Page 100 of 100 FirstFirst ... 509096979899100
Results 9,901 to 9,957 of 9957

Thread: Trump - misc

  1. #9901

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Donald Trump Is Not Well - The Atlantic
    Accepting the reality about the president’s disordered personality is important—even essential.

    SEP 9, 2019 by Peter Wehner

    “...I responded to a pro-Trump caller who was upset that I opposed Trump despite my having been a Republican for my entire adult life and having served in the Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations and the George W. Bush White House....”

    “When asked about Trump’s feelings for his fellow human beings, Trump’s mentor, the notorious lawyer Roy Cohn, reportedly said, “He...”

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...t-well/597640/


    Ivanka Trump’s Fight for the Trump Dynasty - The Atlantic

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...ynasty/596674/
    Thanks for posting. I read those articles also. I found the dynasty one particularly interesting and well written. However, on his mental health, one part of me says is this a surprise? I mean really, I think the only one who really believes he is a "stable genius" is possibly Trump himself, although I am uncertain whether he believes most of his own stories or not.

    However, the bigger problem is not that he is unstable and not a genius, but that the country put him in power anyway with some idea that he was somewhat unstable and definitely not a deep thinker. Has it got worse? Perhaps. Frankly its hard to tell, but what does this all say about the state of mental health of the American people? They are the ones who (sort of) put him in power.

  2. #9902

    Default

    What is more worrisome is the tens of millions of his followers who blindly support him and the Republican part who threw their oath to the US Constitution into the firepit.

    Many of his followers are heavily armed and I see no easy out that will not lead to civil war. Many still believe that Obama was born in Kenya and other conspiracies and will see Trump as a martyr no matter if he shoots someone on 5th Avenue on live TV or if there is undeniable proof that he took money from the Russias and is in Putin's pocket. Mike Pence would rapidly pardon him from prison even as a convicted traitor.

    They will blame the Democrats and as Trump said, not relinquish power.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  3. #9903

    Default

    For a "oh, more of the same" perspective: check out this book from the 90s:


    Trumped!: The Inside Story of the Real Donald Trump-His Cunning Rise and Spectacular Fall

    https://www.amazon.com/Trumped-Insid.../dp/067173735X

    to see that he's not a lot different from what he was in the 80s after he'd burned up a half-billion dallars of his Daddy's money. Written by one of the executives of one of the 4 casinos he bankrupted,

    An entertaining read, and you'll see his current irrational and random behaviour is just Bigly More of what he's done since he got to Manhattan.
    I am in no way entitled to your opinion...

  4. #9904

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    What is more worrisome is the tens of millions of his followers who blindly support him and the Republican part who threw their oath to the US Constitution into the firepit.

    Many of his followers are heavily armed and I see no easy out that will not lead to civil war. Many still believe that Obama was born in Kenya and other conspiracies and will see Trump as a martyr no matter if he shoots someone on 5th Avenue on live TV or if there is undeniable proof that he took money from the Russias and is in Putin's pocket. Mike Pence would rapidly pardon him from prison even as a convicted traitor.

    They will blame the Democrats and as Trump said, not relinquish power.
    I don't see the geographic basis for a civil war. There is a division, but its more of a rural/urban divide in the US. I'm not sure if the Trump supporter in Wisconsin would have a great deal of common cause with the Trump supporter in Alabama.

    I think to some degree being President is a mixed blessing for Trump. Yes, it gives his the attention and sometimes the adulation he wants, but he also faces tremendous scrutiny and criticism daily. I think if he doesn't get re-elected he will just "go back to where he came from", as he likes to say about others. Will he be a bit bitter? Probably. He will also likely hint the election was rigged and go around saying to anyone he can get to listen that he was the greatest President ever or some variation of that, but I think at some level he will be glad to be out of the White House, its fish bowl scrutiny and restrictions, so I don't think he will make a big fight of it.

    However, the problems and challenges of the Trump supporters do not go away, even if he does. It will be a big challenge for whoever takes over after him to try somehow bring the country back together again. It was divided before Trump and even more so now.

  5. #9905

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    What is more worrisome is the tens of millions of his followers who blindly support him and the Republican part who threw their oath to the US Constitution into the firepit.

    Many of his followers are heavily armed and I see no easy out that will not lead to civil war. Many still believe that Obama was born in Kenya and other conspiracies and will see Trump as a martyr no matter if he shoots someone on 5th Avenue on live TV or if there is undeniable proof that he took money from the Russias and is in Putin's pocket. Mike Pence would rapidly pardon him from prison even as a convicted traitor.

    They will blame the Democrats and as Trump said, not relinquish power.
    The so-called right is already heavily armed. I suspect the so-called left isn’t.

    Gun control under Trump might just limit the access of the left to guns should the extremist right move to seize power. Game over. Might makes right.

  6. #9906
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    13,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    And Donald Trump will be totally on board with this.

    Netanyahu vows to annex West Bank's Jordan Valley if re-elected

    The prime minister also reiterated his intention to annex Israeli settlements throughout the West Bank if re-elected, though in coordination with U.S. President Donald Trump, whose long-awaited peace plan is expected to be unveiled sometime after the vote.


    Those moves could effectively kill any remaining hopes for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, long the focus of international diplomacy.


    The Jordan Valley accounts for around one-third of the West Bank and Israeli right-wing politicians have long viewed the strategic area as a part of the territory they would never retreat from.

    https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/netanya...cted-1.4586352
    while i don't think there will ever be unanimity on a middle east peace solution, that doesn't mean a negotiated solution is impossible.

    unilaterally imposing something that simply doesn't need to imposed outside of a negotiated solution acceptable to most of those affected is not likely to be an effective move towards a long-term peace.

    that doesn't mean there might not be some non-negotiable conditions from some of those parties at least at the beginning of those negotiations but there's a potential difference between opening positions and closing positions in a negotiation that this action precludes, at least to the extend that any current government decision is not open to renegotiation by subsequent governments. what this does is likely make a negotiated solution with this government - if it is elected and if it does proceed in this fashion as opposed to this being a negotiating salvo to forestall it - that much harder to achieve.
    Right, because Israel is now going to give up land that they claim as part of Israel as opposed to the occupied territories.

    Might as well just give them the biblical version and be done with it.

    Biblical Boundaries of the Land of Israel

    https://theisraelbible.com/biblical-boundaries-land-israel/
    TAKING IT LITERALLY:
    THE BIBLICAL BOUNDARIES OF ISRAEL


    The Lord makes them perfectly clear. Like any modern-day land purchase, the deed indicates the boundaries of the land given: from the Nile river (which is mainly modern Egypt and Sudan) to the Euphrates (modern-day Iraq).


    To ensure that there is no doubt about the land’s boundaries, Scripture also indicates the different groups of people that occupy it: “…the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites.” We know that these peoples lived in what is today Egypt, Sudan, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, part of Asian Turkey, and of course all of Israel, including Gaza and the West Bank.


    This fact adds another dimension to the promise: the Lord is giving to Abram’s descendants land that is currently occupied by other nations!


    The question arises of how Israel will acquire this land – will she have to invade and conquer other countries?


    The text in Genesis 15 offers no indication that Israel will have to fight and conquer; therefore, the logical answer is that the Lord will see that the promise is fulfilled.

    https://www.chosenpeople.com/site/th...daries-israel/
    you would think i would learn...

    why don't you read what i post and respond to that instead of responding to those voices again?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  7. #9907

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Yeah, the Saudis are totally trustworthy folks.

    Khashoggi was strangled as soon as he entered Saudi Consulate: Turkish prosecutor

    Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was strangled as soon as the journalist entered the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul as part of a premeditated killing, and he was dismembered before being disposed of, a top Turkish prosecutor said Wednesday.


    A statement from chief Istanbul prosecutor Irfan Fidan's office also said that discussions with Saudi chief prosecutor Saud al-Mojeb have yielded no "concrete results" despite "good-willed efforts" by Turkey to uncover the truth.


    The statement is the first public confirmation by a Turkish official that Khashoggi was strangled and dismembered after he entered the consulate on Oct. 2 to collect paperwork needed to marry his Turkish fiancée. It also points to a lack of co-operation from Saudi officials in the investigation of the slaying.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/khasho...gled-1.4885595
    ...


    Jamal Khashoggi 'murder recording transcript' is published
    35 minutes ago (September 11, 2019)

    What does the newspaper say?

    The Sabah has consistently made international headlines by carrying details - including some that have been disputed - about the journalist's mysterious death.

    The newspaper published two new reports this week into Khashoggi's death at the hands of a group they label a "hit squad".


    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49657908
    Last edited by KC; 10-09-2019 at 07:41 PM.

  8. #9908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    And Donald Trump will be totally on board with this.

    Netanyahu vows to annex West Bank's Jordan Valley if re-elected

    The prime minister also reiterated his intention to annex Israeli settlements throughout the West Bank if re-elected, though in coordination with U.S. President Donald Trump, whose long-awaited peace plan is expected to be unveiled sometime after the vote.


    Those moves could effectively kill any remaining hopes for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, long the focus of international diplomacy.


    The Jordan Valley accounts for around one-third of the West Bank and Israeli right-wing politicians have long viewed the strategic area as a part of the territory they would never retreat from.

    https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/netanya...cted-1.4586352
    while i don't think there will ever be unanimity on a middle east peace solution, that doesn't mean a negotiated solution is impossible.

    unilaterally imposing something that simply doesn't need to imposed outside of a negotiated solution acceptable to most of those affected is not likely to be an effective move towards a long-term peace.

    that doesn't mean there might not be some non-negotiable conditions from some of those parties at least at the beginning of those negotiations but there's a potential difference between opening positions and closing positions in a negotiation that this action precludes, at least to the extend that any current government decision is not open to renegotiation by subsequent governments. what this does is likely make a negotiated solution with this government - if it is elected and if it does proceed in this fashion as opposed to this being a negotiating salvo to forestall it - that much harder to achieve.
    Right, because Israel is now going to give up land that they claim as part of Israel as opposed to the occupied territories.

    Might as well just give them the biblical version and be done with it.

    Biblical Boundaries of the Land of Israel

    https://theisraelbible.com/biblical-boundaries-land-israel/
    TAKING IT LITERALLY:
    THE BIBLICAL BOUNDARIES OF ISRAEL


    The Lord makes them perfectly clear. Like any modern-day land purchase, the deed indicates the boundaries of the land given: from the Nile river (which is mainly modern Egypt and Sudan) to the Euphrates (modern-day Iraq).


    To ensure that there is no doubt about the land’s boundaries, Scripture also indicates the different groups of people that occupy it: “…the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites.” We know that these peoples lived in what is today Egypt, Sudan, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, part of Asian Turkey, and of course all of Israel, including Gaza and the West Bank.


    This fact adds another dimension to the promise: the Lord is giving to Abram’s descendants land that is currently occupied by other nations!


    The question arises of how Israel will acquire this land – will she have to invade and conquer other countries?


    The text in Genesis 15 offers no indication that Israel will have to fight and conquer; therefore, the logical answer is that the Lord will see that the promise is fulfilled.

    https://www.chosenpeople.com/site/th...daries-israel/
    you would think i would learn...

    why don't you read what i post and respond to that instead of responding to those voices again?
    Once Netanyahu goes through with this plan, assuming he's reelected, what do you think the odds are that Labour could get elected running on a platform of "Let's give some of Israel to the Palestinians?". Do you honestly believe that that could be a winning strategy? All Likud has to do claim that giving up the annexed land is making Israel less safe and that the land is needed as a buffer against aggression and the new border would be basically carved in stone. Particularly if the Americans decide to recognize the land grab. It's much harder to unscramble an egg than to not scramble it at all. Simply saying "Well, we can always change it back later" is simply naive. What's most likely to happen if this goes through is the West Bank Palestinians will end up in much the same situation as Gaza, surrounded by a wall and totally beholden to Israel for their survival.

    If Likud frames it as a security matter, then the US will basically fall in line and once that happens, any hope of a negotiated settlement is utterly, totally dead. And as the US has given up and pretext of being a neutral negotiator, who could possible challenge them?

    But sure, just treat it as a bump in the road that can easily be undone at some point in the future.

  9. #9909
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    13,082

    Default

    ^

    as i said, maybe you should read my post instead of responding to your voices.

    that's pretty much what i said.

    until the last sentence. which should be addressed to that voice of yours that wants me to have said otherwise and not me.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  10. #9910

    Default

    It's going to, in your words,
    what this does is likely make a negotiated solution with this government - if it is elected and if it does proceed in this fashion as opposed to this being a negotiating salvo to forestall it - that much harder to achieve.
    , it's going to make it impossible. For one reason, Netanyahu has no desire to negotiate with the Palestinians. Noe, zip, zero, zilch. This is the man who said 'Israel Is the Nation-state of Jews Alone'. Does that sound like someone who's got the slightest desire to negotiate for anything?

    In an address to congress on May 24, 2011 he said In Judea and Samaria, the Jewish people are not foreign occupiers. Judea and Samaria is the term for the West Bank. He's always claimed the totality of the West Bank as Israeli territory. This is just the next step in the process.

    He'll claim the land. He'll declare that it's necessary for the security of Israel. Republicans will back him 100%. If he does this just before the 2020, election, they can claim that Democrats are supporting "Palestinian terrorists". American politics being what it is, even mild criticism of Israel is seen as being next to treason.

    So yeah, it's going to be a bit more than "that much harder to achieve."

  11. #9911
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    13,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    It's going to, in your words,
    what this does is likely make a negotiated solution with this government - if it is elected and if it does proceed in this fashion as opposed to this being a negotiating salvo to forestall it - that much harder to achieve.
    , it's going to make it impossible. For one reason, Netanyahu has no desire to negotiate with the Palestinians. Noe, zip, zero, zilch. This is the man who said 'Israel Is the Nation-state of Jews Alone'. Does that sound like someone who's got the slightest desire to negotiate for anything?

    In an address to congress on May 24, 2011 he said In Judea and Samaria, the Jewish people are not foreign occupiers. Judea and Samaria is the term for the West Bank. He's always claimed the totality of the West Bank as Israeli territory. This is just the next step in the process.

    He'll claim the land. He'll declare that it's necessary for the security of Israel. Republicans will back him 100%. If he does this just before the 2020, election, they can claim that Democrats are supporting "Palestinian terrorists". American politics being what it is, even mild criticism of Israel is seen as being next to treason.

    So yeah, it's going to be a bit more than "that much harder to achieve."
    which is really just another way of saying "unilaterally imposing something that simply doesn't need to imposed outside of a negotiated solution acceptable to most of those affected is not likely to be an effective move towards a long-term peace" isn't it? which voice is it that edits out what you don't want to read and eliminates context at will and then substitutes (yet again) arguing against a bunch of stuff that i didn't say and that i didn't defend.

    as i said, you'd think i'd learn how powerful those voices are and just leave you to them and vice versa.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  12. #9912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    It's going to, in your words,
    what this does is likely make a negotiated solution with this government - if it is elected and if it does proceed in this fashion as opposed to this being a negotiating salvo to forestall it - that much harder to achieve.
    , it's going to make it impossible. For one reason, Netanyahu has no desire to negotiate with the Palestinians. Noe, zip, zero, zilch. This is the man who said 'Israel Is the Nation-state of Jews Alone'. Does that sound like someone who's got the slightest desire to negotiate for anything?

    In an address to congress on May 24, 2011 he said In Judea and Samaria, the Jewish people are not foreign occupiers. Judea and Samaria is the term for the West Bank. He's always claimed the totality of the West Bank as Israeli territory. This is just the next step in the process.

    He'll claim the land. He'll declare that it's necessary for the security of Israel. Republicans will back him 100%. If he does this just before the 2020, election, they can claim that Democrats are supporting "Palestinian terrorists". American politics being what it is, even mild criticism of Israel is seen as being next to treason.

    So yeah, it's going to be a bit more than "that much harder to achieve."
    which is really just another way of saying "unilaterally imposing something that simply doesn't need to imposed outside of a negotiated solution acceptable to most of those affected is not likely to be an effective move towards a long-term peace" isn't it? which voice is it that edits out what you don't want to read and eliminates context at will and then substitutes (yet again) arguing against a bunch of stuff that i didn't say and that i didn't defend.

    as i said, you'd think i'd learn how powerful those voices are and just leave you to them and vice versa.
    I think it’s a case of “inherent bias”, “seeing red” or whatever it’s called.


    “reactive devaluation”



    Tribalism in Politics | Psychology Today Canada


    “A high school valedictorian recently gave a graduation speech in which he shared an inspirational quote:

    “Don’t just get involved. Fight for your seat at the table. Better yet, fight for a seat at the head of the table.”

    The student attributed the quote to a beloved political figure. The audience cheered.


    Then he corrected himself and attributed the quote to a leader from the other political party. The cheering “quickly died” (accompanied by “some collective groaning”)
    (Novelly, 2018 ).


    What appeared to happen is called ...”





    “A 2003 study titled “Party over Policy” showed that liberal college students changed their tune about a generous welfare policy when they were told it was supported by congressional Republicans but not Democrats (Cohen, 2003).” ...


    “When it comes to ego protection, it’s easy to misperceive or reinterpret a good idea as bad.”...


    “This is part of the ad hominem fallacy—devaluing an argument not on its merits but because of perceived negative qualities of those who proposed it.”



    https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/b...sm-in-politics








    General Discussion

    Four studies demonstrated the impact of group influence on attitude change. If information about the position of their party was absent, liberal and conservative undergraduates based their attitude on the objective content of the policy and its merit in light of long-held ideological beliefs. If information about the position of their party was available, however, participants assumed that position as their own regardless of the content of the policy. The effect of group information was evident not only on attitude, but on behavior (Study 4). It was as apparent among participants who were knowledgeable about welfare as it was among participants who were not (Study 2). Important alternative explanations for the obtained results, such as effects of heuristic processing and shifts in scale perspective, were ruled out (Studies 3 and 4).

    Considerations of Underlying Process

    Attitude change did not result from mindless conformity. No evidence was found that ...


    Source:
    Party Over Policy: The Dominating Impact of Group Influence on Political Beliefs
    Geoffrey L. Cohen Yale University

    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4ec...9f64e1172f.pdf
    Bolding mine
    Last edited by KC; 11-09-2019 at 10:42 AM.

  13. #9913

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    It's going to, in your words,
    what this does is likely make a negotiated solution with this government - if it is elected and if it does proceed in this fashion as opposed to this being a negotiating salvo to forestall it - that much harder to achieve.
    , it's going to make it impossible. For one reason, Netanyahu has no desire to negotiate with the Palestinians. Noe, zip, zero, zilch. This is the man who said 'Israel Is the Nation-state of Jews Alone'. Does that sound like someone who's got the slightest desire to negotiate for anything?

    In an address to congress on May 24, 2011 he said In Judea and Samaria, the Jewish people are not foreign occupiers. Judea and Samaria is the term for the West Bank. He's always claimed the totality of the West Bank as Israeli territory. This is just the next step in the process.

    He'll claim the land. He'll declare that it's necessary for the security of Israel. Republicans will back him 100%. If he does this just before the 2020, election, they can claim that Democrats are supporting "Palestinian terrorists". American politics being what it is, even mild criticism of Israel is seen as being next to treason.

    So yeah, it's going to be a bit more than "that much harder to achieve."
    which is really just another way of saying "unilaterally imposing something that simply doesn't need to imposed outside of a negotiated solution acceptable to most of those affected is not likely to be an effective move towards a long-term peace" isn't it? which voice is it that edits out what you don't want to read and eliminates context at will and then substitutes (yet again) arguing against a bunch of stuff that i didn't say and that i didn't defend.

    as i said, you'd think i'd learn how powerful those voices are and just leave you to them and vice versa.
    You're saying it's going to make it "that much harder to achieve". I'm saying it's going to make it pretty much impossible. For you, it's just a bump in the road. Something that can be negotiated away at a later date. A bump but not an insurmountable one. What exactly are the Palestinians supposed to use as a negotiating point? They've lost any chance of having East Jerusalem as their capital, due to Netanyahu and Trump. They are now going to lose a huge chunk of the west bank.

    Netanyahu doesn't want to negotiate. He wants to dictate terms and have them all accepted without question. And that's not just making something "harder to achieve". That suggests that a settlement could still be negotiated. Even if Netanyahu loses the election, Likud will call any attempt to roll back the annexation as being soft of the defense of Israel.

  14. #9914
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    13,082

    Default

    ^

    there you go again earning full marks for consistency...

    how is "unilaterally imposing something that simply doesn't need to imposed outside of a negotiated solution acceptable to most of those affected is not likely to be an effective move towards a long-term peace" construed to be classifying something as being "a bump in the road"?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  15. #9915

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    ^

    there you go again earning full marks for consistency...

    how is "unilaterally imposing something that simply doesn't need to imposed outside of a negotiated solution acceptable to most of those affected is not likely to be an effective move towards a long-term peace" construed to be classifying something as being "a bump in the road"?
    Because
    "that much harder to achieve."
    means that there's something still possible to achieve.

  16. #9916
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    13,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    ^

    there you go again earning full marks for consistency...

    how is "unilaterally imposing something that simply doesn't need to imposed outside of a negotiated solution acceptable to most of those affected is not likely to be an effective move towards a long-term peace" construed to be classifying something as being "a bump in the road"?
    Because
    "that much harder to achieve."
    means that there's something still possible to achieve.
    yes, that's exactly what it means.

    does it mean the odds are 10% or 90% or somewhere in between within the next 3/6/9 years? that's a good question.

    as good as asking if the odds were 10% or 90% or somewhere in between for the last 3/6/9 years.

    and noting of course that it's been more than 70 years so far without achieving one. what's your rush to give up entirely?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  17. #9917

    Default

    You're right. Let's just continue to annex Palestinian land and take over East Jerusalem and make non Jews second class citizens and expand illegal settlements (which won't be illegal any more after the annexation). It's all just meaningless and everything can be undone with the stroke of a pen and no repercussions by a future government. Why are the Palestinians bitching about this anyway? It's no big deal. Just a minor adjustment in some numbers. Nothing to see here. Carry on.

  18. #9918
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    13,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    You're right. Let's just continue to annex Palestinian land and take over East Jerusalem and make non Jews second class citizens and expand illegal settlements (which won't be illegal any more after the annexation). It's all just meaningless and everything can be undone with the stroke of a pen and no repercussions by a future government. Why are the Palestinians bitching about this anyway? It's no big deal. Just a minor adjustment in some numbers. Nothing to see here. Carry on.
    i'm right. that part of your post i can agree with, it happens on occasion.

    as for the rest, which voice told you i said anything like that or supported anything like that???
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  19. #9919

    Default

    Well, Netanyahu for one. Trump for another.

    The rest of the middle east, not so much.

    Arabs ‘want to destroy us all’: Netanyahu bot gets Facebook ‘hate speech’ suspension

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud party was found Thursday to have violated Facebook’s hate-speech policy after a post from his account saying Arabs “want to destroy us all”.


    Israeli media reported that the post which said Israeli Arabs “want to destroy us all — women, children and men” appeared on Netanyahu’s official Facebook page and was subsequently removed by Likud.

    https://www.rawstory.com/2019/09/ara...ch-suspension/
    And



    Netanyahu announces post-election plan to annex Jordan Valley
    Some 65,000 Palestinians and 11,000 illegal Israeli settlers live in the area - mostly under Israeli military control.


    10 Sept 2019




    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has promised to annex the Jordan Valley in the occupied West Bank if he wins next week's general election, drawing sharp criticism from Middle Eastern countries including Saudi Arabia.


    "Today, I announce my intention, after the establishment of a new government, to apply Israeli sovereignty to the Jordan Valley and the northern Dead Sea," Netanyahu said in a speech broadcast live on Israeli TV on Tuesday.


    That step, he said, could be taken "immediately after the election if I receive a clear mandate to do so from you, the citizens of Israel".


    Netanyahu announces post-election plan to annex Jordan Valley

    The Jordan Valley and the northern Dead Sea constitute almost 30 percent of the West Bank. Some 65,000 Palestinians and about 11,000 illegal Israeli settlers live in the area - most of which is under Israeli military control in what is referred to as Area C.


    Netanyahu - who is fighting for his political life in a closely contested election - reaffirmed the pledge to annex all Jewish settlements throughout the West Bank, but said such a move would not be made before publication of a long-awaited United States peace plan and consultations with President Donald Trump.


    "There is no change in United States policy at this time," a US official said when asked whether the White House supported Netanyahu's move.


    "We will release our Vision for Peace after the Israeli election and work to determine the best path forward to bring long-sought security, opportunity and stability to the region."


    In 2017, Trump decided to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, reversing decades of US policy.


    The Palestinian leadership has since declared the US cannot be an honest peace broker in negotiations with Israel.


    'Prime destroyer'
    Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said in a statement "all signed agreements with Israel and the obligations resulting from them would end" if Netanyahu went through with the move.


    Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh called the Israeli leader "a prime destroyer of the peace process".


    "The Palestinian territory is not part of Netanyahu's election campaign," Shtayyeh said.


    Arab League foreign ministers condemned Netanyahu's plan, saying it would undermine any chance of progress towards Israeli-Palestinian peace.


    Saudi Arabia said it considered the declaration a"violation of international law and a "very dangerous escalation against the Palestinians". It called for an emergency meeting of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation foreign ministers to discuss the move.


    The 2,400-square kilometre Jordan Valley, which Palestinians seek for the eastern perimeter of a state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, stretches from the Dead Sea in the south to the Israeli city of Beit Shean in the north.


    Israel has long said it intends to maintain military control there under any peace agreement with the Palestinians. It captured the West Bank in a 1967 war.


    Annexing settlements would likely spell the end of any lingering hopes of establishing a Palestinian state alongside Israel. Netanyahu made no mention of what he would do with the territory's more than two million Palestinian residents.

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/...155523634.html

    But, you're right. It's been going on for 70 years. What's a few more decades? Or forever?

  20. #9920

    Default

    Even the man who Trump once called "My African-American" thinks he's racist.

    Why the man Trump once called ‘my African American’ is leaving the GOP

    After two years of frustration with the president’s rhetoric on race and the lack of diversity in the administration, Cheadle told PBS NewsHour he has decided to leave the Republican party and run for a seat in the U.S. House of Representative as an independent in 2020.

    Now, the 62-year-old real estate broker, who supported the Republican approach to the economy, said he sees the party as pursuing a “pro-white” agenda and using black people like him as “political pawns.” The final straw for Cheadle came when he watched many Republicans defend Trump’s tweets telling four congresswomen of color, who are all American citizens, to go back to their countries, as well as defend the president’s attacks on Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., and his comments that Cummings’ hometown of Baltimore is “infested.”


    “President Trump is a rich guy who is mired in white privilege to the extreme,” said Cheadle, of Redding, Calif., who switched from being an independent to a Republican in 2001. “Republicans are too sheepish to call him out on anything and they are afraid of losing their positions and losing any power themselves.”

    https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politic...publican-party

  21. #9921
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    13,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Well, Netanyahu for one. Trump for another.

    ...
    so...

    it wasn't voices in your head that told you i said those things, it was netenyahu for one and trump for another that told you i said those things?

    right. glad we cleared that up.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  22. #9922

    Default

    So Trump is considering backing a French proposal for a $15 billion line of credit if Iran complies with the agreement Trump pulled out of. Yeah, makes perfect sense.

    Trump mulls $15b bailout plan for Iran if complies with nuclear deal – report

    US President Donald Trump is actively considering a French plan to extend a $15 billion line of credit to Iran in return for the Islamic Republic’s compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal, the Daily Beast reported Wednesday.


    Four sources with knowledge of the US president’s conversations with French President Emmanuel Macron told the news outlet that Trump “has in recent weeks shown openness to entertaining” the proposal.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/trump-...r-deal-report/

  23. #9923

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Well, Netanyahu for one. Trump for another.

    ...
    so...

    it wasn't voices in your head that told you i said those things, it was netenyahu for one and trump for another that told you i said those things?

    right. glad we cleared that up.
    Right. You don't see a problem with it since nothing has changed in 70 years and what's a few more decades? More difficult? Heck, it's already difficult so what's the big deal. Nothings happened in the past. Nothings going to happen in the present. As for the future, maybe the Palestinians should be driven out of the area entirely, perhaps for a few thousand years. Then, at some point in the far future, some homicidal maniac will attempt to exterminate them and the world will decide to give them a homeland in the place they used to live in. Of course, the people that live there won't be happy and we can have a role reversal but with the same outcome of killing and hatred.

    Lather, rinse, repeat.

    I wonder what your reaction would be if the Palestinians unilaterally annexed 1/3rd of Israel and they had the military and (undeclared) nuclear weapons to back it up? I'd imagine it would be a bit more than "It's been 70 years, what's a few more?"

  24. #9924

    Default

    It makes you wonder why he keeps hiring these people that are "not smart"?

    BOLTON WAS ‘TOUGH’ NOT ‘SMART,’ SAYS TRUMP

    Trump said that Kim “wanted nothing to do with John Bolton” after that and “I don’t blame Kim. That’s not a question of being tough, that’s a question of being not smart.”


    Trump said he also differed with Bolton on the former U.N. ambassador’s encouragement of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. But the relationship in the White House became unworkable because of personality clashes, the president said.


    “He’s somebody that I actually had a very good relationship with, but he wasn’t getting along with people in the administration who I consider very important,” he said. “You know, John wasn’t in line with what we were doing.”

    https://www.newsweekpakistan.com/bol...rt-says-trump/

  25. #9925
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    13,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Well, Netanyahu for one. Trump for another.

    ...
    so...

    it wasn't voices in your head that told you i said those things, it was netenyahu for one and trump for another that told you i said those things?

    right. glad we cleared that up.
    Right. You don't see a problem with it since nothing has changed in 70 years and what's a few more decades? More difficult? Heck, it's already difficult so what's the big deal. Nothings happened in the past. Nothings going to happen in the present. As for the future, maybe the Palestinians should be driven out of the area entirely, perhaps for a few thousand years. Then, at some point in the far future, some homicidal maniac will attempt to exterminate them and the world will decide to give them a homeland in the place they used to live in. Of course, the people that live there won't be happy and we can have a role reversal but with the same outcome of killing and hatred.

    Lather, rinse, repeat.

    I wonder what your reaction would be if the Palestinians unilaterally annexed 1/3rd of Israel and they had the military and (undeclared) nuclear weapons to back it up? I'd imagine it would be a bit more than "It's been 70 years, what's a few more?"
    which voice said those things to you?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  26. #9926

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Well, Netanyahu for one. Trump for another.

    ...
    so...

    it wasn't voices in your head that told you i said those things, it was netenyahu for one and trump for another that told you i said those things?

    right. glad we cleared that up.
    Right. You don't see a problem with it since nothing has changed in 70 years and what's a few more decades? More difficult? Heck, it's already difficult so what's the big deal. Nothings happened in the past. Nothings going to happen in the present. As for the future, maybe the Palestinians should be driven out of the area entirely, perhaps for a few thousand years. Then, at some point in the far future, some homicidal maniac will attempt to exterminate them and the world will decide to give them a homeland in the place they used to live in. Of course, the people that live there won't be happy and we can have a role reversal but with the same outcome of killing and hatred.

    Lather, rinse, repeat.

    I wonder what your reaction would be if the Palestinians unilaterally annexed 1/3rd of Israel and they had the military and (undeclared) nuclear weapons to back it up? I'd imagine it would be a bit more than "It's been 70 years, what's a few more?"
    You see kcantor not as a thinking individual but as a member of a group you don’t like with attributes you see as negative and/or undesirable. (Doesn’t that pretty much make you a racist?)

  27. #9927

    Default

    Nope, I see him as an individual. And individual who claims that he sees the annexation as a bad thing but doesn't really think it matters much since there hasn't been peace in 70 years.

  28. #9928

    Default

    Meanwhile, what's a little voter suppression between friends?

    Right-wing Jews said behind billboards calling on Arabs not to vote
    Campaigns to suppress the vote in April were commissioned by Jews, with an American nonprofit footing the bill in one case, report says

    During the April 9 elections, Likud equipped some 1,200 polling officials working at ballot stations in Arab population centers with hidden body cameras to prevent what the party claims was widespread fraud that has occurred in the community. Critics charged that Likud’s efforts were a form of voter intimidation designed to keep the non-Jewish minority from the polls, a claim seemingly corroborated by the company contracted by Likud to carry out the operation.


    Ahead of the next national elections on September 17, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sought to fast-track legislation that would allow activists in Likud and other parties to again bring cameras into polling stations, despite opposition from legal officials and the Central Elections Committee.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/right-...s-not-to-vote/

  29. #9929
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    13,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Nope, I see him as an individual. And individual who claims that he sees the annexation as a bad thing but doesn't really think it matters much since there hasn't been peace in 70 years.
    so now your voices tell you i don't really think it matters much since there hasn't been peace in 70 years?

    the fact there hasn't been peace in 70 years is criminal but you do know there was no peace before the west bank was even occupied was there? i wonder why that happened (rhetorical question only)?

    in fact there has not been a single day of peace since the un resolution created the state of israel was there? i wonder why that happened (rhetorical question only)?

    i suppose next your voices will tell you i orchestrated and supported all of those things too, simply for them to be a prelude to supporting the annexation, even though some of those things occurred before i was even born.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  30. #9930

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Nope, I see him as an individual. And individual who claims that he sees the annexation as a bad thing but doesn't really think it matters much since there hasn't been peace in 70 years.

    Without trying to understand his position, you’re attributing thoughts to him - of those you dislike.


    The Psychology of Prejudice and Racism | Psychology Today Canada

    “What is stereotyping and how does it relate to social prejudice?

    Stereotyping goes hand in hand with prejudice. The term stereotype as used in social science was first introduced by the journalist Walter Lippman in 1922. ... When we stereotype people, we attribute a series of traits to them based on the one trait that signals their membership in a particular group.
    ...”


    https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/b...ice-and-racism

  31. #9931

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    It makes you wonder why he keeps hiring these people that are "not smart"?

    BOLTON WAS ‘TOUGH’ NOT ‘SMART,’ SAYS TRUMP

    Trump said that Kim “wanted nothing to do with John Bolton” after that and “I don’t blame Kim. That’s not a question of being tough, that’s a question of being not smart.”


    Trump said he also differed with Bolton on the former U.N. ambassador’s encouragement of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. But the relationship in the White House became unworkable because of personality clashes, the president said.


    “He’s somebody that I actually had a very good relationship with, but he wasn’t getting along with people in the administration who I consider very important,” he said. “You know, John wasn’t in line with what we were doing.”

    https://www.newsweekpakistan.com/bol...rt-says-trump/
    Yes, it does make you wonder why he hires these people and Bolton didn't even seem to suck up to Trump much like some of the others. Having said that it may be better he is gone. He seemed to be a rigid type and not willing to let go of some crazy ideas, even when they got in the way of good sense. Trump's not like that at all - ahem, wall.

    Interesting assessment by Trump though - Lil Kim didn't like him, so I realized there was a problem. I'm not sure the North Korean dictators views should be a consideration in White House staffing, we really are in a upside down world.

  32. #9932

    Default

    Which doesn't explain why he looks the same under natural light.

    Trump blames energy-efficient lightbulbs for his orange skin: ‘The light is the worst’

    "“People said, what’s with the light bulb?” Trump told the crowd. “I said, here’s the story, and I looked at it: The bulb that we’re being forced to use — No. 1, to me, most importantly, the light’s no good. I always look orange.”


    The president then told the GOP crowd they, too, looked orange under the lighting."

    https://www.rawstory.com/2019/09/tru...nMuiY.facebook

  33. #9933

    Default

    I'm thinking this could be a popular word around here:

    A 'mumpsimus' is a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong.
    https://twitter.com/MerriamWebster/s...90997380153344
    I am in no way entitled to your opinion...

  34. #9934

    Default

    From that lefty rag, The Wall Street Journal.

    He'd better hope that Putin & Kim don't hear about this.

    Trump provoked ‘stunned silence’ by shouting ‘where’s my favorite dictator’ at meeting with Egyptian officials: report

    President Donald Trump shocked onlookers at the G7 meeting when he praised the president of Egypt as a dictator.


    “Inside a room of the ornately decorated Hotel du Palais during last month’s Group of Seven summit in Biarritz, France, President Trump awaited a meeting with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al Sisi,” The Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

    “Mr. Trump looked over a gathering of American and Egyptian officials and called out in a loud voice: ‘Where’s my favorite dictator?’ Several people who were in the room at the time said they heard the question,” the newspaper reported.

    https://www.rawstory.com/2019/09/tru...icials-report/

  35. #9935
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,787

    Default

    ^ See, talking about himself again.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  36. #9936

    Default

    Conservative icon Max Boot on why the republican party must be destroyed.

    “We Need to Destroy the Republican Party”: A Conservative Luminary Calls for a Clean Start
    In which Max Boot says the GOP is racist, the Iraq War was wrong, and Trumpism is a cancer.

    MB: I’m ashamed to admit that it took the emergence of Donald Trump. I was in my conservative bunker, and I thought this was a gross libel against the Republican Party to claim that we were catering to racism, or that it was a libel on America to claim that America was a pervasively racist society. And then Trump came along and I realized, “Wait a second. There is a much larger constituency for racism and xenophobia than I had realized.” And it made me think, “Oh, my goodness. This is why a lot of people were voting Republican.” It wasn’t because they loved supply-side economics. It wasn’t because they supported NATO. It was because they were looking for a candidate who would champion the interests of white people. And Donald Trump did that more unabashedly and more unapologetically than previous Republican candidates had done. That was a wake-up call. And then of course I saw other examples of racism coming to the fore in ways that were undeniable, like all these videotapes of police officers killing and abusing African Americans. The evidence is right there, on the tape. You can’t deny it. African Americans have been saying for years that they have been the victims of racist police, but I tended to believe the police officers. Same with the #MeToo movement, which made me realize, “Hey, feminists have a point when they talk about the abuses of patriarchal society and the suffering that women endure in America.” To be clear, I’m not buying into some kind of anti-American worldview. We have made real progress, but I think we have a long way to go. I think a lot of my fellow conservatives are in denial about the state of modern America.


    DC: To me, this part of your book is fascinating. Because the Iraq War, it’s a policy mistake. But race is really one of the fundamental debates and divides we have. And it’s been an article of faith, on the conservative side, that they have been libeled on this front. We see a hue and cry anytime Republicans are confronted with this issue. Why this inability to see at least a portion of this?


    MB: I can talk about my own blindness. I thought, “I’m not racist. And I’m a Republican. So it seems like a gross libel to accuse Republicans and conservatives of being racist if I personally am not racist.” And what I’ve realized is there are a lot of racists that the Republican Party is appealing to. There’s also been a disconnect between what Republicans do in office and what they do on the campaign trail. Because going back to 1964, when the parties basically switched positions on civil rights, Republicans have been appealing for white votes with coded racial appeals. Whether it was Nixon’s Southern strategy, or in 1980 Ronald Reagan kicking off his general election campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi, or the Willie Horton ad from George H.W. Bush. You can point to all these examples. But when you look at the actual Republican presidents and leaders, I think they were actually decent people who weren’t delivering on this white-power agenda that a lot of their supporters might have been led to think they would deliver on. And so you had a disconnect between the Republican Party on the campaign trail and the Republican Party in power. Trump exploited that, because he has no compunctions about doing in office the kind of things that previous Republican standard-bearers only hinted at on the campaign trail. And he is tapping into frustration in ranks with what they see as being RINOs, as Republicans in Name Only. What I think they mean by that is candidates who did not deliver on the kind of racist, xenophobic, white-power agenda that a lot of Republicans would actually like to see. Before Donald Trump, the Republican Party was a majority conservative party with a white nationalist fringe. Now it’s a white nationalist party with a conservative fringe.

    https://www.motherjones.com/politics...a-clean-start/

  37. #9937

    Default

    Max Boot correctly sums it up.

    The white nationalists have taken over the GOP and their only aim is to protect white privilege and political power extolling their version of the Bible and the 2nd Amendment while tilling under the rights of of other classes into servitude.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  38. #9938

    Default

    Only the parts of the bible that they agree with, mostly the old testament stuff. They're not really into the whole "love thy neighbour" stuff.

  39. #9939

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spudly View Post
    I'm thinking this could be a popular word around here:

    A 'mumpsimus' is a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong.
    https://twitter.com/MerriamWebster/s...90997380153344

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Only the parts of the bible that they agree with, mostly the old testament stuff. They're not really into the whole "love thy neighbour" stuff.



    mumpsimus




    The story was told by Desiderius Erasmus (1466–1536) in a letter he wrote in August 1516 to Henry Bullock.[5][6] Erasmus used it as an analogy with those who refused to accept that Novum Instrumentum omne, his edition of the Greek New Testament, corrected errors in the Latin Vulgate. The English diplomat Richard Pace (1482–1536) included a variant in his 1517 work De Fructu qui ex Doctrina Percipitur, where the priest was English and had been saying mumpsimus for thirty years when corrected.[7] While Pace's book (written in Latin) is credited by the first edition of the Oxford English Dictionary as the origin of "mumpsimus",[8] Pace acknowledged his borrowing in a 1517 letter to Erasmus.[9] "Mumpsimus and sumpsimus" became proverbial among Protestants in the early English Reformation.[10]

    ...

    “In an 1883 polemic on errors in translations of the Christian Bible, John Burgon says: "If men prefer their 'mumpsimus' to our 'sumpsimus', let them by all means have it: but pray let them keep their rubbish to themselves—and at least leave our SAVIOUR's words alone."[16]”


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mumpsimus



    Mumpsimus and Sumpsimus: The Intellectual Origins of a Henrician Bon Mot
    by PETER MARSHALL

    Henry VIII’s appearance before the assembled houses of parliament on Christmas Eve 1545 was perhaps his finest hour. In what has been called a ‘pioneer royal Christmas broadcast’, the king delivered an impassioned and eloquent speech lamenting the religious divisions that afflicted his kingdom, and urging his subjects towards unity and charity.4 According to William Petre, the king himself wept as he recounted how ‘charity between man and man is so refrigerate’, and few of his audience could restrain themselves from doing likewise.5 Another eye-witness, the chronicler Edward Hall, wrote down the speech ‘worde for worde, as near as I was able to report it’. This account gives details of how Henry illustrated the breakdown of fraternal love among his people: ‘the one calleth the other Hereticke and Anabaptist, and he calleth hym again, Papist, Yypocrite and Pharisey’; rival preachers in- veighed against each other ‘without charity or discrecion’. To the king’s mind, the blame for this deserved to be apportioned to all sides, and, to reinforce the point, Henry brought forward one of the more curious metaphors of contemporary religious discourse: ‘some be to styff in their old Mumpsimus, other be to busy and curious in their newe Sumpsimus ’.6
    ...”


    “In short, ‘ mumpsimus ’ was part of the currency of humanist wordplay, a pointedly referential Latinate joke, which may have appealed particularly in the English setting because of its suggestion of mummering or mumming, terms which meant both muttering or mumbling, and the disguising and play-acting associated with mummers’ plays.48 To humanists, it was a versatile weapon of ridicule, though one which had been forged from their characteristic disdain for the ignorant mass of the parish clergy. Impatience with clerical shortcomings was de rigueur among the circle of Erasmus’ acquaintance in early sixteenth-century England, with figures like Thomas More and John Colet arguing that what the Church needed was fewer priests and better ones.49 In an ordination sermon of around, Colet’s friend, the chancellor of York Minister,
    ...

    “As informed contemporaries would have recognised, the king’s bon mot was not quite so even-handed as it would first appear: sumpsimus is, at worst, pedantry, while mumpsimus is just plain wrong. As a pejorative label, ‘...Henry framed his famous appeal for unity reveals ... What the king was invoking appears to represent the rhetoric of reformist Christian humanism, ...It would perhaps be difficult to find a more perfect encapsulation of the idiosyncratic religious outlook of Henry VIII, and of the complexities and ambiguities of the reforming processes he initiated;...trying, and failing, to bring under control.



    http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/304/1/WRAP...l_download.pdf

    Last edited by KC; 14-09-2019 at 08:04 AM.

  40. #9940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Only the parts of the bible that they agree with, mostly the old testament stuff. They're not really into the whole "love thy neighbour" stuff.
    Trump had that part removed by executive order...

    His only bible that he has read is Mein Kampf.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  41. #9941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Max Boot correctly sums it up.

    The white nationalists have taken over the GOP and their only aim is to protect white privilege and political power extolling their version of the Bible and the 2nd Amendment while tilling under the rights of of other classes into servitude.
    LOL

    You are insane

  42. #9942

    Default

    I am not the one blaming my skin color on those newfangled lightbulbs...

    Is he getting worried that he is too orange and needs 'whiter' spotlights so his devoted followers don't think he is a person of color?


    BTW, You have been awfully quiet lately while your favorite American President has gone off the rails.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 14-09-2019 at 03:18 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  43. #9943

    Default

    He's been busy at his new job, ghost writing Trump's Twitter feed.

  44. #9944

    Default

    Bibi expands his annexation plans.

    Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu vows to annex ‘all the settlements’ in West Bank

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed Monday to annex “all the settlements” in the West Bank, including an enclave deep in the heart of the largest Palestinian city, in a last-ditch move that appeared aimed at shoring up nationalist support the day before a do-over election.


    Locked in a razor tight race and with legal woes hanging over him, Netanyahu is fighting for his political survival. In the final weeks of his campaign he has been doling out hard-line promises meant to draw more voters to his Likud party and re-elect him in Tuesday’s unprecedented repeat vote.


    “I intend to extend sovereignty on all the settlements and the (settlement) blocs,” including “sites that have security importance or are important to Israel’s heritage,” Netanyahu said in an interview with Israeli Army Radio, part of an eleventh-hour media blitz.


    Asked if that included the hundreds of Jews who live under heavy military guard amid tens of thousands of Palestinians in the volatile city of Hebron, Netanyahu responded “of course.”

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/worl...ettlements-in/
    And gets Trumps support in preparation for strikes on Iran that would automatically include the US.

    Trump floats idea of mutual defense pact with Israel, days before close election

    President Trump said he had discussed a possible new defense pact with Israel during a phone call Saturday with Benjamin Netanyahu, highlighting the Israeli prime minister’s close ties to the Trump administration days before Netanyahu faces a difficult reelection vote.


    Trump did not promise to install a mutual defense pact, nor divulge further details of the conversation. The idea is generally popular in Israel, where the United States is the most important ally and defense partner.


    “I had a call today with Prime Minister Netanyahu to discuss the possibility of moving forward with a Mutual Defense Treaty, between the United States and Israel, that would further anchor the tremendous alliance . . . between our two countries,” Trump wrote in a pair of tweets Saturday.


    The language of the tweets suggests he is contemplating a formal treaty, which would have to be submitted to the Senate for ratification.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...?noredirect=on
    Although Israel shouldn't count on the treaty meaning much based on Trumps refusal to commit to honouring a similar commitment to NATO.

    Trump Questions the Core of NATO: Mutual Defense, Including Montenegro

    In an interview that aired Tuesday evening with the Fox News host Tucker Carlson, Mr. Trump appeared to suggest that the NATO mutual defense compact is confusing, particularly the question of why an American would have to defend a small country like Montenegro, which is more than 5,000 miles away.


    Mr. Trump has long raised questions about the future of the United States’ commitment to NATO, a defense treaty that was established to stave off aggression from what was then the Soviet Union. Montenegro joined the alliance in 2017, a year after Russia plotted a coup to overthrow Montenegro’s government and replace it with one that would be hostile toward NATO.


    On Tuesday, Mr. Carlson asked Mr. Trump: “So, let’s say Montenegro — which joined last year — is attacked, why should my son go to Montenegro to defend it from attack? Why is that?”


    Mr. Trump immediately acknowledged the concern.


    “I understand what you’re saying,” Mr. Trump said. “I’ve asked the same question.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/18/w...ontenegro.html

  45. #9945

    Default

    Seems neither is intellectually capable enough to ask themselves: Why would it be attacked in the first place?

    At Trump’s advanced age he should at least be able to remember the communists funding organizations all over the world in order to fulfil their expansionist agenda. It’s all just imperialism under different names. Russia, China, the US all have expansionist aspirations.

    A Russian Attack on Montenegro Could Mean the End of NATO

    Trump doesn’t think the country is worth defending. Putin has already tried to destabilize it once—the West can’t let it happen again.
    BY JEFFREY A. STACEY | JULY 27, 2018, 2:10 PM


    Russia has repeatedly outsmarted the West in recent years, managing to play a weaker hand with remarkable skill. Moscow has finely honed its skills in information warfare and hybrid warfare, relying on methods including pressure diplomacy, fake news, and foreign electoral intervention. Along the way, it has taken parts of Georgia and Ukraine by force and knocked both the United States and Britain down several pegs geopolitically.


    https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/07/27...rump-helsinki/




    Why is Russia opposed to Montenegro joining NATO? - Russia Beyond

    https://www.rbth.com/international/2...ng-nato_551179
    Last edited by KC; 16-09-2019 at 09:35 AM.

  46. #9946

    Default

    More problems for Russia:


    Five countries in the eastern Mediterranean are shaking up Europe's energy map

    July, 2019

    “...
    Russian fears

    These developments are clearly worrying Russia. Russia, mainly through its oil and gas giant Gazprom, provides 37% of Europe’s gas supplies and Europe’s energy dependence has paid off for Russia.

    The very real risk of losing this influence could result in military conflict. Turkey recently completed the purchase of a Russian anti-aircraft system. This will create a significant power imbalance in the region and give Ankara an advantage in controlling the airspace, especially in disputed areas.

    Greece fears that Turkey may deploy the system along its southern coast, near places where Turkish naval forces already escort vessels to explore gas deposits in the eastern Mediterranean. As a result, the Greek armed forces are on high alert. Greece, along with the Egypt-Cyprus-Israel bloc seem to have US and EU backing, with Turkey being warned not to complete its purchase of the S-400 system.”


    http://theconversation.com/five-coun...rgy-map-119619

  47. #9947

    Default

    Funny how Trump seems to be attached to Netanyahu at the hip when Trump endlessly campaigned on an America First policy but meddles in their elections.

    White-Right wing strongmen stick together...
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  48. #9948

    Default

    He’s been all about building allies (pandering) around the world.

    Maybe it’s to build peace where prior presidents just took a hostile ideological stance against them, but I doubt it.

    I think it’s all about having allies to call on as needed.

  49. #9949

    Default

    You mean allies such as Saudi Arabia, North Korea and Russia, all of whom he's praised? Or allies such as Canada, the UK, France and NATO, all of whom he's condemned?

  50. #9950

    Default

    Trump turns US armed forces into a mercenary outfit.

    Also, Mexico is paying for his wall.

    ‘Saudi Arabia pays cash’: Trump admits ‘unlike other presidents’ he’ll be renting out US troops for military action


    "Moments earlier Trump admitted that if the U.S. engages in military action against the country of Saudi Arabia’s choosing, Saudi Arabia would “be very much involved in paying for that.”


    “This is something that’s much different than other presidents would mention,” Trump said, repeatedly saying the Saudi’s “would be very much involved,” and “that includes payment.”"

    https://www.rawstory.com/2019/09/sau...aX_W0Xlb4ZaqsI

  51. #9951

    Default

    Trump thinks he knows more about selling cars that the automakers and tries to bypass Congressional legislation through executive orders.

    Trump revokes California’s authority to set higher auto emissions standards
    https://globalnews.ca/news/5917309/t...ons-standards/
    U.S. President Donald Trump. announced Wednesday that his administration is revoking California’s authority to set auto mileage standards stricter than those issued by federal regulators.

    In a tweet, Trump said his move would result in less expensive and safer cars. He insisted that new cars would be cleaner, even as they burn more gasoline than they would have under the Obama-era fuel efficiency standards.

    “Many more cars will be produced under the new and uniform standard, meaning significantly more JOBS, JOBS, JOBS! Automakers should seize this opportunity because without this alternative to California, you will be out of business,” Trump tweeted.

    However, U.S. automakers contend that without a substantial increase in fuel efficiency, their vehicles will be less competitive globally, which could potentially result in job losses.

    <snip>

    Top California officials and environmental groups pledged legal action to stop the rollback.

    California’s authority to set its own, tougher emissions standards goes back to a waiver issued by Congress during passage of the Clean Air Act in 1970. The state has long pushed automakers to adopt more fuel-efficient passenger vehicles that emit less pollution. A dozen states and the District of Columbia also follow California’s fuel economy standards.

    California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said the Trump administration’s action will hurt both U.S. automakers and American families. He said California would fight the administration in federal court.

    “You have no basis and no authority to pull this waiver,” Becerra said in a statement, referring to Trump. “We’re ready to fight for a future that you seem unable to comprehend.”

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom said the White House “has abdicated its responsibility to the rest of the world on cutting emissions and fighting global warming.”

    “California won’t ever wait for permission from Washington to protect the health and safety of children and families,” said Newsom.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  52. #9952
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Where ever the pilot takes me
    Posts
    2,287

    Default

    ^It’s all about his desire for retribution by erasing all of Obama’s policies. In this case it’s undoing the Clean Air Act. He’s already moving to undo the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
    Did my dog just fall into a pothole???

  53. #9953

    Default

    Trump knows more about handling sensitive information and making promises to despots than anyone!

    Trump’s communications with foreign leader are part of whistleblower complaint that spurred standoff between spy chief and Congress, former officials say

    The whistleblower complaint that has triggered a tense showdown between the U.S. intelligence community and Congress involves President Trump’s communications with a foreign leader, according to two former U.S. officials familiar with the matter.


    Trump’s interaction with the foreign leader included a “promise” that was regarded as so troubling that it prompted an official in the U.S. intelligence community to file a formal whistleblower complaint with the inspector general for the intelligence community, said the officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.


    It was not immediately clear which foreign leader Trump was speaking with or what he pledged to deliver, but his direct involvement in the matter has not been previously disclosed. It raises new questions about the president’s handling of sensitive information and may further strain his relationship with U.S. spy agencies. One former official said the communication was a phone call.

    The White House declined to comment. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence and a lawyer representing the whistleblower declined to comment.


    Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson determined that the complaint was credible and troubling enough to be considered a matter of “urgent concern,” a legal threshold that ordinarily requires notification of congressional oversight committees.


    But acting director of national intelligence Joseph Maguire has refused to share details about Trump’s alleged transgression with lawmakers, touching off a legal and political dispute that has spilled into public and prompted speculation that the spy chief is improperly protecting the president.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...YfStvy9dLgi2i8


  54. #9954

    Default

    Much like in the case on the tanker attacks, no conclusive evidence is presented and Trump and Saudi Arabia are basically saying "Trust us".

    Disputing Trump claims, Japan says no evidence Iran was behind Saudi attack

    “We are not aware of any information that points to Iran,” Kono said during a press briefing. “We believe the Houthis carried out the attack based on the statement claiming responsibility.”


    The only evidence the Trump administration has released to substantiate its claim of Iranian responsibility are satellite photos that experts said are not clear enough to assign blame. Ret. Gen. Mark Hertling, a CNN intelligence analyst, said the images “really don’t show anything, other than pretty good accuracy on the strike of the oil tanks.”

    https://www.rawstory.com/2019/09/dis...-saudi-attack/

  55. #9955
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    8,187

    Default

    https://www.google.ca/amp/s/arstechn...field/%3famp=1 Cruise missiles found at site as well though.

  56. #9956

    Default

    Where is the UN, the security council on all of this. Where are the allies of the US, how come they/ them are not sparking up some rhetoric. Next time it will be bigger missiles and killing more people. I think the world is just scared to tackle Iran. Pretty soon North Korea will follow this lead.

  57. #9957

    Default

    The security council is controlled by the five permanent members, each of which has a veto.

Page 100 of 100 FirstFirst ... 509096979899100

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •