstances.”

Asked to please shut up 

I am not supposed to talk about the so-called "Clinton body count." Such talk is the kiss of death among my Democratic brothers and sisters. Yet truthfully, I have mixed feelings about the topic.

One of my friends stopped following me on Facebook today, partly because I have mentioned this topic. She said I was "worse than Fox News," which she knows I detest. This in turn made me go back and revisit the so-called "body count" allegations. to see if I had made a mistake, but I don't think I did. Here is what I found ... bodies! They were real. They are unsettling, unnerving. They call for answers. Even if only one of them died under suspicious circumstances it would be alarming, regardless of who the perpetrators are. And yet we know almost for certain that one was murdered, and the others are kind of like, "Do you smell a skunk in the woodpile?" Maybe yes, maybe no. But probably yes. So here they are, the bodies:

Seth Rich -- Seth was murdered, no evidence, no word from investigators, no established motive . It might be worth mentioning that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange (allegedly) "appeared to suggest" Tuesday that Seth was the source of Wikileaks' DNC fraud emails.

Nobody as  yet knows who shot Seth or why, although there are plenty of theories.

Sean Lucas -- Shawn had just sued the DNC for alleged fraud: On Aug. Sean had filed papers against the DNC and DNC head Debbie Wasserman. He also had filed a class-action law suit representing Sanders supporters, claiming he campaign had fraudulently taken money from them under the auspices of what was supposed to have been a neutral campaign. But on Aug. 2, Lucas/ girlfriend reportedly found him lying on the bathroom floor. though he had been in good health, he was now dead.

John Ashe -- John  was a former president of the United Nations General Assembly. Interestingly, he was scheduled to begin pretrial meetings involving shady financial dealings regarding a former Clinton crony, but On June 22, 2016 he was found dead. The cause of death was first reported as a heart attack, but then the story changed: Local police reportedly said “his throat had been crushed, presumably by a barbell he dropped while pumping iron.”"*

Three deaths

Three startling" deaths in a row surrounding Clinton's nomination are not proof of wrongdoing, and more satisfying explanations (for some or all of those deaths) could come out in time ... or maybe not.

Never mind that forty-something other people opposing a Clinton are said to have have died in unusual circumstances over the years. This is the fantasy stuff of of the Republican rubbish mill, am I correct? Only a hard core conspiracy theorist would suggest that most or all of them were ordered killed by the Clinton family or close associates, and I would certainly would not entertain that thought. Or at least I didn't until this evening..It does seem remarkable to me that these three died in this short time frame, and all were involved with testimonies or documentation or court cases that likely would have proven very damaging to Clinton, if only the individuals had survived.

Trying shoes on other feet

Let's face it: If these victims (Do you mind terribly if I call them that?). If they had been set to testify against Republicans and had died in exactly the same manner, would Democrats' responses been so casual, or even hostile to the question. Would they be so strongly insisting that all of this is nothing but a "fluke"?  Perhaps. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt. Scratch that question.

Mental imaging

Yes, I mean that:  I do not accuse Clinton of being linked to the deaths ... not yet. I have no proof, no evidence. So for now, sitting here in the relative safety of my living-room watching The Olympics, I consider her innocent, innocent before the law and deserving of the benefit of the doubt.

On the other hand, let's do a bit of creative thinking: Choose one of three roles and let's role play.

Please humor me: Imagine for a few seconds, that you are a fraud investigator like Seth Rich, with information suggesting fraud in the DNC, that you have just turned over to Wikileaks. **.

Or fantasize briefly that you are now an attorney like Sean Lucas, in the process of suing the DNC: on allegations of fraud

Or if you really want to trip out, pretend that, like John Ashe, you are suddenly an Ambassador set to attend pretrial meetings concerning what you believe are "shady financial dealings" of a former Clinton crony...

How does this change your perspective, if at all?

If you are like me, you might feel concerns about your prospects for a long and happy life.

Or, what if you were a candidate who really threatened Clinton's bid for the Presidency. What if you were a Bernie Sanders? Would you be a bit queasy?

I rest my case. This is not a court of law, and I am not accusing anyone of anything: I am just saying what my feelings would be in that kind of situation. What would your feelings be?

End

Comments are welcome: If you liked this post, please like and Share or Plus+
Thanks

Disclaimer: I am not claiming this is a conspiracy.  It does seem, however, like a set of "unusual" circumstances.


*News reports say Ashe would have testified in just days along with Chinese businessman, Ng Lap Seng.
Seng was accused of smuggling $4.5 million into the U.S. He also was.identified as  “the source of hundreds of thousands of dollars illegally funneled ... to the Democratic National Committee during the Clinton administration.”


