He spent his life in the military. He knows that loose lips sink ships, but blithely discussed secrets not his own with those who were not cleared to know them, using methods he knew were insecure... as is now demonstrated. This is very different than catty gossip about his dearest friends.
[IsraelTimes] While discussing Iran nuclear deal, former secretary of state apparently reveals extent of Jewish state’s alleged atomic arsenal
Former US secretary of state and four-star general Colin Powell alleged that Israel possesses some 200 nuclear weapons, in an email apparently leaked by Russian hackers this week.
Discussing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s March 2015 speech to Congress about the dangers posed by the Iranian nuclear deal, in an email he sent to US Democratic party donor Jeffrey Leeds, Powell wrote that he doubted the Iranian regime would use an atomic bomb even if it could get one, since "the boys in Tehran know Israel has 200, all targeted on Tehran, and we have thousands."
The email was published by the LobeLog foreign policy website.
Israel maintains a policy of so-called nuclear ambiguity, neither publicly confirming nor denying the existence of an atomic arsenal.
According to a 2014 report by the Federation of American Scientists, however, the Jewish state is believed to possess between 80 and 400 nuclear weapons, though that document’s authors estimated the figure was closer to 80.
Powell’s email, sent on March 3, 2015, more than doubled that approximation. As a former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, his figure of 200 nuclear weapons would appear to carry more weight than the approximations of the "news media reports, think tanks, authors, and analysts" cited in the FAS report.
A trove of Powell’s emails was posted on the website DCLeaks.com and first reported by Buzzfeed News late Tuesday. Powell, 79, did not deny the emails’ authenticity when asked for comment by Buzzfeed.
The emails, which run from March 2015 through last month, offer rare insight into the unvarnished opinions of the respected retired US Army general, who was secretary of state under President George W. Bush.
DCLeaks.com has been alleged to be an outlet for hackers tied to the Russian intelligence groups. The website, which says it intends to expose the misuse of political power, has previously released emails from other Washington political figures.
However, there's more than one way to skin a cat... his March 3, 2015, email dealt specifically with the Iranian nuclear deal and Netanyahu’s controversial speech to Congress that day about it. Powell told Leeds, his business partner, that he had watched "parts of it," and that is was "well done, but nothing new. I could have mouthed it."
He challenged some of the assertions made by Netanyahu in the speech. According to Powell, the Iranians "can’t use [a nuclear bomb] if they finally make one," because of Israel’s overwhelming arsenal.
"As Akmdinijad (sic) [said], ’What would we do with one, polish it?'" he wrote, referring to former Iranian president Mahmoud Short Round Ahmadinejad.
Powell said that while all his "buddies" in Abu Dhabi wanted an Iranian nuclear deal and had been working for over a decade to reach one, he was unconvinced.
"I don’t trust Iranians -- almost went to jail over Iran-Contra," he wrote, referring to a political scandal in the United States in the late 1980s, in which American officials were caught facilitating weapons sales to Iran, despite an arms embargo.
Powell also cast doubt on the amount of time that Netanyahu and others estimated that it would take Iran to develop a nuclear bomb.
"Bibi likes to say ’a year away,’ as do our intel guys. They say it every years (sic)," Powell wrote.
#3
"According to a 2014 report by the Federation of American Scientists, however, the Jewish state is believed to possess between 80 and 400 nuclear weapons, though that document’s authors estimated the figure was closer to 80."
The 80 figure goes back to the nineteen eighties.
It is believed that Israel now has enough neutron bombs to eliminate Dar al-Islam were Israel ever threatend with extinction. The Saudis know this, and as Mekka and Medina would be the first to be hit they act very circumspectly.
#4
whether it's 5,000 or 1. The difference is the will to use them to survive
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/16/2016 8:58 Comments ||
Top||
#5
One of the most underrated outcomes of the last Bush administration is that we will never have to worry about a Colin Powell or Condi Rice GOP candidacy for prexy
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
09/16/2016 9:09 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
09/16/2016 10:32 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Powell thinks the Mad Mullahs won't use a nuke because the Juice have 200 of them aimed at Tehran? What a fool. They don't call 'em Mad Mullahs for nothing. They really are crazy and there is no telling what they might do.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
09/16/2016 10:52 Comments ||
Top||
#9
A Quark Bomb
A next generation atomic weapon, suggested in some scientific journals as possible.
