Vladimir Putin: Dear Hillary Clinton, Time for Round III
There is no way that Hillary would be able to win a debate with Vladimir Putin at all because her political calculus is morally and intellectually vacuous.
…by Jonas E. Alexis
Hillary Clinton continues to undermine her own mine by positing extraordinary claims with very little or no evidence whatsoever. She is obviously familiar with the scholarly method. As a lawyer, she knows that one has to present serious evidence and rigorous testing when making serious charges. She knows that no thinking person would accept a case without evidential confirmation.
But Hillary continues to violate the principles of the legal system by making claims like this:
“Our intelligence community just came out and said in the last few days that the Kremlin, meaning Putin and the Russian government, are directing the attacks, the hacking on American accounts to influence our election.”Our intelligence community? Didn’t George W. Bush say something very similar? Didn’t he propagate the categorical lie that the intelligence community said that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction? Didn’t the intelligence community actually say the opposite? Didn’t Bush end up fooling a lot of people with a complete hoax and fabrication?
Hillary has to do more than just saying that “Our intelligence community just came out and said” this or that. She has to present serious cases as a lawyer would do. In fact, many cyberwarfare experts such as Jeffrey Carr have declared that no one knows who really hacked the Democratic National Committee.
Does Hillary know something that the experts don’t know? And if so, why can’t she present the evidence in a logical fashion so that people of reason can examine it? Why is she following the Powers That Be in saying that Russia is actually an enemy of the West? Why is she willing to go head to head with a country that is actually obliterating ISIS in Syria?
Does Hillary really want to tell us all that Russia is worse than Saudi Arabia, a terrorist regime that America has been backing since time immemorial? How about targeting civilians in Yemen?
As Jim W. Dean has recently pointed out on Press TV, Saudi Arabia has made a joke out of the UN by violating a ceasefire in Yemen, and no US official has said a damn thing about this. Why can Hillary say something meaningful about that?