192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
Below viewing threshold (view)
Builder
 
  -2  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 04:15 am
@layman,
I'm actually thinking it was a clever ploy, to bring the Russians into the deal.

What they did in Syria showed up Obama for the lying shithead he really is, and his corrupt sidekick sec of state.

AG Sessions is onto it.
Below viewing threshold (view)
Below viewing threshold (view)
Builder
 
  -2  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 04:30 am
@layman,
Quote:
I think I get this part, if you mean that Trump turned the generals loose and told them to do what they thought needed to be done


It was before the election, when Putin showed just who the US was backing, and how it wasn't who Obama was saying.

The "rebels" that are being used now, instead of regular troops, to avoid any "embarrassing" issues with semantics. It's not like it's news to any historian, that the US is backing both sides in a conflict, just to make sales in munitions and machinations.
layman
 
  -4  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 04:57 am
@Builder,
Builder wrote:

It's not like it's news to any historian, that the US is backing both sides in a conflict, just to make sales in munitions and machinations.


Well, yeah, and it aint just the money, eh?

Harry Truman wrote:
" If we see that Germany is winning, we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way we let them kill as many as possible." (1941)


The "Truman Doctrine" was wisely implemented in the Iran/Iraq war when we armed both sides with poison gas and every other kinda weapon, eh?

It got down to the point where one side was using 10-year-old "soldiers" to shoot and kill 9-year-old "soldiers" on the other.

That, like, ROCKED, eh!?
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 05:00 am
@Builder,
Builder wrote:
It was before the election, when Putin showed just who the US was backing, and how it wasn't who Obama was saying.

Obama gave minor aid to people trying to defend themselves against Assad's genocide. And he openly admitted to having done so from the moment he started doing it.


Builder wrote:
The "rebels" that are being used now, instead of regular troops, to avoid any "embarrassing" issues with semantics. It's not like it's news to any historian, that the US is backing both sides in a conflict, just to make sales in munitions and machinations.

The US did not back both sides in any Syrian conflict.
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 05:43 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
The US did not back both sides in any Syrian conflict.
Certainly there are more than two ("both") in the Syrian conflict.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 06:10 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:
oralloy wrote:
The US did not back both sides in any Syrian conflict.

Certainly there are more than two ("both") in the Syrian conflict.

In the "Assad verses the Syrian people" conflict, there is the "Assad" side and the "Syrian people" side.

Obama did not back the "Assad" side.

In the "Islamic State verses humanity" conflict, there is the "Islamic State" side and the "humanity" side.

Obama did not back the "Islamic State" side.
hightor
 
  5  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 06:18 am
@layman,
Quote:
The Kleins, who owned Sweet Cakes By Melissa, made national headlines in 2013 when they declined to make a wedding cake for Rachel and Laurel Bowman-Cryer, a lesbian couple.

The Kleins were subjected to a homofascist mob that boycotted their business, threatened other wedding vendors and subjected their young children to death threats.

The lesbian couple filed a complaint with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries. The lesbian couple said they had been physically harmed by the bakery’s decision not to bake the wedding cake.

According to a court filing, the couple alleged they had suffered depression, embarrassment, hysteria, impaired digestion, nervous appetite, weight gain, and mental anguish. They also said they felt “mentally raped.”


Gee, I was feeling bad for those poor Xians but when I saw that the article was written by Fox News broadcaster Todd Starnes I figured a bit more research might be useful.

Here's some background:
Quote:
The Oregon Equality Act of 2007 says businesses cannot discriminate or refuse service based on sexual orientation - just as they cannot turn away customers because of their race, sex, disability, age, or religion.


This is account is from the original trial:
Quote:
-- Reports of death threats. In testimony Tuesday, Rachel Bowman-Cryer said she and her wife received death threats as media attention and criticism from strangers escalated in the months after the story went national in January 2013.

She said the threats were part of a stream of "hateful, hurtful things" that came after the couple's contact information (home address, phone and email) was posted on Aaron Klein's personal Facebook page. She said she feared for her life and her wife's life.

McCullough, during a break Friday, told The Oregonian/OregonLive that he also has received death threats tied to his involvement in the case. He said the threats contributed to a decision by BOLI officials to have Oregon State Police provide security at this week's hearing.

