domingo, 20 de marzo de 2016

HILLLARY-ISRAEL “divide & conquest” strategy

HILLLARY-ISRAEL “divide & conquest” strategy
Full of war crimes & crimes against humanity in Syria 

Hugo Adan 


The assault on Syria –intended to ignite-deep sectarian division & war between Shiites and the majority Sunnis of the region drawing in Iran- was coordinated by Hillary Clinton & Israel Intelligence Officers. THE RESULT OF THIS OPERATION: WAR CRIMES & CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY   

Here the text from Sputnik on this operation : 
..
The intelligence service of Israel considers a potential Sunni-Shiite war in Syria a favorable development for the country and the West, according to an email archive of former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, released by WikiLeaks.
The author of the email, forwarded by Clinton in July 2012, argued that Israel is convinced Iran would lose “its only ally” in the Middle East, if the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad collapses.

“The fall of the House of Assad could well ignite a sectarian war between the Shiites and the majority Sunnis of the region drawing in Iran, which, in the view of Israeli commanders would not be a bad thing for Israel and its Western allies,” an email stated.
..
Open this web to read the text of the email released by  Wikileaks.:
----
----

ZERO HEDGE ECONOMICS

..
[ Cuando los de arriba dicen la verdad sobre el colapso neoliberal .. da pena .. pero mas pena da saber que los de abajo sufren sus efectos y aun no se atreven a desafiar el sistema creyendo que los de arriba van a solucionar la crisis y evitar la caída final. Yo si creo que es posible dar solución al problema si unimos labor, capital-productivo y la juventud REV. Y porque creo si es posible solucionar el problema creando un nuevo sistema .. apoye a Sanders y su proyecto de REV con la re-instalación –perfeccionada- del Glass Steagall Act. Pero esto solo es posible abandonando el sistema bi-partidario y creando un FRENTE que lance la 3ra opciónen estas elecciones. La solución al problema nacional e internacional es imposible con Hillary en el poder. Esa dama solo busca dinero para ella y la mafia empresarial que la apoya. Sanders ya indico que transferiría el voto popular a ella. Los socialistas  estamos obligados a organizar el Frente sin Sanders, uniéndonos con otras fuerzas progresistas de America. Si Sanders nos apoya bien .. si no .. que no espere que nosotros apoyemos a Hillary.]   

----
Source:
...
My comment 
[ “Como me dan pena las abandonas por el monstruo neoliberal: nunca pudieron saber si fueron realmente amadas o simplemente usadas” ]
 

….
Leamos a los de arriba:
We are facing  the lowest net profit margin for the index excluding the Energy sector since Q1 2014 (9.9%). Thus, other sectors are also contributing to the expected lower than average net profit margin for the index for Q1 2016.
..
From FactSet:
Lowest Net Profit Margin (9.3%) Projected for S&P 500 since Q4 2012 (8.9%)
For Q1 2016, the estimated net profit margin for the S&P 500 is 9.3%. If 9.3% is the actual net profit margin for the quarter, it will mark the lowest net profit margin for the S&P 500 for a quarter since Q4 2012 (8.9%). What is driving the weaker projected profit margin for the index relative to recent quarters?




Five of the ten sectors are projected to see lower net profit margins in Q1 2016 relative to the 3-year average for each sector, led by the Energy sector (0.1% vs. 6.5%). The estimated net profit margin of 0.1% for the Energy sector is based on estimated aggregate earnings of $263 million and estimated aggregate revenues of $182 billion for the quarter.

Excluding the Energy sector, the estimated net profit margin for the S&P 500 would be 10.0%. However, this would also mark the lowest net profit margin for the index excluding the Energy sector since Q1 2014 (9.9%). Thus, other sectors are also contributing to the expected lower than average net profit margin for the index for Q1 2016. After the Energy sector, the other four sectors projected to report net profit margins below the 3-year averages for Q1 2016 are the Industrials (7.9% vs. 9.1%), Information Technology (17.2% vs. 18.0%), Consumer Staples (5.6% vs. 6.1%) and Consumer Discretionary (6.5% vs. 6.6%) sectors.










No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario