Trump sides with Russia against FBI at Helsinki summit

Trump sides with Russia against FBI at Helsinki summit.

So whats this about then?

The President of the USA doesn't trust his own intelligence services. So what are we supposed to do with that information, why should we trust them if he doesnt?  But hang on maybe we should look outside the box.  Doesn't Trump have interests in Russia?  lets have a look.

So according to Wikipedia (probably not the most accurate place to get info but...)

Donald Trump has pursued business deals in Russia since 1987, and has sometimes traveled there to explore potential business opportunities. In 1996, Trump trademark applications were submitted for potential Russian real estate development deals. Trump's partners and children have repeatedly visited Moscow, connecting with developers and government officials to explore joint venture opportunities. Trump was never able to successfully conclude any real estate deals in Russia. However, individual Russians have invested heavily in Trump properties, and following Trump's bankruptcies in the 1990's he borrowed money from Russian sources. In 2008 his son Donald Trump Jr. said that Russia was an important source of money for the Trump businesses.

By the way isn't it interesting how certain people try to claim that Corbyn is a commie (they probably need to check the difference between Socialist and communist) and those same people think Trump is the next best thing to sliced bread but Trump is the one cuddling up to the dreaded Russians. But i digress.

Actually this Wikipedia information gets more interesting and the trouble is... it all kinda fits or am I creating a jigsaw to fit my puzzle?  Look at this little snippet.

In 1987, Trump visited Russia to investigate developing a hotel, invited by Ambassador Yuri Dubinin whom he had met in New York the year before.[3] British journalist Luke Harding alleged in 2017 that this trip likely began a long-term cultivation operation typical of the KGB's Political Intelligence Department, under written directives initiated by First Chief Directorate head Vladimir Kryuchkov, to recruit politically ambitious Westerners susceptible to flattery, egotism and greed.[3]

So "susceptible to flattery, egotism and greed" I think even the most ardent Trump supporter would have problems trying to disagree that Trump likes flattery, has an ego and greed well are rich people greedy? open for debate I guess.  Or is it? these start up CEO's made their staff millionaires are they greedy in comparison? Makes you think.

Still, Trump’s business ties to Russia are striking nonetheless. Even without access to his tax returns or venturing into conjecture about hidden business interests, it’s clear that Trump has an affinity for doing deals with Russians. Furthermore, it’s clear that his affinity for doing business with them is intertwined with how he perceives them politically; as Franklin Foer points out in Slate, Trump’s public affection for Vladimir Putin corresponds with his dependence on Russian investors.
It’s difficult to say if his praise was intended to make it easier for him to gain access to the Russian market, or if it simply arose out a sincere appreciation for Russia’s authoritarian political culture as he began to understand it more — or some combination of the two. But in either case it’s clear that Trump’s attempts at making deals in Russia have gone beyond business.

And

Donald Trump is like the Kremlin’s favored candidates, only more so. He celebrated the United Kingdom’s exit from the EU. He denounces NATO with feeling. He is also a great admirer of Vladimir Putin. Trump’s devotion to the Russian president has been portrayed as buffoonish enthusiasm for a fellow macho strongman. But Trump’s statements of praise amount to something closer to slavish devotion. In 2007, he praised Putin for “rebuilding Russia.” A year later he added, “He does his work well. Much better than our Bush.” When Putin ripped American exceptionalism in a New York Times op-ed in 2013, Trump called it “a masterpiece.” Despite ample evidence, Trump denies that Putin has assassinated his opponents, “In all fairness to Putin, you’re saying he killed people. I haven’t seen that.” In the event that such killings have transpired, they can be forgiven: “At least he’s a leader.” And not just any old head of state: “I will tell you that, in terms of leadership, he’s getting an A.”

Protesteth too much?

Hmmmm well someone is wrong...

'Nobody's been stronger on Putin than Trump'

Former secret service agent Dan Bongino has said on Fox News that "nobody's been stronger on Putin than Trump".
Mr Bongino was talking with reference to the death of Russian mercenaries in Syria, saying the American military "had the Russians scrambling".
"I don't think Putin expected Trump to respond that way," he said.
"That was not an insignificant incident over there."
He also said Mr Trump's comments about Russian gas pipelines was another example of the US president confronting the Russians.

Wouldn't be the 1st time a few expendable assets were sacrificed to protect a bigger asset.....oops did I say that out loud.

Before leaving the last word to Jonathan Marcus, BBC diplomatic correspondent ill say one thing... Corbyn suffered 2 years of media assassination which continues and a similar weight is thrown against Trump. The trouble is when you checked Corbyn you found that it was indeed that misinformation and lies. With Trump most claims lead to evidence and Trump doesn't help himself by spreading misinformation almost every time he talks, which is so easy to check.

Trump targets opponents back home Analysis by Jonathan Marcus, BBC diplomatic correspondent 

Before their encounter started Mr Putin was already winning on points, by the mere fact that President Trump was meeting him in the first place.
But while Mr Putin came over as the seasoned professional, eager to present his country as an equivalent to the US in terms of being a nuclear superpower; an energy provider; and a key actor in the Middle East, Mr Trump seemed more intent on castigating his opponents back home.
A lot of the questions focused on Russia's intrusion into the US election campaign (the considered position of the key US intelligence agencies) and specifically the indictment by the Mueller probe of 12 Russian intelligence agents.
Mr Trump would have none of it. He visibly seemed happier with Mr Putin's assurances than he did with the evidence of his own intelligence agencies. And he even welcomed Mr Putin's suggestion that Russia could join the investigation and interview the alleged perpetrators itself! Washington's Nato allies and many seasoned observers on Capitol Hill must have been watching in horror.

As always I'm always willing to be proved wrong.  Post away.

LINKS
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/russia-paid-donald-trump-millions-of-dollars
Trump sides with Russia against FBI at Helsinki summit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_projects_of_Donald_Trump_in_Russia
https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/mind-over-money/201003/rich-people-are-greedy
How 3 Startup CEOs Gave Up Fortunes To Turn Half Their Employees Into Millionaires
Why the Rich Are Less Ethical: They See Greed as Good
Finally, A Billionaire Defends The Billions That She Earned
Fact-checking Trump's claim that he has no business ties to Russia
Vladimir Putin has a plan for destroying the West—and that plan looks a lot like Donald Trump.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/819159806489591809
As it happened - Trump and Putin's landmark meeting

Its an insult to put Trump in the same sentence

Personally I think its an insult to those that died to put Trump in the same sentence.

You earn respect it doesn't get handed to you by position or the amount of money you have.

All those troops that died earned our eternal respect.

As yet Trump has not.

USA military deaths WWI = 116,108
UK   military deaths WWI = 800,000

USA military deaths WWII = 407,300
UK   military deaths WWII = 383,700

Total USA military deaths WWI & WWII = 523,408
Total UK military deaths WWI & WWII = 1,183700


LINKS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties

Epilepsy in dogs

Our dog has started having fits which are focal seizures at present lasting no more than 30-40 seconds.

At present hes only had 2 that we know of and there are a myriad of possible causes including head trauma, liver and/ or kidney disease. So hes booked in for blood test of Friday.

Its worth noting that 2 drugs our dog is taking for pain relief are on a suspect list of drugs causing seizures tramadol and gabapentin, according to one website. Conversly gabapentin is used to treat seizures, Hmmm. Tramadol is listed as having seizures as possible side effect

Focal seizures

These only occur in one half of the brain and within a particular region. How these types of seizures present themselves depends upon where in the brain the abnormal electrical activity started, and the function of that part of the brain. Focal epileptic seizures can present as:

• Episodic movements ("Motor" signs) e.g. facial twitches, rhythmic blinking, head shaking or repeated muscle contractions of one extremity
• Autonomic signs (arising from the autonomic nervous system) e.g. excessive salivation, vomiting, dilated pupils
• Behavioural signs (episodic changes in the dogs behaviour) e.g. restlessness, anxiety, attention seeking, unexplainable fear behaviour

What can trigger my dog's epilepsy?

Some dogs may appear to have 'triggers' that lead to a seizure, while others do not. Identifiable triggers may differ from dog to dog. In people with epilepsy, common triggers include tiredness and lack of sleep, stress, and not taking medication. Stress is a trigger commonly reported by owners, and may be caused by a variety of situations including changes in the environment, changes in routine, car rides, thunderstorms, and visits to the vets to name a few. Other owners report certain foods or medications seem to trigger seizures in their dog. Keeping a seizure diary may help identify triggers in your dog.

Is a seizure painful or dangerous to the dog?

"Dog may feel confusion and perhaps panic."

Despite the dramatic and violent appearance of a seizure, seizures are not painful, although the dog may feel confusion and perhaps panic. Contrary to popular belief, dogs do not swallow their tongues during a seizure. If you put your fingers or an object into its mouth, you will not help your pet and you run a high risk of being bitten very badly or of injuring your dog. The important thing is to keep the dog from falling or hurting itself by knocking objects onto itself. As long as it is on the floor or ground, there is little chance of harm occurring.
A single seizure is rarely dangerous to the dog. However, if the dog has multiple seizures within a short period of time (cluster seizures), or if a seizure continues for longer than a few minutes, the body temperature begins to rise. If hypothermia or an elevated body temperature develops secondary to a seizure, another set of problems may have to be addressed.

Possible Triggers (to qualify as a trigger, it has to have happened within 30 hours of your dog’s seizure, except after vaccination)

1. Lawn treatments and fertilisers
2. Herbicides and insecticides
3. Cedar shavings
4. Many flowers and plants are poisonous to dogs, which can also cause a seizure. The ASPCA has provided a list of plants that are toxic to dogs.
5. Barometric pressure changes and extreme heat or cold are thought to be potential triggers.
6. Bee and wasp venom and toad poisoning
7. Photo sensitivity, Photo sensitivity refers to flashing or bright lights.
8. Scented candles
9. Perfume
10. Loud music
11. Cigarette smoke
12. Pine Sol or any other cleaners with pine oil, 
13. Kerosene
14. Camphor
15. Eucalyptus
16. Borax or boric acid
17. Deck and wall stains, 
18. Polyurethane fumes, 
19. Paint fumes and Swiffer chemicals.
20. A diet too high in sodium
21. Processed, low grade dog foods.
22. Fruits, including tomatoes and carrots, can actually trigger a seizure in some dogs
23. Certain dairy products, like cheese (particularly if it is mouldy), cottage cheese and milk are also danger foods.
24.  Unclean or uncooked pork products can be problematic as well as turkey
25.  Rosemary, sage, fennel and saffron
26.  Walnuts are generally thought of as harmful to dogs, and caffeine can also be a trigger
27.  Foods or treats with ethoxyquin, BHA or BHT of foods with MSG can also be potential triggers. MSG is often referred to in food products as “natural flavoring” or “smoke flavouring,” etc.
28. Uncleansed rawhide treats and pig’s ear or feet, Several commercially produced dog chews are bleached. Flavoured chews will often have some chemical additives listed above.
29. A dog’s medications can sometimes trigger seizures as well. These include vaccinations, heartworm medications, flea and tick preventative medications and some other prescription medications.
30. The lights of a television, Christmas lights, or even lightning can trigger a seizure.
31. Changes in barometric pressure and extreme hot or cold weather 
32. Thunderstorms also can spook a dog enough to be a trigger.
33. Sudden changes to your dog’s diet or routine can also cause stress that may trigger a seizure. Dogs run on a very strict internal clock, and know when it is time to eat or go outside or when you get home from work.  Changes in their routine can be caused by visiting friends or family members, a new baby joining the family, construction around the home and more.
34. Missing, skipping, or going too long in between meals can also cause low blood sugar, which can be a trigger of seizures as well.
35. Being left alone for too long can cause a dog a great deal of stress and can trigger a seizure.
36. On the flip side, a prolonged period of activity and excitement can also trigger a seizure.
37. Another stress trigger to avoid is loud arguments or angry voices. When people fight around a dog, the dog will often think that the people are angry at them. This is actually the worst kind of stress for a dog. Other causes of emotional stress to dogs include long car rides, visits to your vet, general nervousness, and anxiety.

LINKS
https://canna-pet.com/triggers-seizures-dogs
https://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/health/for-owners/epilepsy
https://www.rvc.ac.uk/news-and-events/rvc-news/rvc-pet-epilepsy-tracker-app
https://www.cesarsway.com/dog-care/health-and-care-issues/how-to-recognize-and-handle-dog-seizures
https://www.bluecross.org.uk/pet-advice/canine-epilepsy-and-seizures-dogs

https://www.petmd.com/dog/conditions/neurological/c_dg_seizures_convulsions
https://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/3-natural-treatments-for-dog-seizures-and-epilepsy 
https://pethelpful.com/dogs/Warning-signs-of-neurological-disorders-in-canines 
http://dogtime.com/dog-health/53089-gabapentin-dogs-uses-dosage-side-effects 
http://dogtime.com/dog-health/59541-tramadol-dogs-uses-dosage-side-effects

Boris Johnson's resignation letter and Mays reply

Boris Johnson's resignation letter


Dear Theresa

It is more than two years since the British people voted to leave the European Union on an unambiguous and categorical promise that if they did so they would be taking back control of their democracy.

They were told that they would be able to manage their own immigration policy, repatriate the sums of UK cash currently spent by the EU, and, above all, that they would be able to pass laws independently and in the interests of the people of this country.

Brexit should be about opportunity and hope. It should be a chance to do things differently, to be more nimble and dynamic, and to maximise the particular advantages of the UK as an open, outward-looking global economy.

That dream is dying, suffocated by needless self-doubt.

We have postponed crucial decisions – including the preparations for no deal, as I argued in my letter to you of last November – with the result that we appear to be heading for a semi-Brexit, with large parts of the economy still locked in the EU system, but with no UK control over that system.

It now seems that the opening bid of our negotiations involves accepting that we are not actually going to be able to make our own laws. Indeed we seem to have gone backwards since the last Chequers meeting in February, when I described my frustrations, as Mayor of London, in trying to protect cyclists from juggernauts. We had wanted to lower the cabin windows to improve visibility; and even though such designs were already on the market, and even though there had been a horrific spate of deaths, mainly of female cyclists, we were told that we had to wait for the EU to legislate on the matter.

So at the previous Chequers session, we thrashed out an elaborate procedure for divergence from EU rules. But even that seems to have been taken of the table and there is in fact no easy UK right of initiative. Yet if Brexit is to mean anything, it must surely give ministers and Parliament the chance to do things differently to protect the public. If a country cannot pass a law to save the lives of female cyclists – when that proposal is supported at every level of UK Government – then I don't see how that country can truly be called independent.

It is also also clear that by surrendering control over our rulebook for goods and agrifoods (and much else besides) we will make it much more difficult to do free trade deals. And then there is the further impediment of having to argue for an impractical and undeliverable customs arrangement unlike any other in existence

Conversely, the British Government has spent decades arguing against this or that EU directive, on the grounds that it was too burdensome or ill-thought out. We are now in the ludicrous position of asserting that we must accept huge amounts of precisely such EU law, without changing an iota, because it is essential for our economic health – and when we no longer have any ability to influence these laws as they are made.

In that respect we are truly headed for the status of colony – and many will struggle to see the economic or political advantages of that particular arrangement.

It is also clear that by surrendering control over our rulebook for goods and agrifoods (and much else besides) we will make it much more difficult to do free trade deals. And then there is the further impediment of having to argue for an impractical and undeliverable customs arrangement unlike any other in existence.

What is even more disturbing is that this is our opening bid. This is already how we see the end state for the UK – before the other side has made its counter-offer. It is as though we are sending our vanguard into battle with the white flags fluttering above them. Indeed, I was concerned, looking at Friday's document, that there might be further concessions on immigration, or that we might end up effectively paying for access to the single market.

On Friday I acknowledged that my side of the argument were too few to prevail, and congratulated you on at least reaching a Cabinet decision on the way forward. As I said then, the Government now has a song to sing. The trouble is that I have practised the words over the weekend and find that they stick in the throat. We must have collective responsibility. Since I cannot in all conscience champion these proposals, I have sadly concluded that I must go.

I am proud to have served as Foreign Secretary in your Government. As I step down I would like first to thank the patient officers of the Metropolitan Police who have looked after me and my family, at times in demanding circumstances.

I am proud too of the extraordinary men and women of our diplomatic service. Over the last few months they have shown how many friends this country has around the world, as 28 governments expelled Russian spies in an unprecedented protest at the attempted assassination of the Skripals. They have organised a highly successful Commonwealth summit and secured record international support for this Government's campaign for 12 years of quality education for every girl, and much more besides. As I leave office, the FCO now has the largest and by far the most effective diplomatic network of any country in Europe – a continent which we will never leave.

THE RT HON BORIS JOHNSON MP

Theresa Mays reply

Dear Boris,

Thank you for your letter relinquishing the office of Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.

I am sorry - and a little surprised - to receive it after the productive discussions we had at Chequers on Friday, and the comprehensive and detailed proposal which we agreed as a Cabinet. It is a proposal which will honour the result of the referendum and the commitments we made in our general election manifesto to leave the single market and the customs union. It will mean that we take back control of our borders, our laws, and our money - ending the freedom of movement, ending the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the United Kingdom, and ending the days of sending vast sums of taxpayers' money to the European Union. We will be able to spend that money on our priorities instead - such as the £20 billion increase we have announced for the NHS budget, which means that we will soon be spending an extra £394 million a week on our National Health Service.

As I outlined at Chequers, the agreement we reached requires the full, collective support of Her Majesty's Government. During the EU referendum campaign, collective responsibility on EU policy was temporarily suspended. As we developed our policy on Brexit, I have allowed Cabinet colleagues considerable latitude to express their individual views. But the agreement we reached on Friday marks the point where that is no longer the case, and if you are not able to provide the support we need to secure this deal in the interests of the United Kingdom, it is right that you should step down.

As you do so, I would like to place on record my appreciation of the service you have given to our country, and to the Conservative Party, as Mayor of London and as Foreign Secretary - not least for the passion that you have demonstrated in promoting a Global Britain to the world as we leave the European Union.

Yours ever,

Theresa May



LINKS
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5935371/Jeremy-Hunt-Foreign-Secretary-Boris-Johnson.html

Tory Brexit Chaos

Theresa May won the election (Just) on the mantra of the Labour party being the coalition of chaos. 48 hrs after claiming agreement on the Brexit plan we now have David Davis and Boris Johnson resigning.

Well now your really seeing the real party of Chaos.  The Conservatives of Chaos.

Having said that, It was never going to be easy negotiating Brexit without a majority of the country for it. When I say majority I don't mean a 4% majority, to negotiate something of this magnitude the rules of the referendum should have been you needed 60% to win. Anything less and you have the mess we are seeing here. Well thats Cameron for you Mr Vanity himself another Tory that was so far up his own arse he actually believed he could pull off a remain vote and told the EU such.

Its disgraceful that the Tories now seem to be using this as a leadership bid. If it is, its beyond disgraceful, we are months away from the Autumn deadline and the Tories have only just come up with a basic plan of what they want. That in itself is also disgraceful and playing right into the hands of the EU.

I voted to remain but only by the smallest margin and only because I believed it would take 20 years at least to recover from the damage caused. I couldn't vote to leave regardless of the cost to the UK that would not only be stupidity, it would be unpatriotic and Ive yet to see any valid report that promotes a positive picture post Brexit.

1. Anyone that thought they were going to get a better deal than those member states left it were living in cookoo land.
2. Anyone that's thinks we can leave with no deal is not understanding the damage it will do to businesses in the UK.
3. Anyone that thinks its a good idea to stay connected with the EU via customs union etc having thrown away our veto, is not understanding the ramifications as to what the EU will want for it.
4. Anyone that thinks Britain can be great again because we once had an empire is living in some drug induced dream land. We can be great but not because we once had an empire so dont use that twaddle as an argument.

Basically its a crock of shite that I cannot see any positive on the horizon as yet.

How many more businesses will now be ramping up their plans on leaving the UK with this totally chaotic front that the Tories are showing the EU.

Ive yet to see what proposals the Tories have come up with, but whatever it is it still needs to be agreed with the EU and at present they are holding all the cards.


LINKS
Theresa May ~ AKA Mayhem, Maybe, Maybenot
Boris Johnson quits to add to pressure on May over Brexit
Is it really leaving? 'I don't think so,' says Davis

Jane Fonda betrayed POWs - Not True

Did Jane Fonda betray POWs as per the email and post doing the rounds again.

The facts are, Jerry Driscoll in the video below, states that these claims about himself and Larry Carrigan are NOT TRUE, you cant get better than the truth from the actual person.

Heres part of the post doing the rounds on face Book, the full text is posted below the links

Barbara Walters writes:
Unfortunately, many have forgotten and still countless others have never known how Ms. Fonda betrayed not only the idea of our country, but specific men who served and sacrificed during the Vietnam War.

The first part of this is from an F-4E pilot. The pilot's name is Jerry Driscoll, a River Rat. In 1968, the former Commandant of the USAF Survival School was a POW in Ho LoPrison, the "Hanoi Hilton."

Dragged from a stinking cesspit of a cell, cleaned, fed, and dressed in clean PJ's, he was ordered to describe for a visiting American "peace activist" the "lenient and humane treatment" he'd received.

He spat at Ms. Fonda, was clubbed, and was dragged away. During the subsequent beating, he fell forward onto the camp commandant 's feet, which sent that officer berserk.

In 1978, the Air Force Colonel still suffered from double vision (which permanently ended his flying career) from the Commandant's frenzied application of a wooden baton.

Just to clarify I'm only commenting on whether the supposed facts in the below email are true or false. 

They are FALSE, its all rubbish.

Whether she should have gone to Hanoi or had a picture taken is another matter.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4488407/jerry-driscoll
Blame Jane Falsehoods
Did Jane Fonda Betray American POWs in North Vietnam?
How Jane Fonda’s 1972 trip to North Vietnam earned her the nickname ‘Hanoi Jane’
What Did Jane Fonda Really Do Over in Hanoi?
Jane Fonda Urban Legends
http://educate-yourself.org/lte/janefonda25apr05.shtml
Myth Blaster – Hanoi Jane Fonda, “100 Greatest Women” Jul 25
The Truth About My Trip To Hanoi

Barbara Walters writes:
Unfortunately, many have forgotten and still countless others have never known how Ms. Fonda betrayed not only the idea of our country, but specific men who served and sacrificed during the Vietnam War.

The first part of this is from an F-4E pilot. The pilot's name is Jerry Driscoll, a River Rat. In 1968, the former Commandant of the USAF Survival School was a POW in Ho LoPrison, the "Hanoi Hilton."

Dragged from a stinking cesspit of a cell, cleaned, fed, and dressed in clean PJ's, he was ordered to describe for a visiting American "peace activist" the "lenient and humane treatment" he'd received.

He spat at Ms. Fonda, was clubbed, and was dragged away. During the subsequent beating, he fell forward onto the camp commandant 's feet, which sent that officer berserk.

In 1978, the Air Force Colonel still suffered from double vision (which permanently ended his flying career) from the Commandant's frenzied application of a wooden baton.

From 1963-65, Col. Larry Carrigan was in the 47FW/DO (F-4E's). He spent 6 years in the "Hanoi Hilton". . . The first three of which his family only knew he was "missing in action." His wife lived on faith that he was still alive. His group, too, got the cleaned-up, fed and clothed routine in preparation for a "peace delegation" visit.

They, however, had time and devised a plan to get word to the world that they were alive and still survived. Each man secreted a tiny piece of paper, with his Social Security Number on it, in the palm of his hand. When paraded before Ms. Fonda and a cameraman, she walked the line, shaking each man's hand and asking little encouraging snippets like: "Aren't you sorry you bombed babies?" and "Are you grateful for the humane treatment from your benevolent captors?" Believing this HAD to be an act, they each palmed her their sliver of paper.

She took them all without missing a beat. . . At the end of the line and once the camera stopped rolling, to the shocked disbelief of the POWs, she turned to the officer in charge and handed him all the little pieces of paper...
Three men died from the subsequent beatings. Colonel Carrigan was almost number four but he survived, which is the only reason we know of her actions that day.

I was a civilian economic development adviser in Vietnam, and was captured by the North Vietnamese communists in South Vietnam in 1968, and held prisoner for over 5 years.

I spent 27 months in solitary confinement; one year in a cage in Cambodia; and one year in a 'black box' in Hanoi. My North Vietnamese captors deliberately poisoned and murdered a female missionary, a nurse in a leprosarium in Banme Thuot, South Vietnam, whom I buried in the jungle near the Cambodian border. At one time, I weighed only about 90 lbs. (My normal weight is 170 lbs.)

We were Jane Fonda's "war criminals."

When Jane Fonda was in Hanoi, I was asked by the camp communist political officer if I would be willing to meet with her. I said yes, for I wanted to tell her about the real treatment we POWs received. . . and how different it was from the treatment purported by the North Vietnamese, and parroted by her as "humane and lenient."

Because of this, I spent three days on a rocky floor on my knees, with my arms outstretched with a large steel weight placed on my hands, and beaten with a bamboo cane.

I had the opportunity to meet with Jane Fonda soon after I was released. I asked her if she would be willing to debate me on TV. She never did answer me.

These first-hand experiences do not exemplify someone who should be honored as part of "100 Years of Great Women." Lest we forget. . . "100 Years of Great Women" should never include a traitor whose hands are covered with the blood of so many patriots.

There are few things I have strong visceral reactions to, but Hanoi Jane's participation in blatant treason, is one of them. Please take the time to forward to as many people as you possibly can. It will eventually end up on her computer, and she needs to know that we will never forget.

RONALD D. SAMPSON, CMSgt,
USAF 716 Maintenance Squadron,
Chief of Maintenance DSN: 875-6431 COMM: 883-6343

The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse

This goes all the way to the top ......

The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) in England and Wales was announced by the British Home Secretary, Theresa May, on 7 July 2014. The inquiry was established to examine how the country's institutions handled their duty of care to protect children from sexual abuse.

It was set up after investigations in 2012 and 2013 into the Jimmy Savile sexual abuse scandal revealed widespread abuse, including claims of abuse stretching back over decades by prominent media and political figures, and inadequate safeguarding by institutions and organisations responsible for child welfare.

So far 3 chairs have stepped down now some might say that, that's a bit unusual?

Materials found at National ArchivesIn January 2015, an academic researcher found in The National Archives a reference to a file regarding allegations of "unnatural" sexual behaviour taking place at Westminster that probably went to the Prime Minister in the early 1980s. The file was entitled "Allegations against former public [missing word] of unnatural sexual proclivities; security aspects 1980 Oct 27 - 1981 Mar 20." The file remains classified as it contained information from the security services and Law Officers. The Cabinet Office stated that any pertinent files would be made available to the forthcoming Independent Panel Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse.

Scope

Justice Goddard announced on 27 November 2015 that 12 separate investigations would be undertaken. These would cover:^[9]

• Children in the care of Lambeth Council
• Children in the care of Nottinghamshire councils
• Cambridge House, Knowl View and Rochdale Council
• Child sexual abuse in the Anglican Church
• Child sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic Church
• The sexual abuse of children in custodial institutions
• Child sexual abuse in residential schools
• The internet and child sexual abuse
• Child exploitation by organised networks
• The protection of children outside the United Kingdom
• Accountability and reparations for victims and survivors
• Allegations of child sexual abuse linked to Westminster

She said that the scale of the inquiry was unprecedented, and that it would take five years, but she was determined that it would succeed. She added that all the investigations would start immediately, and that most if not all would include public hearings.

More to update.........

"I was taken to one side and it was made clear to me, I was told that Theresa May was going to be the Prime Minister, this inquiry was going to be part of this, and that if I didn't toe the line and do I was told, if I tried to get information out, I would be discredited by her advisors."

Evans also claimed that, when talking to the Home Affairs Select Committee, she was given a 23-page document of what she should say and told then-chair Keith Vaz "I fear that I may not be able to tell the truth because I have been told what I may and may not say."  

Although Evans and her colleagues were promised the inquiry would be independent, she told John "there was no independence" and the confidentiality clause imposed on all panel members facilitated the "suppression" of the truth.
When asked who wanted to suppress the information, she said "my belief is that it was the Home Office."

LINKS

Wikipedia: Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse
Child abuse inquiry member: 'I was silenced in 2015 to ensure Theresa May could become Prime Minister'
The Westminster child abuse ‘coverup’: how much did MPs know?
Edwardian house at heart of a long-simmering sex scandal

UPDATED
TheLondonEconomic: Westminster child sex abuse probe hears how parties and police covered up abuse

One wing plane landing - Hoax - viral marketing

Sorry guys its fake 

https://youtu.be/2-0xv7d4gBc

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/plane-loses-wing

https://www.hoax-slayer.net/one-wing-plane-landing-best-air-race-pilot-ever-video

https://youtu.be/naSZBdJoEbM

https://youtu.be/I89EMDZ0dsc

Trumps smoke and mirrors veil the real deal

So if Trump had managed to pull off an agreement from North Korea to denuclearise I would have taken my hat off to him (not that I wear one, but anyway...)

However in summary what we find is

• Trump handed the North Korean dictator a respectability card never dished out before by an American president.
• What did Trump "the great negotiator" get in return? Looking through the veil of the smoke and mirrors it appears to be nothing of substance.
• Trump seems to have forged forward, casting aside all human rights issues, purely again on a vanity stunt, just so he can claim to the blinkered faithful. "I achieved what no other US president did" when all other Presidents could have done the same if they had been prepared to toss aside the horrendous human rights issues that North Korean has.
• We've achieved an agreement from North Korean to completely denuclearise ..... Sorry what!!... no you haven't ... more smoke and mirrors. Turns out all that was agreed was a working towards denuclearisation, totally different.
• Lol Trump just recently withdrew from a 110 page agreement with Iran only to wave around a two page document with nothing of substance on it as if hes achieved something other than legitimising a Dictator, you couldn't make it up.

So setting aside all the smoke, mirrors and look at me how great I am. What did we actually see achieved.  These are the actual points from the signed agreement.

1. The United States and the DPRK commit to establish new U.S.-DPRK relations in accordance with the desire of the peoples of the two countries for peace and prosperity.
2. The United States and the DPRK will join their efforts to build a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.
3. Reaffirming the April 27, 2018 Panmunjom Declaration, the DPRK commits to work towards complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
4. The United States and the DPRK commit to recovering POW/MIA remains, including the immediate repatriation of those already identified.

"Put simply, Kim is saying he’ll get rid of his nuclear weapons only when Russia, China, the US and everyone else gets rid of theirs."

Hmmmm now where have we heard that before?

Oh yes that would be the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Entered into force 1970 and extended indefinitely in 1995.

 Article VI: Each party "undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control".

So for  48 years the members of this treaty have been forging ahead negotiating on complete disarmament ..... except they haven't. Trump couldn't even get Kim to sign back up to this treaty, at least that would have been something more official.

Instead hes come out with .... NOTHING with regard to nuclear weapons.

What a joke!

Kim will party on this achievement for years and rightly so. Hes negotiated with the biggest power on earth and gave away absolutely nothing.

LINKS
The full text of the Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un statement
Trump really has achieved a historic breakthrough – for the Kim dynasty
North and South Korean leaders promise 'lasting peace' for peninsula 
Trump Kim summit: US president lauds deal despite scepticism

Tommy Robinson & the trial was over Myth

 Q:  Was the Trial of grooming gang at the sentencing point on 25 May 2018?  

This is an important question as it means that if it wasn't then Robinson's actions should be questioned.

These are the most frequent claims put out in defence of Tommy Robinsons actions.

1. Trail was over defendant's were being sentenced on the 25th May 2018 ~ 
1.  No it wasnt and trial is still ongoing as of 6/6/18
2. Reporting restrictions were protecting the Grooming gang ~ 
1. No they werent, reporting restrictions are imposed in cases like this to protect the children involved.
3. Tommy was just letting the British public know the full extent of the charges against the defendants ~ 
1. Whatever his agenda was it wasnt in the interests of the children.
2. By doing what he was doing outside the court he risked the grooming gang getting off on a technicality, in fact this is still a possibility as the trial is ongoing.

As can be seen below from court details on 25th the trial was ongoing.



Court Docket

http://www.thelawpages.com/court-hearin ... esults.php

29/5/18
Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 10:25
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 11:00 - 10:46
Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 12:17
Trial (Part Heard) - Reporting Restrictions Lifted - 12:52
Trial (Part Heard) - Jury retire to consider verdict - 13:15
Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 15:54
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 10:30 - 16:00

The restricting reporting lifted refers to Tommy Robinson debacle.
Looks like case continues 10:30 am tomorrow.

30/5/2018
Trial (Part Heard) - Jury retire to consider verdict - 10:32
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 09:45 - 15:59

Jury back to deliberations tomorrow,

31/5/2018
Today there are developments in GROUP 1 case T20177269
abdul rehman
amere singh dhaliwal
irfan ahmed
mohammed rizwan aslam
mohammed kammer
nahman mohammed
raj singh barsran
zahid hassan

For Sentence - Prosecution Opening - 10:34
For Sentence - Case adjourned until 14:00 - 11:28
For Sentence - Resume - 14:04
For Sentence - Case adjourned until 09:45 - 14:28
For Sentence - Case adjourned until 10:30 - 14:28
1/6/2018
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 09:53 - 09:51
Trial (Part Heard) - Jury retire to consider verdict - 11:04
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 11:12 - 11:11
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 10:30 - 12:54
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 14:00 - 12:54

4/6/2018
Case T20177269 (Group1)
U20180121 Scheduled For Sentence U20180121

For Sentence - Resume - 10:29
For Sentence - Case adjourned until 10:30 - 10:47

Cases T20177360, T20187130 (Group 2)
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 13:45 - 13:40
Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 14:23
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 14:30 - 14:27
Trial (Part Heard) - Legal Submissions - 16:24
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 10:00 - 16:25

5/6/2018
Case T20177269 (Group1)
For Sentence - Resume - 10:39
For Sentence - Case adjourned until 10:00 - 11:02


Cases T20177360, T20187130 (Group 2)
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 10:09 - 10:08
Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 12:15
Trial (Part Heard) - Verdict to be taken - 12:16
Trial (Part Heard) - Hearing finished for FAISAL NADEEM - 12:45
Trial (Part Heard) - Case to be listed for Sentence on 22-Jun-2018 - 12:54

6/6/2018
Case T20177269 (Group1)
For Sentence - Resume - 11:49
For Sentence - Case adjourned until 12:15 - 12:13
For Sentence - Resume - 12:16
For Sentence - Case adjourned until 10:30 - 12:28

Cases T20177360, T20187130 (Group 2)
Not Scheduled... case over? (Report back June 22)

7/6/2018
Case T20177269 (Group1)
For Sentence - Resume - 10:29

LINKS
https://randomtopics.org/viewtopic.php?f=152&t=1958
http://www.thelawpages.com/court-hearings-lists/crown-court-lists-hearing-results.php
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-39580591
http://zelo-street.blogspot.com/2018/05/tommy-robinson-and-reporting.html
https://www.examiner.co.uk/news/trial-dates-set-29-people-13022848
https://www.courtserve.net/courtlists/viewcourtlist2014.php?courtlist=leeds_T180607.01.htm&type=crlists 

Free Tommy Robinson... Bollox ... Why?

All this religious hatred and Free Tommy Robinson bollocks is a nice distraction for the Government who are quietly Royally messing up Brexit and pretty much everything else.

No doubt that first statement will have got a few people s backs up so lets set the record straight before we carry on.

I have no love for religion, none at all. However If people feel the need to believe in a fictitious entity who is omnipresent. Then who am I and my invisible white rabbit friend to argue.

There is a caveat though, as far as I'm concerned you can believe in what you want and practise whatever religion you want as long as it doesn't detrimentally affect others.  Full Stop.

Most if not all religions cross this boundary.

Next we go to Mr Robinson,  cant say I believe in his views but I do believe in his right to have those views and his right to free speech.

There's a second caveat here. Free speech is an important pillar of this countries society and its fine as long as its not detrimental to others or inciting violence against others.  This goes for all Black, White, Asian, Muslin, Christian, Catholic, Hindu, Etc Etc.  Doesn't matter who you are.

Now why do I say all this religious hatred and Free Tommy Robinson bollocks is a nice distraction for the Government?  Actually Ill come to that in a minute.

I happen to believe that Tommy Robinson might be a lot of things but hes not stupid.  So when he was outside the court recently and got arrested he had a game plan. Its what that game plan was or is, that is confusing me.

1. He knew he was on a suspended sentence and would be jailed if re-offending.
2. This is the real one I don't get, why would you jeopardise the court case and possibly give the accused a get out of jail free card?

Now I know people are going to say the case was over, or he thought the case was over. Sorry utter rubbish, Robinson knew exactly at what stage the court case was at and the court case was definitely ongoing on the 25th May.  Note below "Trial part heard" that's on 29th May.

The only plausible explanation that I can come up with is he actually wanted them to get off. So he could claim that the establishment is favoring Muslim grooming gangs.

Sorry to spell out the reality Tommy but the establishment is not going to be worried about favoring Muslim grooming gangs. They have been protecting their own groomers for decades.

• Saville
• Max Clifford
• Rolf Harris 
• Etc Etc

the list goes on.

Robinson claims hes letting the general public know about the horrible crimes the defendants have committed. The problem with that is its "allegedly committed" until they are found guilty. Its unfortunate but that's the way British justice is. Robinson's personal agenda has no thought whatsoever for the victims.

Maybe people should be protesting about 3 judges stepping down in the Child abuse enquiry, which is massive and far, far bigger than the Leeds case that Robinson was supposedly informing the world about. But no, no one makes a squeak about that.

Another thing people are making a big noise about is the reporting restrictions. There are two points here.

1. Reporting restrictions on the court case.
2. Reporting restrictions on Robinson's arrest and subsequent sentencing.

So No.1 they put reporting restrictions in place where it is deemed necessary to protect the interests of a child, of which there are many involved in this case. Its nothing to do with protecting the grooming gang.

and No.2 Presumably the reporting restrictions spilled over onto Robinson when he basically forced them to arrest him.  I don't necessarily agree with that, but Hey Ho, he knew damn well what he was doing.

Imagine how those kids would feel if the scum got off due to Robinson's stupidity or his personal agenda, because he certainly hasn't got the interests of the kids at heart.

What would you say to them?

Again back to the original point, while all this distraction is going on the Government is being let off the hook. They are not being held to account because everyone is focusing on Robinson. First it was Chemical nerve agents in Salisbury, then Syria and now this. Its one thing after another all distracting from the failings of the current Tory Government.

So I'll leave you with what I consider the two most important points.....and the two points Id like you to consider also.

1. What would you say to those kids if the scum got off due to Robinson's stupidity. 
2. Don't let the media distract you from a failing Government, they need to be held to account and this is a distraction, we're all being played.

As an addition I've added the court ruling and sentencing from the previous case when Robinson got  the suspended sentence.  Its clear that he either totally ignored what was said or he knew exactly what he was doing.

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/coc-yaxley-lennon-20170522.pdf

As predicted Trump has failed to even get to the table with N Korea.

If anyone thought that N Korea would just give up their nuclear capability in exchange for talks you had to have rocks in your head.

Looks like no peace prize for Trump although why anyone that acts like a Bully and makes comments like "Ive got a bigger Nuclear button than you" would even be contemplated for a peace prize is beyond me.

Intel Core i5 M540 vs AMD Athlon II X3 445

The AMD Athlon II X3 445 is comparable to the Intel I5 M540
 

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-M-540-vs-AMD-Athlon-II-X3-445/m882vsm1775

LINKS

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-2500-vs-AMD-Athlon-II-X3-445

http://www.game-debate.com/cpu/index.php?pid=1299&pid2=528&compare=core-i3-3250-3-5ghz-vs-athlon-ii-x3-445

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-650-vs-AMD-Athlon-II-X3-445

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-5200U-vs-AMD-Athlon-II-X3-445

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-6400-vs-AMD-Athlon-II-X3-445/3512vsm1775

Temar Boggs

Unfortunately he was sentenced for armed robbery in 2016. Which is a bit of a shame as sound like he was a good kid from everyone's comments. 

Boggs — with the help of a 16-year-old accomplice — held up a Lancaster store, the El Coqui Market, in December, "racking" the slide of the gun and threatening the store clerk, authorities said.

LINKS
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2362102/Pennsylvania-teens-save-year-old-girl-kidnapping-chasing-kidnappers-car-BIKES.html
https://lancasteronline.com/news/local/temar-boggs-sentenced-up-to-years-for-role-in-december/article_619ae946-686f-11e6-b387-2b776d59325f.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/temar-boggs-hero-teen-rescued-girl-sentenced-robbery-article-1.2760740
https://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/15/justice/pennsylvania-teen-heroes/index.html
https://lancasteronline.com/news/local/temar-boggs-local-hero-turned-robbery-suspect-turns-himself-in/article_dace9cc0-cc7c-11e5-9119-bf4502c9589a.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/temar-boggs-hero-teen-rescued-girl-sentenced-robbery-article-1.2760740
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/reward-the-heroes-scholarship-fund-temar-boggs-and-chris-garcia#

Thachers plans to dismantle the NHS

As time goes on and documents are released it becomes clearer the amount of lies told to an unsuspecting public.

 The plan commissioned by Margaret Thatcher and her chancellor, Sir Geoffrey Howe, included proposals to charge for state schooling.

PM declared the health service was ‘safe with us’ but secretly pressed on with radical proposals, archives reveal.

Margaret Thatcher secretly tried to press ahead with a politically toxic plan to dismantle the welfare state even after a “cabinet riot” and her famous declaration that the “NHS is safe with us”, newly released Treasury documents show.

The plan commissioned by Thatcher and her chancellor Sir Geoffrey Howe included proposals to charge for state schooling, introduce compulsory private health insurance and a system of private medical facilities that “would, of course, mean the end of the National Health Service”.

 Soapbox Opinion
A succession of Tory leaders since Thatcher have espoused the mantra "the NHS is safe with us" its clearly not. Its being set up to fail. Various private healthcare companies including Virgin cherry pick the best contracts and leave the NHS (The Tax Payer) to fund the dross. No doubt these contracts will be subsidised by the tax payer as well. Like they were in the railways. But I'd need to check that.

If you want a NHS the Tories should not be allowed anywhere near it.

It should probably be ring-fenced so that its safe from the meddling of all political parties.


LINKS
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/25/margaret-thatcher-pushed-for-breakup-of-welfare-state-despite-nhs-pledge 
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/dec/28/margaret-thatcher-role-plan-to-dismantle-welfare-state-revealed
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/29/national-archives-thatcher-documents-scott-inquiry
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/naylor-report-tory-nhs-privatisation-healthcare-flog-off-conservatives-theresa-may-election-2017-a7766326.html
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/how-the-nhs-is-being-dismantled-in-10-easy-steps-10474075.html

Alex Ferguson on the NHS

Not been able to qualify if this is something Alex Ferguson actually said




LINKS
https://leftfootforward.org/2013/05/five-things-sir-alex-ferguson-said-about-the-tories

Can the US shoot down an ICBM

So two questions

1. Has the US got the capability to shoot down a ICBM similar to the ones N Korea fired over Japan 8 times?
2. How certain could they be of downing a missile?

Here's some facts from the Operational Test and Evaluation Office of the Secretary of Defence.

LINK HERE (as of March 2018)

83 of 102 hit-to-kill intercept attempts have been successful across all programs since the integrated system began development in 2001 ..... 19% fail rate.

53 of 68 hit-to-kill intercept attempts have been achieved for THAAD, Aegis BMD, and GMD test programs since 2001 .... 22% fail rate

Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD):  10 successful intercepts in 18 attempts since 1999 ....44% Fail rate

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defence:  37 successful intercepts in 46 attempts against ballistic missile targets: 19% fail rate

Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD): 15 successful intercepts in 15 attempts ... 0% fail rate


From another source .....

"This was the first time THAAD had ever intercepted a target representing an IRBM (intermediate-range ballistic missile) and was the system’s 14 successful intercept since a revised testing regimen began in 2005."

We can conclude from that there have only been 2 launches against IRBMs. That's not a great deal of testing although 15 out of 15 is a pretty amazing result considering what its doing.

Executive Summary LINK HEREThe Ground-based Midcourse Defence (GMD) element demonstrated the capability to defend the U.S. Homeland from a small number of intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) or intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) threats with simple countermeasures when the Homeland Defence Ballistic Missile Defence System (BMDS) employs its full sensors/command and control architecture. This assessment is upgraded from FY16. 

The Regional/Theater BMDS demonstrated a limited capability to defend the U.S. Pacific Command (USPACOM), U.S. European Command (USEUCOM), and U.S. Central Command (USCENTCOM) areas of responsibility for small numbers of medium-range ballistic missile and IRBM threats (1,000 to 4,000 km), and a fair capability for short-range ballistic missile threats (less than 1,000 km range). This assessment is unchanged from FY16.

Conclusion LINK HERE 

The deployment of one or two THAAD batteries in South Korea would substantially enhance its capacity to defend against a North Korean missile attack. To be sure, there is no perfect defence against ballistic missile attacks, but the probability of greatly reducing the damage resulting from missiles with conventional warheads increases when THAAD is incorporated into the defence architecture. When viewed through the lens of providing maximum protection from a North Korean missile threat, accepting the American offer to provide THAAD to the Republic of Korea is a prudent and defensible policy decision for Seoul. However, the added defensive capability will have to be weighed against other considerations. Chinese objections to the deployment of THAAD (an assessment of whether those objections are rebased on a realistic assessment of the system is beyond the scope of this article) are clear. The economics of missile defence must also be considered. It is considerably more expensive to deploy and operate THAAD to South Korea, than it will be for North Korea to grow the size of its arsenal or to quickly invest in additional missiles, missile launchers and trained crews in order to overwhelm the defences. Last, as this analysis shows, any system designed to destroy incoming missiles will have leakage. If those missiles are armed with nuclear weapons, that leakage could have catastrophic results. 

Officials in Seoul will have some difficult decisions ahead of them, but the analyses here should partially refute arguments that say THAAD will not significantly benefit South Korea when countering the short-range, Hwasong missile threat from North Korea in the immediate future. 

In answer to question one above: 
Yes ...Looking at the facts the US can shoot down a ICBM similar to the ones N Korea fired over Japan.

In answer to question two above:
THAAD was the only system with 15/15 and only two of those was against ICBMs.  Other documents allude to its effectiveness being less than 100%. The report certainly seems to bear out the 100% success rate. But THAAD has its limitations and is part of the overall system, which is why the overall a 20% fail rate prevails and that's a big window.  The real answer is the jury is out and additionally no one has tested effectiveness against a nuclear missile, so no one knows exactly what would happen.


I have another question... why did Trump not attempt to shoot down the Missiles, fired by N Korea?

After all in his tweets Trump has called Kim Jong-un "Little Rocket Man" he also claimed "Ive got a bigger nuclear button than you and it works"  Trump must have been salivating at the thought of being able to claim he'd shot one of "Rocket Mans" missiles down. So why didn't he?


It could be for many reasons so lets explore a few...

1. They knew they would land in the sea so didn't bother wasting a missile shooting it down.....Hmm the US has never been worried about wasting missiles and the kudos from shooting one of "Rocket Mans" missiles down would be worth billions in Trumps eyes.
2. They knew it wasn't armed..... Hmmm the only system that has this capability as far as I understand it is THAAD and how accurate that is hasn't been disclosed as far as I can see.
3. They didn't want to provoke him by shooting a missile down....Hmmm. North Korea firing a missile over another country is about as provocative as it gets without getting real.

Soap Box Conclusion

Trump has been trying to get South Korea to pay for the THAAD missile defences. That bill wouldn't be small and if THAAD wasn't as 100% effective as some suggest, it would increase South Korea's and others reluctance to buy it.

In my humble opinion looking at all the facts and figures. I propose that they haven't attempted to shoot a North Korea missile down because a fail would cause a massive loss of face and a few countries that are looking to buy it would be asking some very serious questions. 

Lets face it we all know Trump would love to be able to say "Rocket man I shot your missile down" but with a 20% overall fail rate he cant afford to risk a miss, unless its for real.

LINKS
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2017/pdf/bmds/2017bmds.pdf
https://www.mda.mil/
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2017/pdf/other/2017lfte.pdf
https://www.mda.mil/global/documents/pdf/testrecord.pdf
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2016/pdf/bmds/2016bmds.pdf
https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/can-we-stop-a-nuke-16988105/?page=1
https://www.scienceabc.com/eyeopeners/would-a-nuclear-missile-cause-a-nuclear-explosion-if-its-shot-in-mid-air.html
http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/the-scary-reason-why-nobody-has-attempted-to-shootdown-one-of-north-koreas-missiles/news-story/66b2a67ef21952e3d4af0381d74de0e0
https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/30/15713966/ballistic-missile-attack-department-of-defense-pentagon-north-korea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_High_Altitude_Area_Defense
http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2018/04/13/2018041301408.html
http://www.dw.com/en/the-limits-of-missile-defense-systems/a-38602048
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles-usa-defenses-excl/exclusive-u-s-plans-to-test-thaad-missile-defenses-as-north-korea-tensions-mount-idUSKBN19S2XQ
https://thediplomat.com/2016/02/what-is-thaad-what-does-it-do-and-why-is-china-mad-about-it/
https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-05-03/how-good-new-missile-defense-system-us-just-deployed-south-korea
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/09/19/can-us-military-shoot-down-north-korean-missile.html
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/07/11/us-successfully-tests-thaad-missile-system-amid-north-korean-tensions.html
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/09/08/what-would-happen-if-north-korea-fires-missile-at-us.html