ParisInAKilt Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 (edited) Peaceful protest and civil disobedience is a good thing but this is completely reactionary and short sighted, not to mention rooted in hypocrisy. The white liberals only seem to mobilise when they lose an election, they've been awfully quiet when the previous administration was waging war abroad and at home on Muslims, Mexicans and whistle blowers. However I do feel sorry for all that will suffer at the hands of the next governments policies, even those who might have voted for them. Edited January 22, 2017 by ParisInAKilt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 "The Bible tells us, how good and pleasant it is when God's people live together in unity. We must speak our minds openly, debate our disagreements honestly, but always pursue solidarity. … "There should be no fear. We are protected, and we will always be protected ... by the great men and women of our military and law enforcement. And most importantly, we will be protected by God.” Trumps recent speech. Sounds like one of Bush's He'll continue the US's foreign policy like a used car salesman delivering the script to the masses like Obama did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave78 Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 1 hour ago, Scotty CTA said: If they want the President decided by popular vote and not by electoral seats then they should petition their senators to work toward that change. Aye. I detest Trump, but that doesn't blind me from seeing the hysteria from some on the other side. I watched Jon Snow interviewing Michael Moore last night where he was decrying the electoral system that let Trump win without winning the popular vote. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't have been the case had Hillary won. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 "Obama's" legacy laid out Obama is the first President in American history to be at war for every single day of an 8 year presidency. Obama has carried out 10x more drone strikes than Bush ever did. Every Tuesday a military aide presents Obama with a “kill list”, and the “decent, gracious” Obama picks a few names off a list…and kills them. And their families. And their neighbours. These illegal acts of state-sanctioned murder have killed hundreds of civilians in 5 different countries in 2016 alone. The only reason that number isn’t higher, is that the Obama administration re-classified all males over 18 as combatants, regardless of occupation. After declaring he wanted tobuild a “nuclear free world”, Obama committed to spending $1 TRILLION dollars on rebuilding America’s nuclear weapons. Under Obama, the NSA et al. were able to spy on, essentially, the whole world. When this was revealed, not a single intelligence officer or government official was prosecuted. Instead… Obama’s administration declared a “war on whistleblowers”, enacting new laws and initiating what they call the “Insider Threat Program”. Manning was prosecuted, Snowden sent into exile and Assange was set-up, discredited and (they hoped) extradited. It has never been more dangerous to be a government whistle-blower, than under Barack Obama In terms of foreign policy, despite his press-created and non-sensical reputation as a non-interventionist, American Special Forces are currently operating in over 70% of the world’s 195 countries. The great lie is that, where Bush was a warmonger, Obama has sought to avoid conflict. The truth is that Obama, in the grand tradition of the CIA and American Imperial power, has simply turned all America’s wars into covert wars. Before Obama came into office, Libya was the richest and most developed nation in Africa. It is now a hell-hole. Destroyed by war, hollowed-out by corruption. The “liberal” press allow him to agonise over this as his “greatest mistake”, and then gently pardon him for his good intentions. The truth is that Libya was not a mistake, or a misjudgment, or an unforeseen consequence. Libya is exactly what America wanted it to become. A failed state where everything is for sale, a base to pour illegal CIA weapons south into Africa and east into the ME. When war is your economy, chaos is good for business. When secrecy is your weapon, anarchy is ammunition. Libya went according to plan. A brutal plan that killed 100,000s and destroyed the lives of millions more. Libya, like Iraq, is a neocon success story. Syria on the other hand… Syria, probably the word that will follow Obama out of office as “Iraq” did his predecessor, is a total failure. Both of stated intent and covert goals. Where the press will mourn Obama’s “indecisive nature” and wish he’d “used his big stick”, the real story is one of evil incompetence, so great that it would be almost comical…if it hadn’t destroyed an ancient seat of civilisation and killed 100,000s of people. Syria (along with Libya, Iraq, Somalia, Iran and Sudan) was on the list of the 7 countries America intended to destroy, famously “leaked” by General Wesley Clark. After the fall of Libya, Syria was (essentially) surrounded by American military on all sides. Iraq, Israel, Turkey and America operating out of Libya could pour “freedom fighters” into Syria to bring down “the regime”. When that didn’t work they deployed the trusty “WMD” method, to demand “humanitarian intervention”…the Russians saw that off. Then “ISIS” was created by the CIA, as al-Qaida were before them, and their manufactured barbarism was used as a pretext for invasion. The Russians, again, saw to it that this would not happen. Perhaps in the hope of distracting Russia from the ME, or perhaps merely as a short-sighted punitive measure, the Obama’s administration next foreign policy target was Ukraine. Victoria Nuland’s own voice proves how much that “color revolution” was an American creation. Ukraine is broke, even more broke than it was, its people starve and freeze through the winter. The new “democratic government” has shelled 10,000 people to death in the East of the country….using American weapons. In Yemen, the poorest country in the ME is being bombed to shreds by the richest….again, using American (and British) weapons. Obama’s “defense of democracy” doesn’t extend to criticising, or even discussing, the abhorrent Human Rights record of America’s Saudi Arabian allies, and in an act of brazen hypocrisy, even supported their chairing of the Human Rights Council of the UN. https://off-guardian.org/2017/01/15/the-beatification-of-barack-obama/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 21 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said: Peaceful protest and civil disobedience is a good thing... Agreed. I've taken part in 2 large ones. Here's one of my pics from the G20 in Toronto... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 25 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said: "The Bible tells us, how good and pleasant it is when God's people live together in unity. We must speak our minds openly, debate our disagreements honestly, but always pursue solidarity. … "There should be no fear. We are protected, and we will always be protected ... by the great men and women of our military and law enforcement. And most importantly, we will be protected by God.” Trumps recent speech. Sounds like one of Bush's He'll continue the US's foreign policy like a used car salesman delivering the script to the masses like Obama did. I actually have a glimmer of hope for change these days. (That would destroy it.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 23 minutes ago, Dave78 said: Aye. I detest Trump, but that doesn't blind me from seeing the hysteria from some on the other side. I watched Jon Snow interviewing Michael Moore last night where he was decrying the electoral system that let Trump win without winning the popular vote. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't have been the case had Hillary won. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 19 minutes ago, Scotty CTA said: I actually have a glimmer of hope for change these days. (That would destroy it.) There's someone on my facebook who shares in your hope. I'm very skeptical, I know Trump isn't republican establishment per say but suspect he'll be brought into line, it's too dangerous otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 45 minutes ago, Dave78 said: Aye. I detest Trump, but that doesn't blind me from seeing the hysteria from some on the other side. I watched Jon Snow interviewing Michael Moore last night where he was decrying the electoral system that let Trump win without winning the popular vote. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't have been the case had Hillary won. Agreed. I enjoy some of Moore'a work and he has said a lot of things I agree with post the result about why the democrats lost, he also, rightly, predicted Trump would win. But can't follow him any further than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 There was someone interviewed yesterday rightly pointing out the massive wealth inequality in the world and how 8 men hold x amount of wealth compared with the rest of us. She had a Clinton shirt on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Q Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 3 hours ago, Dave78 said: Aye. I detest Trump, but that doesn't blind me from seeing the hysteria from some on the other side. I watched Jon Snow interviewing Michael Moore last night where he was decrying the electoral system that let Trump win without winning the popular vote. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't have been the case had Hillary won. Moore demonstrated a feeble understanding of the U.K. electoral system in that interview, including painful footballing analogies, which Snow (who must have been aware of Moore's errors) curiously didn't challenge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eisegerwind Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 6 hours ago, Scotty CTA said: LBJ insisted that Jackie was at his swearing in on Air Force One in the hope it would be seen by the public as a smooth transition of power... Jackie, however, felt in her heart that LBJ was in on the assassination. From history... Several people asked Mrs. Kennedy whether she would like to change her suit but she refused. When Lady Bird offered to send someone to help her, she responded: "Oh, no ... I want them to see what they have done to John." Despite the advice of John F. Kennedy's physician, Admiral George Burkley, who "gently tried to persuade her to change out of her gore-soaked pink Chanel suit," she wore the suit alongside Vice President Johnson as he was sworn in on Air Force One as the 36th President of the United States. In the photograph of the ceremony the blood stains cannot be seen as they were on the right-hand side of the suit. Lady Bird recalls that during the swearing-in: "Her hair [was] falling in her face but [she was] very composed ... I looked at her. Mrs. Kennedy's dress was stained with blood. One leg was almost entirely covered with it and her right glove was caked, it was caked with blood – her husband's blood. Somehow that was one of the most poignant sights – that immaculate woman, exquisitely dressed, and caked in blood." Kennedy had no regrets about refusing to take the blood-stained suit off; her only regret was that she had washed the blood off her face before Johnson was sworn in. --------------------- So... 'tasteless' or a brave stand? Your 'use' of the pic was tasteless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 6 hours ago, Scotty CTA said: I wasn't frightened. (Maybe people prayed... correctly.) James 4:2-3 2 You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask. 3 You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions. Anyone that believes praying works (never mind an invisible deity) is a complete and utter moron Apologies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huddersfield Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 4 hours ago, ParisInAKilt said: Obama is the first President in American history to be at war for every single day of an 8 year presidency. That's a very big statement & I'm immediately interested in it. How is being "at war" defined? There has not been a formal, Congressional declaration of War for many years (the Senate website suggests 1942 was the last one; against Romania). Nowadays, it is generally accepted that the modern equivalent would be resolutions authorising military interventions rather than formal declarations of war, but there haven't been too many of those. If we are talking about US military involvement, either under the guise of the UN or based on Presidential power (legitimate or otherwise), then I think it's a bit of a long shot to say that there have been periods under every previous 8-year Presidential tenure where America hasn't been involved anywhere militarily. I haven't researched every one, but I'd be stunned if you could, for every one of them, point to a date & say 'look, the USA wasn't involved in any military intervention, anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 6 minutes ago, Huddersfield said: That's a very big statement & I'm immediately interested in it. How is being "at war" defined? There has not been a formal, Congressional declaration of War for many years (the Senate website suggests 1942 was the last one; against Romania). Nowadays, it is generally accepted that the modern equivalent would be resolutions authorising military interventions rather than formal declarations of war, but there haven't been too many of those. If we are talking about US military involvement, either under the guise of the UN or based on Presidential power (legitimate or otherwise), then I think it's a bit of a long shot to say that there have been periods under every previous 8-year Presidential tenure where America hasn't been involved anywhere militarily. I haven't researched every one, but I'd be stunned if you could, for every one of them, point to a date & say 'look, the USA wasn't involved in any military intervention, anywhere. Good point, the article doesn't clarify how that's defined. I was surprised by it, just assumed America was always at "war" in the sense of being militarily involved in some way or another abroad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huddersfield Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 7 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said: Good point, the article doesn't clarify how that's defined. I was surprised by it, just assumed America was always at "war" in the sense of being militarily involved in some way or another abroad. Don't get me wrong...I have little doubt they have been involved somewhere during every day of his Presidency; I just doubt he's the first! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 http://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/marchapril-2012/obamas-top-50-accomplishments/ http://pleasecutthecrap.com/obama-accomplishments/ http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/in-defense-of-obama-20141008 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 19 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said: http://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/marchapril-2012/obamas-top-50-accomplishments/ http://pleasecutthecrap.com/obama-accomplishments/ http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/in-defense-of-obama-20141008 Lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 Let's hope this doesn't happen again with Trump's finger on the button http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/trident-test-flop-cover-up-9670746 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 7 hours ago, ParisInAKilt said: There was someone interviewed yesterday rightly pointing out the massive wealth inequality in the world and how 8 men hold x amount of wealth compared with the rest of us. She had a Clinton shirt on. The wealth of the eight richest men on the planet is equal to that of the bottom half of people on the planet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 4 hours ago, Eisegerwind said: Your 'use' of the pic was tasteless. My use for for 'said' reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 3 hours ago, Huddersfield said: Don't get me wrong...I have little doubt they have been involved somewhere during every day of his Presidency; I just doubt he's the first! He was the first U.S. President to lie about killing and capturing Osama Bin Laden. "OK now, Everyone. Look concerned and pretend that you you are watching a live feed of Seal Team Six raiding Bin Laden's compound in Pakistan... And 'click'... Thank you!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 59 minutes ago, Toepoke said: Let's hope this doesn't happen again with Trump's finger on the button http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/trident-test-flop-cover-up-9670746 There is no 'button'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 They really, really, really, really, really wanted to sell this... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 5 hours ago, Eisegerwind said: Your 'use' of the pic was tasteless. My use was for 'said' reason, and it was historically accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.