JW Insider

I was pretty sure you had already broken into the Watchtower HQ and added the last sentence to a paragraph in a very recent Watchtower we just studied: (November 2019)
*** w19 November p. 17 par. 13 Are You Maintaining Your “Large Shield of Faith”? ***
13 Imagine the scene. A group of soldiers spend the morning training with their swords, but one of their company is missing. That soldier is in town setting up a food shop. In the evening, the soldiers spend time inspecting their armor and sharpening their swords. But the one who owns the shop spends his time preparing food to sell the next day. The next morning, however, an enemy launches a surprise attack. Which soldier is more likely to act appropriately and earn the approval of his commanding officer? And whom would you want standing beside you—a soldier who focused on being prepared or the one who was distracted?

That being said, I can’t believe all the deceit and duplicity that goes on here. Aliases, counter-aliases—it’s enough to make a nice guy like me swear like a trooper. Which, of course, I would never do. And you call yourselves Bible people!

I remember that. It was pretty funny. I always got the impression that the first thing you must always type in any response is the term "that being said" and then you work your post before and after that expression, just to make sure it's in there. But then again, you probably already know that there is another person, not nearly so active, who has never used that particular expression here, but who has used at least half a dozen other terms and definitions that would otherwise have been mostly unique to you.

SM probably was using JB1 as shorthand for "4Jah2Me." That was the name you took just after "John Butler." It was very easy to identify you --you didn't try very hard to hide the fact-- but I understand why you thought it necessary to avoid admitting directly to being the reincarnated (re-insiliconated)  "John Butler." But you have already admitted previously that "4Jah2Me" was the name you had when you changed it to "Patiently waiting for Truth." That means, by the transitive property of multiplication of identities, that you are now admitting that both the previous names were re-instances of John Butler. But that should be no big deal to any of us. It's just an interesting observation that helps to understand your issues and concerns more clearly: like noticing all the points in common between "Cesar Chavez" and "NoisySrecko." 

SM probably was using JB1 as shorthand for "4Jah2Me." That was the name you took just after "John Butler." It was very easy to identify you --you didn't try very hard to hide the fact-- but I understand why you thought it necessary to avoid admitting directly to being the reincarnated (re-insiliconated)  "John Butler." But you have already admitted previously that "4Jah2Me" was the name you had when you changed it to "Patiently waiting for Truth." That means, by the transitive property of multiplication of identities, that you are now admitting that both the previous names were re-instances of John Butler. But that should be no big deal to any of us. It's just an interesting observation that helps to understand your issues and concerns more clearly: like noticing all the points in common between "Cesar Chavez" and "NoisySrecko." 

(Haʹzor) [Courtyard; Settlement].
In just a few more minutes into this video you will see Archaeologist Eric Cline mention the ruins and invaders of Hazor including Joshua
The chief city of northern Canaan at the time of Israel’s conquest under Joshua. (Jos 11:10) Hazor has been identified with Tell el-Qedah (Tel Hazor) located about 11 km (7 mi) SSE of the suggested site of Kedesh. According to archaeologist Yigael Yadin, under whose direction excavations were carried out at the site from 1955 to 1958 and 1968 to 1969, the Hazor of Joshua’s time covered an area of approximately 60 ha (150 acres) and could have accommodated from 25,000 to 30,000 inhabitants.

I remember that. It was pretty funny. I always got the impression that the first thing you must always type in any response is the term "that being said" and then you work your post before and after that expression, just to make sure it's in there. But then again, you probably already know that there is another person, not nearly so active, who has never used that particular expression here, but who has used at least half a dozen other terms and definitions that would otherwise have been mostly unique to you.

I agree friend. My thought is not just in statistics, no more than facts. These are plain to see.
Race Relations in America_ Examining the Facts-ABC-CLIO (2021)
Data collected on fatal police shootings reveal that African Americans are approximately 2.5 to 3 times more likely than white Americans to be killed by police. One explanation for the racial disparity frequently used to defend police killings of African Americans is that they are more likely than whites to be armed and to resist arrest, thus necessitating violent force by police. A competing explanation centers on the racial biases of police officers and maintains that the explicit and implicit biases of officers affect the snap judgments they make about African Americans—including whether or not to shoot. Research provides support to the latter perspective, though the evidence is not conclusive.
 
HEARINGS BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, NINETY -EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION ON POLICE MISCONDUCT
JUNE 16, JULY 18, SEPTEMBER 19, AND NOVEMBER 28, 1983
 Robin (1963) studied 32 fatal shootings by police in Philadelphia from 1950 to 1960. Twenty-eight, or 87.5 %, of these involved blacks, in a population estimated to be about 22 % black. The proportion of those killed who were black, then, exceeded population - based expectation by 65.5%. Robin also reports that the population - based rate of deadly force for blacks in Philadelphia was about 22 times that of whites. Results of a mail survey for seven other cities indicate a range from six to nearly thirty times the white rate for blacks.
 Takagi (1974) draws upon data from the VITAL STATISTICS, and reports that 48.7 % of the decedents due to police use of deadly force nationwide were black in 1960 through 1968. He estimates that 10 % of the population at that time was black, yielding a higher-than-expected black representation among deadly force decedents of 38.7 %. He further describes these data as revealing that while deadly force rates for both blacks and whites increased over these years, the rate for blacks was always at least nine times as high for blacks as it was for whites.
 It is true, conditions have improved over the decades, but not to a noticeable extent from another race perspective.
 My observation is on why is it necessary to make any distinctions from God’s creation, here. This is one reason why “whites” in America think they are obligated to maintain their superiority over other races.  A predicament that is even vocal in this forum. Why? What is the need?

Being knowledgeable does not equate to being part of the world.
For if a man knows there is a Tiger in his village, he prepares himself, but a man who is unaware of the Tiger will most likely be mauled to death because he didn't have the knowledge of a potential danger. Something of this regard can be liken to Proverbs 22:3 and all references to it.
The prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple go on and suffer for it.
Moreover, these events ties in to things globally, not just America, an example would be these court cases, which now concluded, which got people around the globe speaking, hence the world is watching. Hence, the week I was out, I was in debates, majority of them being with Leftists who do not know the justice system.
That being said, it should be known to you even Christians of old, as is followers of the True God were knowledgeable and aware of things happening around them although they are no part of the world, an example would be the decree that took place in Joseph and Mary's time concerning the month of Ethanim. For if followers of God and his Christ know what is going on around them, granted we have several examples, what is stopping you, as a Christian, or anyone else to do the same?
Like I said, there are people who are aware of things, and there are those who are unaware, which often times, succumb to Bystander Syndrome. Symbolically, there is a Tiger, in your neck of the woods, which was professed to you weeks ago, perhaps, maybe, you know.
This is true, however, usually what is professed, even when it comes to pushing the narrative, the media often uses any situation where it is a black person (ironically never someone of authority, i.e. David Dorn). Also there are statistics, which is public; for black people make up 13% of the U.S. population, about 33% of that 13% is related to crime, some of which there is police involvement, which does not involve any of such persons being shot and or killed in the process (some instances, but not insanely high) because of the low percentage, however, this does not stop various pro-black groups, and Leftist, who do not know this information will proclaim their own information. So if we are to take 2 situations, a white man being shot vs a black man, the agenda wants to push a racial narrative, so the black person being shot will be the choice of media content for them. We can even see this in regards to both Wisconsin incidents - Kyle Rittenhouse vs. Darrell Brooks Jr., and in regards to Darrell Brooks Jr., this guys history, alone with how they let him out, is quite surprising to me.
The extreme Left does not realize how damaging their actions are. It'll be worse for not just the black community, but everyone else once the reset starts; as we speak a great transfer of wealth is taking place.
That being said, the family is a strong unit, if the system can break the family, then it can break each individual that make up the family very easily.
@TrueTomHarley I do not believe they are both the same Srecko, one is actually aware of most things.

I am am almost 69 - and I have been interested in many of these things throughout my life.  That is why I do not remember all the names but my understanding of how it works is still intact
Old money goes back a long way.  The money of the catholic church goes back to the time of the crusades.  Money in Venice, money from the colonies and the beginning of the modern day banking system which is based on usury and lending of money to governments for war.
 

You may be right. Stand by for my latest persona: NoisyNoisySrecko.

Allow me to express a profound thought, friend, and I hope you will not take it the wrong way. I pray you don't. 
May your strength carry you over a 100. Be at peace and forgive yourself in these trying time. Do not look upon yourself as an unrepentant person but instead a lost sheep looking for a righteous Shepherd. You seem to have lost confidence in the people around you. Stop, think, and reflect on what scripture means in the personal relationship you need to reconnect with Jehovah. Christian faith while unified cast a greater self-worth of faith. It is by virtue of our personal relationship with God that will ultimately be our salvation. God demanded the unity of his chosen people. He expects no less from spiritual Israel. May you find time to reignite your service to Jehovah.
My apologies in advance if my words offend you in any way. May peace and love carry you in your journey.

Without peaking, didn’t capitalism get underway when people began pooling investments? With regard to European exploration of North America, expeditions were financed from pooled investors. They were not self-financed. 
Queen Isabella of Spain is the one to watch in this instance. Expeditions to South America were not investor financed. They could not be, because Spain (and Italy) were solidly Catholic. Catholics considered any kind of investor finance was usury prohibited by scripture. The only one who with deep enough pockets to self-finance a voyage to South. America was the crown. That is why South America was exploited to a much greater degree than North. ‘Grab the gold and go’ was the motto of Catholic Spain and Italy. But investors from England and the Netherlands were not thwarted by usury scriptures that ruled out investing. They had no need for their stake to be paid back instantly.
Does the legacy even remain to this day?
 

Actually, everyone has the same amount of time .... some start earlier ... some die earlier.
But barring that, other things being equal, we all choose how to, and how not to ... spend our time.

Most of them are NOT Christians but are globalists with transhumanist aspirations.  Blackrock value is 9 trillion for example.  There are people who fly under the radar such as the old money  i.e. Dutch east India Company (dutch king which owns Shell etc); English east India company (British queen who owns British Petroleum). Vanguard, Buffet and people like Ted Turner and others who hold similar atheist convictions together with the top global corporations that have more money than most countries - all the stocks of these corporations owned by the same group of billionaires (which includes the CCP military wing). And add to that all AI companies together with the digital companies (who all do secret contracts for DARPA, CIA, NASA and the other secret organizations and spy on enemies and citizens.)
 
Capitalism took a turn when 'usury' became the way to make money but it also changed when gold or silver no longer backed the money system......... A central banking system, owned by a private cartel, can take control of all money.

I caught a glimpse of Judge Schroeder saying that he'll think twice about ever letting the media in his courtroom again.
If someone had only followed the terribly biased reporting of MSNBC, CNN, and the usual NBC,ABC,CBS TV news and their late-night comedy shows (Colbert, Kimmel, etc.), they would have come away with the idea that Rittenhouse was the white supremacist Trump supporter who crossed state lines with an assault rifle to kill BLM protesters and then turned himself in to the police who let him go.
Even NPR, up until the day of the verdict, kept using the expression "the man who shot and killed Black Lives Matter protesters." They later corrected this to "the man who shot and killed protesters at a Black Lives Matter demonstration" to be slightly more correct, but still avoid the outright admission that all his 'victims' were white.
The trial gave them even more optics for the narrative since Rittenhouse and Judge Schroeder both have Germanic names. I even saw people spelling the name as Rittenhaus.
A very interesting experiment for casual news consumers to do now is to watch a 10-minute video by Matt Orfalea which provides a very clear review of the case, making use of all the evidence in favor of a not guilty verdict. It's here, but might be hard to play because of YouTube's warnings about controversy and community standards. Be warned; it does contain the sometimes grainy video of the shootings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkTnQfjRvk0
--------------
When I was looking for this video, I didn't remember how to spell Matt Orfalea's last name, so that I also found a Matt Taibbi report --political reporter for "Rolling Stone" who is often wrong-- which covered this case correctly. It's here: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/the-rittenhouse-verdict-is-only-shocking
I didn't watch the accompanying video, which appears to be related to the one above (per the byline). But the article mentions the MSNBC employee who was stopped for speeding through red lights while chasing the dismissed jury's bus from the courthouse, and who claimed in defense that MSNBC had ordered him to get pictures of the jury. This could have been jury tampering, but I suspect they only wanted to be able to say, in case of acquittal, that it was an all-white jury. Instead, they reported that it was a "mostly white jury as far as they could tell."
There is a racial element to the story, in my opinion. Video shows lots of guns among the white protesters. And it also shows many white protesters instigating the burning and destruction of property. Even the initial confrontation was due to Rosenbaum (first victim) literally pushing a dumpster fire towards a gas station. Pouring gasoline on a dumpster fire was probably a good analogy to what MSNBC and other MSM were doing.
I have a feeling that Rittenhouse might have been far too anxious to give the impression that he was an important, heroic good-guy protecting a "white town" from BLM overreach. The gun was carried for protection, yes, but it was overkill, even if it was the only gun he had access to (from his local friend's father-in-law). I believe his involvement in the confrontation with a crazy white supremacist-look-alike backfired. By "crazy," I mean in the medical sense of the word, because this man (the one chasing Rittenhouse) had just been released from a hospital after bloodying his girlfriend and trying to commit suicide.. But this victim truly looked and acted the part of a crazed white supremacist, and by shooting him, even in self defense, it triggered a few whites in the racially charged crowd to turn against Rittenhouse, as if Rittenhouse were a BLM sympathizer. This seems likely, even though unintended, from the Matt Orfalea video. But it would turn the whole narrative on its head from the perspective of the MSM spin.

Same, I caught that one too. But the only good pros to that is that anyone paying attention to that Trial can see what the Prosecution tried to do. The people who attack the judge are more inline with anything pertaining to Marxism and Socialisms, namely, BLM and anyone assisting them such as the Revolutionist, who are of the Left. The man shot by Kyle, Gaige Grosskreutz, is a Revolutionist himself, for he is part of the People’s Revolution Movement, a social justice (SJW) group that originated in Milwaukee.
Plus in various discussions, you can see the difference between someone who watched the Trial vs those who didn't and focus on the MSM only.
Yep, that last 2 days of the Verdict was chaotic, and it also exposes MSNBC for what they are, and now people question past articles and stories they profess; ironically afterwards, they still continue to spread misinformation, even now with recent events in Wisconsin. From what I heard prior to the verdict, among the Jury, it was 7 women, and 5 men, one of the men was African American.
Yes, Conservatives proclaim him as a Hero, but in reality, although he could lawfully defend himself, it appears to have panic, then you Jump Kick Man, who some say may have embolden Huber to attack Kyle. BLM is a problematic group, and I myself often get into heated discussions with pro-black followers because of them and their Leftist allies, even recently because of the Rittenhouse Trial. On the other side of the spectrum in regards to all this, someone like Rosenbaum should not have been out in the first place, likewise with his friend, Kaminski, who fired shots prior to Rosenbaum chasing Kyle.
That being said, the way the MSM is reacting, as is anyone like a Hasan Piker or a Seder is reacting, it shows that eventually these people want a system in place, a Socialist one, and eventually a Marxist one, granted most Leftist groups adhere to Marxism, namely BLM. We will see what will take place after the reset.
Other than the Arbury Case, I am looking forward to the Giselle Maxwell one, but I doubt this will be public, so this one would be difficult for some of us to get information on.

When a reporter asked Trump (this was some time ago) about the spate of black persons shot and killed by police, he responded that police kill a lot of persons, including white persons. If fact, they kill more white persons than blacks. Incredibly, the reporter did not seem to know this. The statement had to be “fact checked.” The next day came the admission that—yes, what Trump said is technically true, but that’s only becasue there are more white people than black people.
If you follow the news of police shooting as reported by media, you might think that the very purpose of police was to kill black people. I wrote my proposed solution in ‘No Fake News but Plenty of Hogwash’ (since withdrawn for rework):
In the course of their job, police shoot hundreds of people per year. How should one report this? Put all shootings on TV. All of them. Run them 24/7 in the order in which they occur. Create a dedicated channel: The Shooting Channel. Make it freely available. Give every network a cut so no one will complain about ratings. Promote “The Shooting Channel” heavily. Ban shootings on any other channel.
Put white-on-black shootings on. Put black-on-white shootings on. Put black-on-black shootings on. Put white-on-white shootings on. Put Hispanic-on-Methodist shootings on. Put Buddhist-on-nudist shootings on. Put redneck Alabama white-on transgendered Vietnamese shootings on. Put them all on. Let viewers decide for themselves which shootings are significant and which are yawners. Otherwise, the newspeople will cherry-pick their favorites and start a race war. 
I did learn from my experience that much is generational. Those of my generation are not the slightest bit shocked that during a time of unrest, ordinary people should assemble so as to protect livelihoods at risk. But there is a younger generation that thinks first of how when someone shouts “Fight!” people who just love to fight on any pretext will come running to extract their pound of flesh, and bring their guns with them. I have to admit, if you viewed in that way (which I don’t in this instance) it does change your view of the outcome.
I even triggered the remark that I am out of touch with the thinking of the current generation. Tell me something I didn’t know.

I caught a glimpse of Judge Schroeder saying that he'll think twice about ever letting the media in his courtroom again.
If someone had only followed the terribly biased reporting of MSNBC, CNN, and the usual NBC,ABC,CBS TV news and their late-night comedy shows (Colbert, Kimmel, etc.), they would have come away with the idea that Rittenhouse was the white supremacist Trump supporter who crossed state lines with an assault rifle to kill BLM protesters and then turned himself in to the police who let him go.
Even NPR, up until the day of the verdict, kept using the expression "the man who shot and killed Black Lives Matter protesters." They later corrected this to "the man who shot and killed protesters at a Black Lives Matter demonstration" to be slightly more correct, but still avoid the outright admission that all his 'victims' were white.
The trial gave them even more optics for the narrative since Rittenhouse and Judge Schroeder both have Germanic names. I even saw people spelling the name as Rittenhaus.
A very interesting experiment for casual news consumers to do now is to watch a 10-minute video by Matt Orfalea which provides a very clear review of the case, making use of all the evidence in favor of a not guilty verdict. It's here, but might be hard to play because of YouTube's warnings about controversy and community standards. Be warned; it does contain the sometimes grainy video of the shootings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkTnQfjRvk0
--------------
When I was looking for this video, I didn't remember how to spell Matt Orfalea's last name, so that I also found a Matt Taibbi report --political reporter for "Rolling Stone" who is often wrong-- which covered this case correctly. It's here: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/the-rittenhouse-verdict-is-only-shocking
I didn't watch the accompanying video, which appears to be related to the one above (per the byline). But the article mentions the MSNBC employee who was stopped for speeding through red lights while chasing the dismissed jury's bus from the courthouse, and who claimed in defense that MSNBC had ordered him to get pictures of the jury. This could have been jury tampering, but I suspect they only wanted to be able to say, in case of acquittal, that it was an all-white jury. Instead, they reported that it was a "mostly white jury as far as they could tell."
There is a racial element to the story, in my opinion. Video shows lots of guns among the white protesters. And it also shows many white protesters instigating the burning and destruction of property. Even the initial confrontation was due to Rosenbaum (first victim) literally pushing a dumpster fire towards a gas station. Pouring gasoline on a dumpster fire was probably a good analogy to what MSNBC and other MSM were doing.
I have a feeling that Rittenhouse might have been far too anxious to give the impression that he was an important, heroic good-guy protecting a "white town" from BLM overreach. The gun was carried for protection, yes, but it was overkill, even if it was the only gun he had access to (from his local friend's father-in-law). I believe his involvement in the confrontation with a crazy white supremacist-look-alike backfired. By "crazy," I mean in the medical sense of the word, because this man (the one chasing Rittenhouse) had just been released from a hospital after bloodying his girlfriend and trying to commit suicide.. But this victim truly looked and acted the part of a crazed white supremacist, and by shooting him, even in self defense, it triggered a few whites in the racially charged crowd to turn against Rittenhouse, as if Rittenhouse were a BLM sympathizer. This seems likely, even though unintended, from the Matt Orfalea video. But it would turn the whole narrative on its head from the perspective of the MSM spin.

I had a very brief and blunted “sharp outburst of anger” with someone over Rittenhouse. In the process of restoring peace, I observed they shouldn’t put trials on the media anyway. To get the populace all worked up when they can’t know more than 1% of the facts? It’s just done for ratings. 
The only people who (hopefully) know it all will the the 12 of the jury. Let them decide it. Or, if you are not going to let them decide it, send them home. Nobody wants to serve jury duty anyway. Broadcast the entire trial on social media and decide the outcome by ‘likes’

The good thing is, if it was not public, the Prosecution would have gotten away with the misinformation they presented, especially in regards to the issue with the video footage's quality (original vs compressed). As for the media, mainly Left leaning, they tried to smear Kyle as if he was a White Supremacist, and lied about various other things regarding him. The Trial being public also allowed people to see other things, like what MSNBC tried to do, as is what took place outside of the courthouse, but like I said, the Left are crazy, so much so they got Facebook and Go Fund Me to strangle the funds for Rittenhouse.
The VIP of ignorance in the past 2 weeks was Joy Reid of MSNBC, who was among several people who wanted to stir up a race war by professing earlier on that Kyle shot and killed 3 black people, which caused pro black groups like BLM to be triggered. Among all groups in Kenosha,  Revolutionist were present, and among the people whom Kyle shot at, the 3rd, Gaige Grosskreutz, was one himself; not to mention him being foolish when giving testimony.
That being said, it is odd how BLM is involved even when given the facts, but they are attempting to use this opportunity because of the Blake shooting. And now the recent event at a Christmas Parade, they are trying to pin this on Kyle.
But as pointed out before, these events are merely leaks in a powder keg, this event with Rittenhouse, as is the events unfolding with the death of Ahmaud Arbery and how that case is doing. The MSM's agenda is to have a crisis, and to them, a race war may be something they want, not realizing we will end up with a situation similar to what transpired in 2017 whereas a rare moment the United Nations attempted to step in.
Yep, and they had a lot of pressure on them to, so much so, it was said by some during the 2 weeks that there will be people seeking to intimidate the jury, even the media.
As for the justice system, I always said it is a double edge sword in regards to all things, the good thing is the judge in question was not the one the prosecution, and the MSM expected.
That being said, this case as with Arbery, were among many rare moments where Truthers, Independent Journalists, Creators, Preppers even, and some Lawyers got together, but we are not out of the woods yet. As of right now, the case regarding the late Arbery is still ongoing, and the MSM is playing tricks still, only for people to expose them.
 

Whether it makes sense or not, there's a huge story there, and a lot of the evidence comes from many sources that might seem surprising. It's not really an exception to the idea that communism must still be sabotaged wherever possible. In this case the sabotage was drunken capitalism. And, of course, the form of government is less important to the US and Western allies than the idea of keeping all other other economies too weak. If it still seems like an exception to the rule, there is a lot to say here, but I'll save it for later.
The US also destroyed the Japanese capitalist economy, beginning in the 1980's, with specific trade policies. For now, I'll also just leave this topic for later. This doesn't mean that the US doesn't want shining examples of democracy producing strong economies. It's just that certain types of direct competition couldn't be allowed under particular historical circumstances.
It's almost too easy to see it with Central and South America. Coups, assassination attempts, kidnappings, riots, sanctions, embargoes, sabotage, US backed terrorism, training small armies in bordering countries. There is also the constant drone of reporting only on dissatisfaction, and twisting facts everywhere. Yesterday morning I listenedd to BBC news on NPR:
the big anti-China story of the week, that you mentioned earlier (where I suspect the tennis player just knew she'd need and want some privacy after the bombshell). a story about how the leftist parties of Chile will have to run off in the next election against a growing faction that will even admit openly to wanting another Pinochet a story about how a precinct in Venezuela finally voted in a right wing opposition party candidate The BBC topics the week before included daily mentions of protests in Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Peru, supposedly sham elections in Central America, etc.
A major point of all this news, especially the last couple of 60 Minutes that I watched, was to make sure that the US audience does NOT see any leftist/socialist government as "democratically" elected. The NYT even ran a piece decrying the fact that the Chinese people overwhelmingly "elect" to have a communist government because it does so much for them. It was almost like: "Why can't the people in China see how terrible their government is, the way we see it?" This popularity of communist governments with the people is, of course, why Chinese people (and their government) can claim to have a democratically "selected" government. They would say it is more representative of their interests than the US version of elected, but unrepresentative, democracy.
Hey! I saw that!! 😉
There's a historical and current reason for this. It goes for Cambodia and Laos, too. There actually has been a bit of fomenting again about Vietnam, but not at all to the point of "demonizing" them. I've heard the rumors here that US State Dept folks have expected Vietnamese communism to fall during a couple of previous US presidencies. But now it's actually looking more entrenched. A particular mode of government (like communism) doesn't have to look quite as good as shiny capitalism to still be better than what they had recently gone through.
Also, this ties back to the most viable method to weaken a superpower. In this case the superpower is China, and every method is used to try to foment unrest related to China (Hong Kong, Xinjiang, Tibet, Taiwan, Inner Mongolia). If nationalist breakaway parties can be formed it could take a powerful country and break it into weaker pieces.
In this case Vietnam was thought to be a part of that equation. The arguments over who can fish how far out from their own borders in the South China Sea have probably gone on for over a thousand years. Japan hates China and the US has considered allowing them to arm their own military which would serve US purposes in case of a skirmish over this. (And the US floods Taiwan with military equipment for the similar reasons.) Vietnam and the Philippines have the same issue with China Sea fishing too, and Vietnam has had a negative history with China since Mao. (Mao stupidly funded and helped militarize variously chosen "sides" all over the place, including the muhajideen in Afghanistan, Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge communism. And it did much damage to Viet Nam especially when Sino-Russian relations broke down.
I've heard that the US loves it that the China Sea conflict is ongoing and has encouraged the Philippines to stand up to China. The US keeps a fleet there too in case any provocation can start and escalate. The US was supposedly really miffed that Duterte was elected again after saying he won't stand up to China militarily, but will just do his best to get along. If Vietnam would at least stand up with a voice against China, then the US could amplify that voice. And demonizing Vietnam would keep it from falling into trade partnership with the US if a split over communism develops. China is taking advantage by building rails and transportation in Laos, and plans to further help Cambodia and VietNam too.
The TPP and Pivot to Asia initiatives were set to help break the economic growth of China by favorable trade partnerships with countries all around that would exclude China. I think Trump either didn't realize that this was the purpose, or he knew that a lot of constituents didn't realize it, and therefore thought best politically to discard it as just an Obama/Hillary thing. But it would have had a more "successfully" negative effect on China's economy than the trade wars he initiated. China ended up winning the trade wars, and this caused a lot of farmers to change their minds about Trump while he was still in office.
Suicide is nothing to squid kid about so I had to scratch my comment about so many also dying from deadly games of red light, green light, etc.
At least I can laugh at anthro[po]morphic coal. But I wouldn't want to "lignite" any hard feelings under the surface. I didn't think you'd "mine."
You might have meant "anthracite," but here's my anthropomorphic coal joke:
Q. Peat and Re-Peat were in a bog. Peat fell out. Who was left?
A. Re-Peat.
Q. Peat and Re-Peat were in a bog. Peat fell out. Who was left?
A. Re-Peat.
etc, etc, etc

Better throw in a bone for the dog @Pudgy. I mentioned how I would listen to Rush if driving with the car radio, but otherwise no. However, in my janitorial years, which ended well before my retirement, I used to record and play back his show every night. During Clinton’s presidency (and Clinton seems to have been a reasonably sound president, as presidents go) Rush had some impersonator who would adapt Beatles songs and sing in his booming Clintonesque voice, cracking at the peaks. They were sidesplittingly funny:
I’m a real nowhere man, sitting here in Washington, making all my nowhere plans for you, buddy. Don’t care bout you point of view. I know what is best for you….and so forth. (Sung to the tune of Nowhere Man, of course) Pudgy might even be able to recall all the lyrics.
Also for Pudgy: It is Rush that made me realize that my own Dad never cared for politics. On a trip of the three Harley boys—my dad, myself, and my brother—to visit family in Ohio, my brother and I conspired to play Rush when his show came on. It was no more than 10 minutes, if that, then my dad began to grouse about ‘You like that? All that contention and arguing?’
He didn’t care for politics. All these years I had imagined he did, since at family gatherings politics was a frequent topic of discussion. Turned out that my mom’s dad, a staunch conservative, would carry on endlessly about it, and Dad was just too circumspect and amiable to tell his father-in-law to zip it.
Recently, now that Pop has died, I accompanied my brother, who is into ancestry. Believe it or not, he tracked down the grave of my great great great great grandfather. It’s off a dirt road drivable only by serious SUV, which is itself off a dirt road. The tiny gray speck at the focal point of the first pic is my brother’s non-SUV car. We had to walk from there.
I’m getting so I like to tell stories, and I do it right here on the old hen’s website, to reward her for being so indulgent with me.
”Making all my nowhere plans for you, buddy!!” I love how that song ends.