And yet you use stuff like the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s to back your points up.
I looked for facts, you’re not good at those.
As anybody with any knowledge of US politics knows, and as I told you the other night, the Civil Rights Act is the central dividing line in modern US politics and remains so to this day.
But of course, given that your knowledge of US politics and historical context is so non-existent, you’re oblivious to such a basic fact.
Eisenhower’s speech carries no relevance to the modern Republican party - they are the exact definition of what his speech warned about.
Eisenhower’s foreign policy wasn’t so great itself, it should be said.
It was on his watch that Mossadegh was overthrown by a US/British plotted coup in Iran, Arbenz was overthrown in Guatemala, the Rosenbergs were executed and Cuba turned into a brutal dictatorship.
Plenty there above.
Show me facts that say that a dictator and his family that have ruled for half a century unelected, that forced at least 10% of his population to flee and that imprisoned political opponents on show trials and send many to the firing squads cannot be called a despot.
The only reason you and other on here defend him is because he stood up to the US. You will throw all of your principles out for that.
This is going round in circles. I ask for facts, you make things up, I note that you are making things up, you try to insult me, I’m not really bothered, you try to make more things up.
I think this is eligible for the cliche bingo thread.
1 Like
Tell me what to believe, mate.
That sounds like an Alanis Morrisette lyric.
2 Likes
You oughtta know.
2 Likes
I don’t want you to believe, pal. I just want you to open your eyes… the lads here are reading from a script.
Reagan…Christ, the utter warmonger (and Satanist 
). @Sidney where Obama has failed is where all US presidents have failed since they decided to rape the ME. He sided with the Saudis which was to be expected but mainly so the US could deter Russian / Iranian control there (1000s of miles from home). Business depends on control of the area, at a high cost to people in the ME and financially in the US.
How do you make that out?
Kid, the Iranian and Syrian central banks were some of the few not owned by the Rothschilds… What do you think all these wars and sanctions are about? Nothing to do with ideology or over throwing dictators, it’s about the American empire controling every financial institution in the planet. Presidents are only puppets to achieve this end.
The ideologues and coups are symptoms. Horrid. I remember reading that the rape of the ME was discussed soon after ww1 and escalated big time after ww2. The provocation of Russia and China which comes with the ‘Territory’ is also hugely worrying
Serbia is a perfect example of what you are saying re: Banks
In the year of 2000 there were only seven countries without a Rothschild owned Central Bank:
Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Cuba, North Korea, Iran…
Where are we at today? - When will America introduce freedom to all of these countries? - You have mugs then like @glasagusban and @Tim_Riggins arguing about the international records of various US presidents 
That is too neat a narrative. What about China?
China and Russia are entities onto themselves. Neat? It’s facts - do with it what you want.
So the Chinese and Russian central banks are not owned by the Rothschilds.
What about Venezuela?
What have the US/Venezuelan relations been like for the last 20 years?