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.

 

Today's Newsweek Trump Cover Story: The Castro Connection

page: 2
25
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

My Dear Hat, you have enjoyed warm Cuban vacations and communications with Cuban citizens, while I could only Winter cruise by it and family members could never see the Cuban family members they left behind in the 1960s. Castro was evil personified here in America, and Cuba was a sacrificial land in the American war against Communism. No matter how hard Cubans here (and many Cubans never became American citizens, because they hoped one day to return to the land they left, their home) wanted to see their relatives, they could not.

So, here the sentiment was different than elsewhere. And what Trump did in 1998 would have been thought of as anti-American, pro-Castro and Communist. A very big deal back then.




posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

He was in the business of making money? He was trying to do this cheaply. 1998 was 18 years ago before he was ever involved in politics. His main concern was profits. I wonder if the cuba dealings got anyone killed. I wonder if it hurt anyone in anyway. 99% nope.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: FrontRunner

Back at you Mr. Offtopic.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: FrontRunner
a reply to: intrepid

He was in the business of making money? He was trying to do this cheaply. 1998 was 18 years ago before he was ever involved in politics. His main concern was profits. I wonder if the cuba dealings got anyone killed. I wonder if it hurt anyone in anyway. 99% nope.

So because it didn't hurt anyone we shouldn't worry about him breaking national trade embargoes?



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: desert
And what Trump did in 1998 would have been thought of as anti-American, pro-Castro and Communist. A very big deal back then.


That's business. You DO know how JFK's father Joe made his millions, before he went into politics, right? I love the way Biography.com put it, "alcohol distribution." They neglected to mention that it was during Prohibition.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: FrontRunner


...before he was ever involved in politics.


Is that true though???


thehill.com...


No, it isn't.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

That's like saying it was okay for the US government to make front companies to purchase titanium from russia during the cold war to make a-12s, and sr-71s. Do you condemn our goverment for bettering ourselves like Trump was doing? It's no different than our goverment bending their own rules. Or do they get a pass, because the sr-71 is sexy.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Double
edit on 29-9-2016 by FrontRunner because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: FrontRunner

No it isn't like saying that at all. Plus YOU are the one apologizing for Trump's actions, not me. Thus pushing an apology about me forgiving the US for purchasing titanium from Russia is a strawman.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

He was not involved in politics past lobbying. I'm saying employed, and or running to serve the United States people.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

It's the exact same concept. Profitting from our enemy.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: FrontRunner

No, he was running for nomination of The Reform Party and campaigning to be President in 1999.

This is aside from his lobbying.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

My Dear Hat, you are exactly why I love all my Hats! Intelligent and so humorous. And reality based.

Yes, correct on Kennedy.

But Prohibition only lasted 13 years. Anti-Communism was an existential threat here. Those Cuban Missiles were pointed here, not further north I believe. Prohibition, perhaps an afterlife-existential threat to some. And without it, how would we have NASCAR today?



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: desert

You split a hair. Ouch. The point being both men broke the law to make money. Simple.

As to why we are discussing this is another story. Plenty of Trump's business dealings to question. A businessman making deals? Even shady ones? As Commander Cody said, "Everybody's doin it." Hell, what those Wells Fargo bastards did and are going to profit into the hundreds of millions is criminal but I don't see that going to court.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 12:13 PM
link   
only two pages is shocking and shows the bias of this place.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Please feel free to never mention Rachel Maddow in any of your future posts if you wish to have any hint of credibility.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 12:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: jjkenobi
a reply to: theantediluvian

Please feel free to never mention Rachel Maddow in any of your future posts if you wish to have any hint of credibility.



yeah right....and all of us here on ATS, want so desperately to be seen as credible to you......your approval is sacrosanct to us.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

I need another hair.... split! .... here, this whiskey will help with any pain. JFK was the POTUS candidate, not his father. Trump is the candidate.

Yes, I am shocked, shocked to find that deals are going on. Did you know that we have a law here, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, that deals with engaging in "foreign corrupt practices"? Some people complain that it makes it harder for US companies to do business with foreign govts, some people say it doesn't have that effect. Anyway, that's beside the point, or is it? Hmmmmm.

So, that FCPA was enacted during Pres Jimmy Carter's term. Which brings me to this..... since we broke away from England with its royals, those we elect to govern don't always depend on family lineage. We have had our box of chocolates in regard to our POTUS's, but we have only elected people.... men, white men for the most part of our history.... maybe we should have had royals.... I probably would at least have been governed by a queen a long time ago.... and those people elected have always, up till now, had military or governing experience. Ya know, some kind of experience leading people.

Even Harry Truman, who was in business with a haberdashery, had been a US Senator. Same for wealthy people like the Roosevelts. That "peanut farmer", Jimmy Carter, had a Bachelor of Science degree before he was in the Navy nuclear sub program before he was in his state senate and gov. What I'm getting at here is that we have public records of what our candidates, up till now, have done, some military or govt background on which to form a judgement as to leadership abilities.

Now, it used to be that a man's private life was private. haha JFK and his White House girlfriend stories and drug addiction, but he kept the missiles out of Cuba. Well, nowadays things are different. It seems that's all we've talked about for years in re to pres and candidates for pres. We've kept the focus on cultural issues, shiny objects to get votes, as for decades Americans could give a rat's patooty about economic issues. Anyway, those chickens sure came home to roost. And now, some citizens think that a man with neither military nor governing experience should lead them. We have never had this before!! We only have his business dealing to go by, and they aren't impressive.

Anyway, one last thing, that FCPA I mentioned, has to do with the Securities and Exchange Commission in our govt. One third party candidate's platform wants to do away with the SEC, and just about everything else in Washington, by either "starving the beast" or electing someone who would do it. Trump's party is pretty much on the same platform nowadays. So, how nice it would be to them to do away with all those pesky regulations and things like embargoes and just let business be business. Trump would benefit greatly. Or if we head off these people and don't let them take over, Trump would still benefit, because unethical, non-patriotic, selfish weasels like him look for every loophole and roundabout ways to get their way.
edit on 29-9-2016 by desert because: small clarification, two words



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

4 posts down til the first deflection, man you trump supporters are slippin!!!! trumps eyes are going to pop out of his head, i can see it now steam coming out of his ears at the next debate when hilary brings this up, he is going to have a heart attack live on camera!!!



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: FrontRunner

This wasn't "before he was ever involved in politics." It was while he was flirting with running for president, something that Roger Stone had been encouraging him to do for years.

In a sense, Trump has been about as involved in politics as a person can be without holding office since his late 20's thanks to his relationships with Roy Cohn, Roger Stone and others.

I don't disagree that his main concern was profits at all. That's actually central to the point I was making.

What opportunity for profits do you think Trump was exploring? There weren't any legal profits to be made. So he was either investigating an opportunity for illegal profits or assessing the potential if US policy concerning Cuba was to change. Then he announces his desire to be the Reform Party nominee for President.

Keep in mind that in the '92 elections, Perot had managed nearly a fifth of the popular vote and that was after dropping out and then re-entering the race and without major party backing. There are a number of parallels between the two and it seems highly likely that Trump concluded that he could succeed where Perot ultimately failed.

After all, he had Roger Stone and Paul Manafort in his corner.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join