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.

 

Trump signs $110b arms deal w/ Saudis & Ivanka gets $100m donation

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2017 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: AnonyMason

Democrat or Republican...........same people just different faces.




posted on May, 21 2017 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to: amfirst1

I never suggested it was pay for play. I think it's funny that Trump blasted Clinton repeatedly for accepting donations from Saudis. On his Facebook you can find this:


Saudi Arabia and many of the countries that gave vast amounts of money to the Clinton Foundation want women as slaves and to kill gays. Hillary must return all money from such countries


But since it's not a political fund the two things aren't the same. I get that. That was never the point of the thread.

The point of the thread should be clear. Ethics.

It concerns me that many of you guys don't see the ethical concerns here. White House position, daddy as President, husband as White House Official, and she gets to sit down with all those people, has a nice little meeting with a few female Saudi business women, and then generates 100 million in donations for her project.

That's a direct contradiction to the White Houses statement that she would not be soliciting for this during her time in the White House, eh?

edit on 21-5-2017 by AnonyMason because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
We need to have a lot more context to this issue before we knee-jerk too quickly.



Agreed.Even though I am a Trump supporter,it wouldn't hurt to keep an eye on this.Just in case.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 08:48 PM
link   
I recall watching a Youtube video a few months ago detailing how members of the British Royal family was helping to negotiate arms deals with the Saudis. Apparently, the Saudis like the king/king or prince/prince type of negotiation. There is another video explaining deals between Saudi Arabia and Germany for billions of dollars worth of arms.

I can appreciate the hate for anything Trump, but I think there are a couple of real non-partisan questions we should be asking.

Why are heads of state negotiating arms deals? Shouldn't it be arms manufacturers negotiating the sales of their products? Why are Western heads of state acting as salesmen?

Why is Saudi Arabia buying so many weapons? They certainly aren't using that much. Are they preparing for something? Where are all these weapons going? *cough cough ISIS cough* Excuse me.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Yeah, the front page story here is all about Ivanka.

Nothing to do with the $110b arms sold to the Saudis.

Misdirection.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: AnonyMason

Hhmmm... ivanka is not the secretary of state. Why would it matter if her charity gets a donation. I think every first lady has had projects like this. Nancy reagan, barb bush, michelle. Didn't they run charities and civil projects?



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 08:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnonyMason

The point of the thread should be clear. Ethics.

It concerns me that many of you guys don't see the ethical concerns here. White House position, daddy as President, husband as White House Official, and she gets to sit down with all those people, has a nice little meeting with a few female Saudi business women, and then generates 100 million in donations for her project.

That's a direct contradiction to the White Houses statement that she would not be soliciting for this during her time in the White House, eh?


Did you have these same concerns with the Clinton? Did you have concern they left the white house broke to be worth what 500 million in a decade? I'm sure you can link all your concern posts about the Clinton too. lol

I think the difference is the Clintons have been running scams for decades with this last one with her actually as sec of state with the pay to play. When Ivanka does this while being sec of state we can talk more.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

I agree. The arms deal in and of itself warrants it's own thread. Maybe I'll put something together on that, too.

It's worth mentioning that Trump has yet again shown his two faced policy contradictions to his very own statements regarding the Saudis.


The deal would also appear hypocritical after the President publicly accused the Saudis of masterminding the attacks on the Twin Towers in 2001.



After his election, Mr Trump said Saudi Arabia should be banned from exporting oil to the US, and has accused the country of killing gay people and enslaving women.



Amnesty International accused the President of a “glaring omission” of human rights on the leaders’ agenda, and called for the US to stop selling arms to the Saudis to prevent the nation’s violation of international law via air strikes in Yemen and killing civilians.

“This brazen disregard for human rights and humanitarian law will only serve to further embolden states in the Gulf and around the globe in their pursuit of ‘security’ at the expense of people’s basic rights,” said Margaret Huang, executive director of Amnesty International USA.

Independant

I thought we were going to step away from arming groups that like to arm other groups we consider terrorists.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

Yes, as a matter of fact I did have those concerns. I am not a fan of Killary. I didn't vote for her.

Once again, though, jumping me for my opinions about Clinton (however unwarranted) mean literally nothing. Neither Clinton is a President. Trump is. Hence the reason why I scrutinize him and his administration so much.

The argument of "well what about Clinton" hold zero weight. It's purely deflection.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Woodcarver

She's not the First Lady, is she?

I'm sure it thrill her dad if she were though.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnonyMason

The argument of "well what about Clinton" hold zero weight. It's purely deflection.


But then you want to connect dots about Ivanka, a person not in any position other than who her daddy is...at least Clinton was sec of state and that holds no weight to you but Ivanka does...lol



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

When your dad is the President and you hold an official position in the White House with literally no qualifications??? Yeah that holds some weight. Especially when she's working for the American people yet has done nothing to help the American people. Her pet project with the World Bank Group doesn't benefit the United States in any way shape or form.
edit on 21-5-2017 by AnonyMason because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnonyMason

It's worth mentioning that Trump has yet again shown his two faced policy contradictions to his very own statements regarding the Saudis.



The whole Middle East is extreme, but we need to work with someone, pick you poison. It is something we can't just ignore, so our only other option is to try and find a middle ground. What do you propose?



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnonyMason

When your dad is the President and you hold an official position in the White House with literally no qualifications??? Yeah that holds some weight. Especially when she's working for the American people yet has done nothing to help the American people. Her pet project with the World Bank Group doesn't benefit the United States in any way shape or form.


Ok so says you... I think she can do what she likes, are you suggest it is pay to play like the Clinton foundation was.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

Not repeating the same mistakes that Obama made would be a good place to start. It wasn't even a year ago that Obama agreed to a 115 billion dollar arms deal with the Saudis.

What do they need American weapons for? Yemen? Please. The Saudis support groups like al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Lashkar-e-Taiba. I would imagine those same groups are benefiting from the deals we make with Saudi Arabia. It's a perpetual circle of self financing our own wars, yet politicians want to pretend we're all dumb...

Like I said, this particular discussion warrants it's own thread.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

No. I made it clear in a previous post that there is a distinct difference between the two.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: AnonyMason

I hope I'm not the only one formulating a crazy conspiracy theory about what happens to Presidents once they get into the Whitehouse. With all the facts and rumors about CIA mind control research, if any of it is true, how hard would it be to alter the thought processes of someone once they are in the Oval Office? Think about the changes in attitude Obama went through from candidate to President. From "get the troops out of Afghanistan" to "let the commanders on the ground handle it." We're still there. From "I will shut down Gitmo" to "can't seem to scrape together enough money for it."

Maybe my tin foil hat needs a layer of lead.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

I think it would be relatively easy to social engineer a man like Trump. Even more so since the administration he heads is in a state of relative chaos at all times.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
WTF?

I hate charities that empower women now!



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Anyone besides me find it ironic that the Saudis give Ivanka 100mill for women entrepreneurship and the Saudies won't even let their own women drive or open a bank account.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join