OregonLive
The women were doxxed. And they were also distressed about the two foster children they were trying to adopt.
Quote:
She said they spoke to state adoption officials who told them it was the couple's responsibility to protect the children and keep privileged information confidential, even as their own privacy was threatened by news coverage of the case.

The court's opinion talks about the damages award starting on page 49 for emotional, mental, and physical suffering. It discusses the baker husband's use of 'abomination' and how the couple interpreted that based on their religious upbringings — "that God made a mistake when he made her, that she wasn’t supposed to exist, and that she had no right to love or be loved” and "this is a creature not created by God, not created with a soul. They are unworthy of holy love. They are not worthy of life". The bakers encouraged harassment and told investigators that not only were they not sorry they had done this but would do it again if given the chance.

I could see this sort of thing being rather stressful for normal people, you know, the kind of delicate people who don't post on threads like this one.

Starnes ends his biased article with this tearjerker:
Quote:
The judges sent a clear a message to people of faith: Christians are no longer welcome to do business in the state of Oregon.

Awww, anyone got a Kleenex handy?


Quote:
But in their ruling Thursday, a panel of state appeals court judges sided with Avakian [the judge in the original case], saying the Kleins did, in fact, deny the Bowman-Cryers because they were lesbians. The justices also rejected the Kleins' argument that Avakian's ruling violated state and federal free speech protections.

In the ruling, Judge Chris Garrett wrote that Avakian's order does not violate the Klein's free speech rights because it simply "requires their compliance with a neutral law." Garrett also wrote that the Kleins "have made no showing that the state targeted them for enforcement because of their religious beliefs."

In a statement, Avakian said the Appeals Court ruling "sends a strong signal that Oregon remains open to all."

source
blatham
 
  2  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 06:31 am
@Real Music,
I no longer tune in to the Simpsons. Decline in quality gives me heartache.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 06:34 am
@oralloy,
The enemy of my enemy is my friend ... unless he is my enemy.

0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 06:44 am
@izzythepush,
Quote:
I bet there's loads of parallels with the Grenfell tower fire in London. That found cost trumped safety.
Well, I, for one, am exceedingly surprised to hear that the profit motive might lead to amoral or immoral outcomes.
Below viewing threshold (view)
blatham
 
  3  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 07:16 am
@hightor,
Quote:
homofascist

I thought a google search on this term might be interesting. Here's Conservapedia's contribution (side note: they also have an entry for "After the Ball" that's a lot of fun)
Quote:
Homo-fascism is the term coined by pro-family activists and describing the phenomenon when homosexual activists strive for advancing themselves beyond favored status to supremacy. In line with instructions in After the Ball (the LGBTI equivalent to Mein Kampf and the Communist Manifesto), the homosexual movement avoids using such terms as "favored status" or "supremacy", but rather outwardly pretend their goal is "tolerance" or "acceptance". Supremacy is then the stage in which the homosexual movement and its allies take effective control of most or all of the centers of power of a government or other organization. When they have achieved this level of control they use and abuse their power to suppress and/or punish those who openly disapprove of the homosexual lifestyle or its agenda.[1][2][3]


And here's the top definition at urban dictionary
Quote:
homofascism
Homosexual activists are vehemently promoting homosexuality throughout the media, academia, and politics as spelled out in their manifesto titled After The Ball. "Sensitivity" classes in schools are required to children as young as kindergarden where they brainwash a child within minutes into believing homosexuality is the same as trying a new food. This is pure Pavlonian style brainwashing, indoctrination, and ideological subversion. All states that legalize same sex "marriage" require schools to have these classes, and parents who opt their kids out can potential get thrown in jail and pay fines.

The only reason why homosexuals pushed to "serve openly" in the military, because they know the military is one of the largest institutions within the Fed govt. Now they can politicize their way into more influential positions to easily push the agenda further.

I'm not against any person, and I feel for the people experiencing same sex attraction and gender identity confusion, whether they think it's okay or not. However, homosexuality as a movement (the activists) are a facist/totalitarian movement disguising itself behind flowery words like "diversity," "rights," and "tolerance." It is founded on lies/hypocrisy, but because of the sophisticated Marxist/Saul Alinsky psychological onslaught on the masses, they are able to hide their lies and hypocrisy in plain sight. We need to WAKE UP!


And another from catholicism.org
Quote:
Homofascism – “a way of organizing a society in which homosexualists impose their agenda with which no one is allowed to disagree or have any appeal to the contrary without being subjected to severe consequences of ridicule, slander, libel, fines, public demonstrations, distortions, denial of free speech rights, loss of employment, and having the word “hate” attached to you in some form.”


So, that's all really sane and measured.
layman
 
  -3  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 07:27 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

So, that's all really sane and measured.


Sho nuff. Ya know, not long ago the City of Philadelphia, whose city council is completely dominated by homosexuals, had a million dollar judgment assessed against them by a federal court in favor of the boy scouts.

Why? Because they blatantly, deliberately, and knowingly ran roughshod over the civil rights of the boy scouts.

They said the boy scouts had to let homos go on camping trips with them, sleeping in tents with the other boys, and ****, and the homos tried to steal their building when they refused. Fraid not.

To hear them tell it, they, AND ONLY THEY, have constitutional rights. Straights' only "right" is to praise and obey homosexuals, and eat their ****. Anyone who doesn't glorify, advocate, and practice homosexuality is a "homophobe," ya know?

Just one example (of many) of "homofascism," eh?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 07:43 am
This is simply and stupidly careless:
Quote:
After Donald Trump appeared to endorse Ron DeSantis’ campaign for Florida governor last week, a handful of the biggest and most influential billionaires in Republican politics threw their support behind the three-term GOP congressman, upending the race in the nation’s biggest swing state.

The stable of billionaires and millionaires listed on DeSantis’ “Finance Leadership Team,” obtained by POLITICO, include casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, hedge fund heiress Rebekah Mercer, investment tycoon Foster Friess and other donors who have funded the conservative Koch brothers’ network and President Trump’s campaign. Just last week, Trump weighed in on Twitter to say that DeSantis “would make a GREAT Governor of Florida.”

...“This sets DeSantis apart from the rest. He will have the financial resources and the ground game and the Trump base to be an incredible statewide candidate,” said David Bossie, a DeSantis backer, who founded the Citizens United conservative group, served as Trump’s deputy campaign manager and just co-authored the new “Let Trump Be Trump” book plugged by the president.
Politico
The carelessness here is the use of "after" in the first sentence implying that these other individuals/entities named jumped on board following (and as a consequence of) Trump's endorsement. That's obviously not true. Just click on the first link in paragraph 2 and try to work out how all this got done in one week.

0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  3  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 07:52 am
Quote:
A pair of Russian comedians appear to have successfully prank-called U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley by posing as a Polish government official.

The two comedians, Vladimir Kuznetsov and Alexei Stolyarov, posted a video over the weekend in which a woman identified as Haley believes she is speaking to Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki.

"Let me start with very much thanking you for the support we received on the vote today," Haley says. "We will never forget it.

Haley was referring to the U.N. vote last week to condemn President Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Poland was one of 35 countries who abstained from voting on the resolution.

The man posing as Morawiecki then asks Haley about the fictional island of Binomo in the South China Sea.

"You know Binomo?" the man said, to which Haley replied "yes, yes."

"They had elections and we suppose Russians had its intervention," the man said.

"Yes, of course they did, absolutely," Haley replies. "We've been watching that very closely, and I think we will continue to watch that as we deal with the issues that keep coming up about the South China Sea."

The man posing as Morawiecki asks Haley what the United States plans to do about the fictional island of Binomo.

"Let me find out exactly what our stance is on that, and what if anything the U.S. is doing or thinks should be done, and I will report back to you on that as well," she says.


The Hill

Embarrassed
layman
 
  -1  
Fri 29 Dec, 2017 08:06 am
Everyone knows where binomo is, eh? It's on Route 66, which, as we also know, winds from Chicago to LA---more than two thousand miles, all the way.

Y'all will see Amarillo,
Gallup, New Mexico,
Flagstaff, Arizona.
Don't forget Binomo,
Kingman, Barstow, San Bernardino.

0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.9 seconds on 11/14/2024 at 07:45:33