Essentially it is a weapon which somehow splits open protons to release their quarks, the subatomic particles which make up protons, in theory releasing masses of energy. (possibly about 1200 times more energy than an atomic bomb of similar size)
#11
Powell thinks the Mad Mullahs won't use a nuke because the Juice have 200 of them aimed at Tehran?
Since they believe that if they are losing Allah will be forced to intervene to tip the scales in their favour, starting a nuclear war they are bound to lose is logical. Al Qaeda believed the same thing before 9/11; it was the massive damage that the Ummah recoved at the hands of George W. Bush's coalition that changed minds about that whole hard jihad of the sword thing until President Obama proactively left the battlefield.
#12
Also, some or all of the Ayatollahs are Twelvers - they believe that the 12th imam is hiding in the well and a nuclear war will bring him out. He will bring about peace, justice, and/or the end of the world. Which they think is a good thing.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
09/16/2016 12:12 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Condi also agreed with Powell's assessment of Benghazi a "witch hunt". She has been fully assimilated.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
09/16/2016 14:53 Comments ||
Top||
[Observer] Wells Fargo fraud department inundated with calls from low-income Clinton supporters reporting repeated unauthorized charges.
Hillary Clinton’s campaign is stealing from her poorest supporters by purposefully and repeatedly overcharging them after they make what's supposed to be a one-time small donation through her official campaign website, multiple sources tell the Observer.
The overcharges are occurring so often that the fraud department at one of the nation's biggest banks receives up to 100 phone calls a day from Clinton's small donors asking for refunds for unauthorized charges to their bankcards made by Clinton's campaign. One elderly Clinton donor, who has been a victim of this fraud scheme, has filed a complaint with her state's attorney general and a representative from the office told her that they had forwarded her case to the Federal Election Commission.
"We get up to a hundred calls a day from Hillary's low-income supporters complaining about multiple unauthorized charges," a source, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of job security, from the Wells Fargo fraud department told the Observer. The source claims that the Clinton campaign has been pulling this stunt since Spring of this year. The Hillary for America campaign will overcharge small donors by repeatedly charging small amounts such as $20 to the bankcards of donors who made a one-time donation. However, the Clinton campaign strategically doesn't overcharge these donors $100 or more because the bank would then be obligated to investigate the fraud.
"We don't investigate fraudulent charges unless they are over $100," the fraud specialist explained. "The Clinton campaign knows this, that's why we don't see any charges over the $100 amount, they'll stop the charges just below $100. We'll see her campaign overcharge donors by $20, $40 or $60 but never more than $100." The source, who has worked for Wells Fargo for over 10 years, said that the total amount they refund customers on a daily basis who have been overcharged by Clinton's campaign "varies" but the bank usually issues refunds that total between $700 and $1200 per day.
The fraud specialist said that Clinton donors who call in will attempt to resolve the issue with the campaign first but they never get anywhere. "They will call the Clinton campaign to get their refund and the issue never gets resolved. So they call us and we just issue the refund. The Clinton campaign knows these charges are small potatoes and that we'll just refund the money back."
#1
The banks and credit card processor are involved in this. I used to work for a credit card processor and when a cardholder complains to the bank about a charge and do a chargeback, the merchant gets fined. Used to be $200 per chargeback. Get so many in a year and they canceled your account too, usually 5-7. So somewhere in these lines a deal has been struck for the banks to essentially donate to Hillary since if they were charging these back, the campaign wouldn't be allowed to continue accepting cards. So yes, it's fraud but more than just the campaign is involved here.
#3
Wells Fargo fraud department - Didn't Wells Fargo just rob 2.1 million Americans with fraudulent credit cards? Was this tied into the Clinton campaign fundraising?
#4
They have often been referred to as grifters. Grifters are people who engage in petty swindles. There is nothing petty about the swindles/crime going on. Malfeasants might be a better tag to hang on them but that is often used to refer to crooked public officials. We need a new noun to describe what they do. What is surprising is how many people they are able to drag into their web of deceit.
Recent polls in Arkansas: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Emerson Trump 57, Clinton 29, Johnson 5, Stein 3 Trump +28. The people in Arkansas know this couple.
