It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Calls Grow For Hillary Clinton to Return Donations from Radical Islamic Movement

page: 2
26
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2015 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Thanks for the links. Interesting read:


More than two dozen other candidates and lawmakers across the political spectrum received Gülen-linked donations that appear questionable, including Clinton and Jeb Bush.


So why the focus on Hillary, hmm?




posted on Dec, 20 2015 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Intellectuals from West, East agree Gülen movement works for a better world




At a time when the faith-based Gülen movement is under heavy government pressure in Turkey, intellectuals from various countries have praised the movement for its efforts to make the world a better place for everyone by promoting education, peace, benevolence through dedication.


Really no proof of wrong doing or anything like that, just interpretations of what the movement means by the other side.



posted on Dec, 20 2015 @ 08:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert


So why the focus on Hillary, hmm?


Then you would ruin a perfectly good anti Muslim, anti left propaganda thread..

edit on 20-12-2015 by theonenonlyone because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2015 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Can we get a list of those others they have contributed too, the more important ones at least besides hillary and jeb.



posted on Dec, 20 2015 @ 08:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: xuenchen

She is a political whore, do you expect any less?



exactly! the first thing that came to my mind when I read the Op was " she`s a politician and all politicians are whores"



posted on Dec, 20 2015 @ 08:50 PM
link   
Some more opinions about the GULEN MOVEMENT....



TURKEY'S FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM: TARGETING THE GULEN MOVEMENT

Erdogan grew convinced that Gulen was trying to overthrow his government. He accused the Gulen movement of infiltrating the judiciary, police and prosecutors - establishing a "parallel state."
Tensions surfaced last year when Erdogan accused Gulen and his followers of orchestrating a corruption probe against his inner circle. Four cabinet members were forced to resign. A taped conversation surfaced of a conversation between Erdogan and his son, Bilal, in which they plotted to dispose of ill-gotten gains. On the tape, which Erdogan maintains is "fabricated," Bilal is heard promising to remove a stash of money from the family home "in the dark."




Exclusive : FBI Whistleblower and Teacher Expose Islamic Gülen Movement Infiltrating U.S. Through Charter Schools

Gülen-inspired schools are the largest charter network in the U.S. and receive approximately $150 million a year in taxpayer money. There are about 130 of these charter schools in 26 states where the majority of the teachers are from Turkey, as well as many of the contracts for construction and operation have gone to Turkish businesses. Those actions have raised red flags for the U.S. government.

The schools themselves are considered high quality and are focused on STEM-based learning — something that proponents of the Gülen Movement claim is lacking in U.S. education.





posted on Dec, 20 2015 @ 09:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Some more opinions about the GULEN MOVEMENT....



Yes ..OPINIONS not facts. So since there are no facts that make the movement is a place where evil dwells how is it wrong that she accepted donations from them?



posted on Dec, 20 2015 @ 10:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Swills



It must be a totally alternative viewpoint.

Like un-MSM.




Earlier weren't you complaining about liberal sites with inadequate sourcing?



Yea he was..and this is from one thread only




originally posted by: xuenchen
great sources with many "easy to follow" references in at least 2 wiki stories...

some even for sale

most highlight zero evidence

just plain old propaganda denazification


I know everybody automatically accepts the Left Wing writings as absolute truth even when nobody even posts any real evidence.


:



originally posted by: xuenchen

You still can't show any clear and concise "sources" or even "definitions".

None of the "Academic" references have any verifiable facts.






originally posted by: xuenchen

LOL

All Left Wing "sources" at the bottom of the page you cleverly forgot to link.



The MSM/Academic complex has you totally sucked in.

Still no valid and unbiased "definitions".




originally posted by: xuenchen

Ah yes.

Excellent biased sources in all that.





originally posted by: xuenchen



Jump on it.

What *ARE* the unbiased "definitions" anyway?




originally posted by: xuenchen
The arguments are getting weaker and weaker aren't they.


Everything is coming from out-of-reach sources.

No wonder Fascism is flourishing and failing at the same time.






originally posted by: xuenchen

All Left Wing definitions and "sources".

They're a strong bunch with many loyal followers.




posted on Dec, 20 2015 @ 11:16 PM
link   
Hilary will be the democratic nominee



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 12:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

Do men take money from countries who mistreat women?

