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.
originally posted by: Kharron
Do I need to wait until DJT personally comes to my house and shoots my dog, or can we make an assessment based on his warmongering, heavy atrocities in the Middle East, division and derision at home, immigration policies and family separations, incessant lies to the public and the disinformation of the public, and so on...
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: Kharron
Do I need to wait until DJT personally comes to my house and shoots my dog, or can we make an assessment based on his warmongering, heavy atrocities in the Middle East, division and derision at home, immigration policies and family separations, incessant lies to the public and the disinformation of the public, and so on...
dear Lord, you are swimming in the Kool-aid.
For Trump, 2017 has already been an explosive year: The U.S. has said it dropped over 2,400 bombs on Afghanistan, up from 1,337 last year. In the fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, the U.S. has already dropped 32,801 bombs, compared with 30,743 in 2016. And the U.S. has also conducted more than 100 strikes against Al Qaeda in Yemen in 2017, compared with 38 in 2016.
Trump did promise in a campaign speech in 2015 to “bomb the #” out of ISIS, and he seems to be living up to his word—with little regard for the consequences.
Under Trump, civilian casualties from America’s war on ISIS have reached an all-time high in Iraq and Syria.
The pace of air attacks has led to dozens of civilian deaths, watchdogs say. From 28 to 88 civilians have been killed in Afghanistan, according to the Bureau for Investigative Journalism. And Airwars, which tracks international airstrikes against ISIS, estimated that U.S.-led airstrikes killed 1,060 civilians in Iraq and Syria in August 2017, compared with 138 in August 2016.
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: Kharron
Do I need to wait until DJT personally comes to my house and shoots my dog, or can we make an assessment based on his warmongering, heavy atrocities in the Middle East, division and derision at home, immigration policies and family separations, incessant lies to the public and the disinformation of the public, and so on...
dear Lord, you are swimming in the Kool-aid.
originally posted by: Kharron
That's terrible, hope you guys get that cleaned up fast.
I also hope the owner of the mill didn't run for office and pretended to be a good guy. Gal?
originally posted by: Kharron
Do I need to wait until DJT personally comes to my house and shoots my dog, or can we make an assessment based on his warmongering, heavy atrocities in the Middle East, division and derision at home, immigration policies and family separations, incessant lies to the public and the disinformation of the public, and so on...
originally posted by: Kharron
a reply to: schuyler
Thank you for all that info schuyler.
Everything you described begs a question though: if the EPA is so hard on people to clean up their own messes, to the point where they bankrupt businesses; why were they so lax with the Pence family as to completely forgive the cleanup costs in the end? Why are other people's lives ruined and the Pence family keeps their profit and moves onto higher office positions?
originally posted by: Xtrozero
originally posted by: Kharron
That's terrible, hope you guys get that cleaned up fast.
I also hope the owner of the mill didn't run for office and pretended to be a good guy. Gal?
Its the way it is...there isn't enough money to "clean up" fast or otherwise. When a company has been polluting for 50 to 100 years, there is no clean up unless the Government does it. We need to remember that what they did back in the day was perfectly legal and acceptable.
I guess my point is there is no Good or Bad in any of this. The owner of the mill is not bad was not bad...Made a living for 10,000 families over the years.
originally posted by: schuyler
originally posted by: Kharron
a reply to: schuyler
Thank you for all that info schuyler.
Everything you described begs a question though: if the EPA is so hard on people to clean up their own messes, to the point where they bankrupt businesses; why were they so lax with the Pence family as to completely forgive the cleanup costs in the end? Why are other people's lives ruined and the Pence family keeps their profit and moves onto higher office positions?
I basically answered your question in the very first sentence of my post. And the answer is exactly the same. In the case of the Shell station I mentioned, the owner abandoned the land and the public picked up the tab with the owner losing a piece of property that was otherwise his. I see no difference at all here between the results from the Shell station and the results from the Pence situation. Further, I maintain that it is NOT true that the "public picked up the tab that Pence should have paid." The EPA MADE these onerous requirements that no one could possibly pay. Requiring expensive lab testing of dirt that was being removed is just insanely stupid, and suggesting that Pence & Co "owe" that is also insanely stupid. It should never have been a requirement in the first place. What you have here is a government agency run amok with Pence and the Shell station owner caught in their pincers. The EPA caused this so-called $21M bill, not Pence.
I do not know about the Pence family involvement here, but I do now a bit about the situation of contamination of old underground gas tanks.
originally posted by: rickymouse
Every gas station pays into a fund to take care of contamination under any situation. They do here, that cost is spread out amongst the gas customers buy. The cleanup is being funded by that organization, the fact that the legal costs bankrupted the company and were found later to not be right means that the state is on the hook for these charges.
I am thinking these charges may never have been right, someone was trying to get back at that business, probably someone who would gain by them being shut down.