**Assange strongly implied he had turned such information over to Wikileaks.

Main Source:
http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/3-dead-spark-new-interest-in-clinton-body-count/
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/3-dead-spark-new-interest-in-clinton-body-count/#2wrFr2zbG4d4kxAh.99

#sethrich #clintonbodycount #

Monday, August 8, 2016

Lessons for teachers taken from Facebook

#Education: This should be of interest to teachers. An amazingly obvious fact of Facebook, and contrary to common belief among educators, is this: "American young people LOVE to write!" Students who, in school, cringe at the sight of pen and paper are more than ready to take on the world when they have the freedom to determine the topic, the target audience, and the length of article. Furthermore, students and young adults who normally would only write a few words end up writing thousands of words with a little prompting, with responses from their friends. Nevertheless, for all their love of writing, many of them are not very good at it ... yet. I don't say that as a put down because I am glad to see them attempting to communicate, and would like for them to be able to do it more effectively. Yes, the quality of the writing -- and sometimes of the thinking -- is not always the best, but they are writing, lots, and here's the key: Nobody is assigning letter grades to these comments or marking them up with red ink. And that is a good thing. No letter grades, no pass or fail. Just communication: This brings out fluency. I think this phenomenon has implications for teachers. Firstly, Facebook observations should inform our teaching practices. And secondly, they should give us an unsolicited measure of where students are often strongest and weakest. If we could incorporate the non-judgmental and self determining aspects of Facebook into our coursework, would we get improved volume and frequency of writing from students? I think they answer is yes. From an educator's viewpoint, the more challenging task then would be to improve the effectiveness of this writing.

What we have not taught our students

In spite of all our efforts, it seems that in many cases we have done a poor job at teaching effective communication. This opinion is based upon my reading of Facebook. I say so because so many younger people do not seem to be able, when it comes to their own writing, to distinguish between opinions and facts, but even more limiting, they have difficulty distinguishing between name calling and argumentation. Although, perhaps they do distinguish it, but reaching an early frustration point in every controversial conversation, resort to the skills they have learned best: name calling, put-downs, and insults. Teachers, your work is cut out. You must help students to express themselves with the use of content, of ideas and of facts, rather than resorting to mostly negative emotions. Good luck to all educators as we approach the start of another new school year.

Comments will be welcome. Thanks. #teaching #writing #Facebook #education #howtoteachwriting

Saturday, August 6, 2016

Reaction to Ben Carson's Karl Marx statement

Ben Carson on my Facebook page  (via "The Washington Times") said this:
Like Karl Marx, today's political leaders believe they must force their theories onto we the people. They've decided we are simply not smart enough to understand what is "good" for us." 


My reaction

The truth is, all political groups force their ideas on the populaces they serve. As a politician, Ben Carson does that to, or would attempt to do so.

That is what government does: That is what government  is designed to do, regardless of which party happens to be in power.. There are no governments that I know of that do not do this, and I think there never will be.


Good governments versus bad governments

A good government will try to build a consensus about what is important to the people. An evil government will pervert the message in order to suit corporate moguls or wealthy individuals who want to use the government to enrich themselves.
The pertinent question we must ask politicians is this: What are your priorities? Is the priority war, world-wide control that feed lucrative government contracts, often without regard for human lives?

Or doe the priorities serve the general welfare of the populace? That's the apex from which we start our slide off into political actions.

As to being stupid or smart enough to understand what is good for us, the remarks by politicians, including Mr. Carson, do not always help us in this regard, in my opinion.  Beware of political "maps" that do not fit the territory, and of action plans that do not bring about the promised results.

Karl Marx like decades of Republicans, have always put teeth into their ideologies.

Examples that come to mind are trickle-down economics, the Iraq war, and the disastrous "War on Drugs.".

Yes, I am all in favor of Americans being informed about the intents and possible consequences of government policies and actions, especially military involvement. Beware the Ben Carsons of the world: There is a world of difference between taxation for social programs that benefit everyone, universally, versus bully governments enforcing unpopular wars, unwilling standing armies, and world-wide carnage.

Yes, indeed we are "smart enough" to govern ourselves were it not for  the lies and propaganda of politicians financed by lucrative war machines. Need I say more?

#war  #warmachines  #bencarson   #reactionpaper   #bencarson , 

Monday, August 1, 2016

No repentance, no love, no good faith: The DNC digs in, blames victims

My reaction to Bernie Sanders law suit: Sanders followers have sued the Democratic National Convention and Debbi Wassermann Schultz for their roles in alleged voter fraud in trying to support Hillary Clinton while dealing with Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders.