If Dakota Access Pipe Line did not legally own the land, then Clean Water protestors were not trespassing on DAPL land.
Protestors were injured in the very aggressive assault on the protestors. Was this on instruction of local or federal police or done by police privately hired
Police used water cannons in below freezing weather on the Clean Water #DAPL protestors; as well as tear gas and rubber bullets that caused serious injury.
Over 300 people were injured.
It was like something you’d expect in a vicious totalitarian police state.
When govts start restricting free speech (which inherently includes the right to peaceful protest) to protect certain interest groups; its a short trip to totalitarian police state-ism.
Intimidation and attack by police on the #DAPL Clean Water protestors occurred under the Obama admin - as did the attack on Ferguson protestors (those protestors included outside agents provocateurs that engaged in acts of violence - a situation then used as an excuse to attack)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Notice the partisan framing of this article, especially the header.
Who thinks paying $10 million for 33 acres of water front land for a college is a bad idea?
Bernie and Jane Sanders, under FBI investigation for bank fraud, hire lawyers - CBS News cbsnews.com/news/bernie-an…
Jane Sanders (Bernie Sanders wife), had obtained pledges from potential donors to buy 👉🏼33 acres of waterfront property in 2010 for $10 million.👈🏼
At least one of the pledgers backed out.
Did any who backed out buy the land as a Real Estate investment in 2015?
The land was purchased in 2010.
Sanders left the College in 2011.
Ask yourself why a College that only owed $11.4 million in debt (and had at least $10 million in property) had to close in election year, 2016
Philip Matthews gives some back story on the political agenda driven “Tax Payers Union” - which, despite the benign sounding name, featured as a right wing attack tool in Nicky Hager’s book - Dirty Politics stuff.co.nz/national/polit…
To be fair; the “Tax Payer’s Union” does dig up some useful information on govt waste.
But its agenda seems mainly focused on attacking Labour and its Coalition partners.
If you read Hager’s book “Dirty Politics”; you would better understand what the Tax Payers Union is about
A search will reveal that Taxpayers Alliance or Taxpayers Union is mentioned 18 times in Hager’s book
Consider Clinton. She has investigated (a farce by all accounts) by the FBI
This was regarding 👉🏼hard evidence, in the public domain, (not rumour) that for anyone else would have resulted in a jail term
Wasn’t that investigation led by some of same guys doing a hit job on Trump?
In the case of Clinton’s FBI investigation, wasn’t there?
👉🏼No audio.
👉🏼No verbatim records.
👉🏼Production of evidence was voluntary.
👉🏼Not everyone was interviewed
👉🏼2 of her chief sidekicks (witnesses) were in w her during her interview. Weren’t they and others given immunity?
Sure Clinton had a hearing; but that hearing was over things she actually did, triggered in part by the utterly unbelievable way the FBI had handled the token investigation they made in her case.
Between 2010 - 2014, PSYOP was renamed Military Information Support Operations (MISO), then briefly renamed PSYOP in Aug 2014, only to return to MISO shortly thereafter in 2015
The bulk of U.S. military PSYOP units are Army
White PSYOP can come from the Voice of America or regional radio/TV
CIA units are apt to have responsibility, on a strategic level, for black and some gray propaganda
🐘How much Psyops do you think is directed at social media?🐘
The overall psychological operations of the United States, overt and covert, were to be 👉🏼under the policy direction of the U.S. Department of State👈🏼 during peacetime and war.
Who have been head of the State Dept - hence have had an inside track to propagandists?
A new (IMO irresponsible) Quinnipac Kangaroo Court poll, which by framing such questions - serves to normalise character assassination, gossip & rumour based opinion 👉🏼as if its fact:
With no consideration of the negative effects of this social engineering on justice overall
God help any men, if they are to be presumed guilty just because they’re male - if a politically motivated hit team uses unverifiable claims by a female against them
This ladies, is not feminism in action. (I am a female who has fought that fight)
It’s malicious anti-male sexism
Sexism is wrong, whether against women or men.
It is sexist to deem as a default that the word of one sex is superior to the other
Judging people on gossip and rumour is profoundly morally wrong.
Its no wonder there is an unjust justice system in the US.
The media promotes it