#8
They were creating millions of fake accounts at Wells Fargo then defrauding those people. 5500 Wells Fargo Emplys fired. Lady who was head of that group was allowed to retire early with a 160 million in bonuses and stock options. Oh and Rantburg's English accounting expert say Buffet is a big investor in Wells Fargo. Lots of circles might or might not be connected.
[PJ] Near my father's home, something that looks like a large birdhouse has appeared on someone's property. It's one of those "little free libraries" that you might have seen -- they've popped up all over the place.
The idea is simple: If you want a book, you take a book and leave another in its place. It's a nice, sweet idea that has worked out remarkably well, considering how many folks out there are Grade A jerks.
Speaking of jerks, however, the government is cracking down on such book sharing. Because of course it is:
Last summer in Kansas, a nine-year-old was loving his Little Free Library until at least two residents proved that some people will complain about anything no matter how harmless and city officials pushed the boundaries of literal-mindedness:
The Leawood City Council said it had received a couple of complaints about Spencer Collins' Little Free Library. They dubbed it an "illegal detached structure" and told the Collins' they would face a fine if they did not remove the Little Free Library from their yard by June 19.
Scattered stories like these have appeared in various local news outlets. The L.A. Times followed up last week with a trend story that got things just about right.
"Crime, homelessness and crumbling infrastructure are still a problem in almost every part of America, but two cities have recently cracked down on one of the country's biggest problems: small-community libraries where residents can share books," Michael Schaub wrote.
"Officials in Los Angeles and Shreveport, Louisiana, have told the owners of homemade lending libraries that they're in violation of city codes, and asked them to remove or relocate their small book collections."
This, ladies and gentlemen, is why we can't have nice things.
Keep in mind that these structures are on private property, and are typically not large enough to do much of anything except hold a handful of books. Wronging another human in any way with these structures may be literally impossible.
#4
some people will complain about anything no matter how harmless Kind of like bitching about a little kid's lemonade stand. It is the whiner--PC--annoying era. It will pass at some point (he said hopefully).
#6
See - tool shed. It's all about power in the hands of people who should never be permitted near it.
'Some people complained' - the fundamental right of the accused to face their accuser. Put it in writing with your name and address on it for public view and access.
#10
Many zoning / property maintenance regulations are only enforced when someone complains. I legally parked my slide-on truck camper in my front driveway from 1983-2005, when that suddenly became illegal. I continued to park it from 2005 to 2011 when someone complained & I was forced to move it to a paid parking lot.
Posted by: Bobby ||
09/16/2016 13:45 Comments ||
Top||
#12
The California Coastal Commission used to have a cow when a person installed such things as bird houses or flagpoles (or anything that one might have to dig a hole to install) within a certain distance from the ocean. My Dad found out the hard way when he put up a trellis in his yard.
Don't know if it is still that way or not.
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
09/16/2016 14:43 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
09/16/2016 14:55 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Hillary DID IT AGAIN!!!
Just called the veterans presser "Disgraceful".
Posted by: Spusing Darling of the Huns5115 ||
09/16/2016 15:54 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Sounds like the stupid little ants walked into it thinking like fatheads.
Birther is what they wanted. The script has always gone this way.
But oh, when their funny little prejudices and expectations are wrong, it is Trump's fault.
I don't care much if it was on accident or on purpose, it shows that the media does not have a decision loop, it has a decision yarn. Always suspected, now confirmed.
h/t Instapundit
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said today that he's not in favor of requiring a prescription to purchase birth control. In a taped interview on "The Dr. Oz Show," Trump said, "I would say it should not be a prescription; it should not be done by prescription." A covert strike at Dem voters?
#1
"A covert strike at Dem voters?". You got it. Trump is a master at this game and plays to win. He is always ahead of most in media. Why because they are managed.
#3
Planned Parenthood would loose a lot of taxpayer money.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
09/16/2016 8:30 Comments ||
Top||
#4
He just cut the legs out the the Donk wing of the screaming garbage baby feminists who keep playing the 'War on Women' mantra. What are they going to fallback on? That the drugs are dangerous with terrible side effects, the same drugs they've insisted on access to for generations?
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.