This is a presidential race, not a gender race.


My word !!

Are you suggesting there's bias involved?

Seems Islamic States mistreat Women, and here we have Hillary taking $$$ from specific groups that may very well be involved in that travesty.




No.

But, if this sentiment doesn't also apply to every other candidate (regardless of gender) , that I have a problem with


Can you prove that "every other" candidate took money from this or similar groups? Or is this a tit-for-tat because Hillary is the focus.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 12:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: xuenchen

Thanks for the links. Interesting read:


More than two dozen other candidates and lawmakers across the political spectrum received Gülen-linked donations that appear questionable, including Clinton and Jeb Bush.


So why the focus on Hillary, hmm?


Probably because she and her family run an international foundation that excepts donations, and has also held a high ranking position in the WH and is currently running for the top job? I think its fair to scrutinize, especially if everything points to her getting the dem nomination regardless.
edit on 21-12-2015 by Wardaddy454 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 12:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

Do men take money from countries who mistreat women?

This is a presidential race, not a gender race.


My word !!

Are you suggesting there's bias involved?

Seems Islamic States mistreat Women, and here we have Hillary taking $$$ from specific groups that may very well be involved in that travesty.




No.

But, if this sentiment doesn't also apply to every other candidate (regardless of gender) , that I have a problem with


Can you prove that "every other" candidate took money from this or similar groups? Or is this a tit-for-tat because Hillary is the focus.


Where did I mention that I said every other candidate took money . . . . . .

I said nothing to require I prove what I said.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 01:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

Do men take money from countries who mistreat women?

This is a presidential race, not a gender race.


My word !!

Are you suggesting there's bias involved?

Seems Islamic States mistreat Women, and here we have Hillary taking $$$ from specific groups that may very well be involved in that travesty.




No.

But, if this sentiment doesn't also apply to every other candidate (regardless of gender) , that I have a problem with


Can you prove that "every other" candidate took money from this or similar groups? Or is this a tit-for-tat because Hillary is the focus.


Where did I mention that I said every other candidate took money . . . . . .

I said nothing to require I prove what I said.


Then what did you mean by


if this sentiment doesn't also apply to every other candidate (regardless of gender) , that I have a problem with


In a thread about Hillary accepting donations from a radical Islamic movement.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 04:21 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen
RIP this failed thread.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: ghostrager
a reply to: xuenchen

Hillary is playing her voters. She doesn't care about Democrats ideologies. Her platform and purpose is on the international scale.


Nicely-put.

2nd



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: FamCore

originally posted by: ghostrager
a reply to: xuenchen

Hillary is playing her voters. She doesn't care about Democrats ideologies. Her platform and purpose is on the international scale.


Nicely-put.

2nd


And which politician isn't?

GOP is so hung up on religious morals, they don't even understand conservative government anymore.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

I think there are a number of presidential "front-runners" who aren't thinking on the international scale..

basically Hillary will sell out quicker than a lot of others since she (her husband) has been around and has spent time building relationships.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 05:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: Annee

I think there are a number of presidential "front-runners" who aren't thinking on the international scale..

basically Hillary will sell out quicker than a lot of others since she (her husband) has been around and has spent time building relationships.



The era of isolationism is history.

International is the only logical direction.



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 06:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: Annee



The era of isolationism is history.

International is the only logical direction.


International for the BENEFIT OF ALL, yes, that is the direction we should be moving in. Hillary is more about the benefit of her and those in charge/those who donate to her campaign which is the opposite of "the benefit of ALL"

Don't try to convince me that Hillary cares about us peons and wants to do good for the world. She's MOST interested in getting power and exploiting that power (as she's very well demonstrated in her other roles)



posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 07:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: FamCore

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: Annee



The era of isolationism is history.

International is the only logical direction.


International for the BENEFIT OF ALL, yes, that is the direction we should be moving in. Hillary is more about the benefit of her and those in charge/those who donate to her campaign which is the opposite of "the benefit of ALL"

Don't try to convince me that Hillary cares about us peons and wants to do good for the world. She's MOST interested in getting power and exploiting that power (as she's very well demonstrated in her other roles)


I suppose we'll probably find out.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join