[bagster]

>Anybody that Hillary Clinton wants to drone, is definitely on our side.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I think you jumped the rails a bit here. Hillary was quite ready to take out Saddam Hussein and Qaddafi (for her own personal gain, of course). I wouldn’t refer to them as white hats. Nevertheless, I agree with you about Assange.

I was mostly talking about Assange, but your post got me thinking. Looking at the "big picture" and what we know now,thanks to our Q research and current events. Think of W. Bush being a part of the same deep state that Hillary is a part of. We all seem in accordance on that now, right?

Then think of Obama's so called "Arab Spring", events in Egypt, the forming of ISIS, and all over the Mideast. I believe that the "deep state's" goal was consolidation of the entire middle east into a "caliphate". Taking out Saddam and Khaddafi were crucial to that goal, right? Saddam was surely a pain in the ass, and Khaddafi HAD been, but he gave up his nuclear ambitions and was being a good raggedy man after Reagan spanked him. Why was it necessary to go after him all of a sudden?

No. I'm gonna stick with my original thought. Anybody that Hillary wants to drone is on our side. Even Khaddafi and to a lesser and shakier extent, Saddam.

I know, it's a hard sell. Just think about it.

Bagster

Lesser Oracle

[greeneyes]

Anybody Hildebeast wanted to drone is on our side. Hmm not so fast. Not sure I’m agreeing with that. Not really worth arguing about to me though.

Kaddafi - that’s easy. That’s the standard topple and rob the country that they have done for ages. Topple the Government. Put in your own puppet guy. Have Puppet sign over oil leases and all other mineral wealth to your buddie’s companies. Share the spoils of war.

Of course that’s after you steal Kaddafi’s gold and money and split with your partners in crime, and a give a little to Soros to use with the next topple.

Why did CIA help bring down the Shah of Iran? Same deal - Carter wanted his buddy’s to have the oil leases. Shah had other plans. History repeats.

[Disestablishmentarian]

I believe that the "deep state's" goal was consolidation of the entire middle east into a "caliphate". Taking out Saddam and Khaddafi were crucial to that goal, right? Saddam was surely a pain in the ass, and Khaddafi HAD been, but he gave up his nuclear ambitions and was being a good raggedy man after Reagan spanked him. Why was it necessary to go after him all of a sudden?

No. I'm gonna stick with my original thought. Anybody that Hillary wants to drone is on our side. Even Khaddafi and to a lesser and shakier extent, Saddam.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I have to admit, they were better (for the U.S.) by far than the present circumstances.

I tend to think the globalist goal is not a Caliphate per se, but to absorb all these nations into an expanded E.U.

That would explain why the E.U. wants to get rid of Israel, as well as any strong nationalistic governments in the region.

Hillary, of course, is not the least bit idealistic--more of a garden variety sociopath. She was just in it for the money, the narcissistic gratification and the power.

[cherry]

I've come to believe that too...the enemy of my enemy is my friend...

which is why we were on the wrong side in Kosovo and why we where wrong to support the Syrian rebels....

hey Toonwitch, anything you support, we've against... anything that you attack, we're for...

[TEXOKIE]

I think you construct a good logic chain there, bagster. Had not thought of it in entirely that way.