• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

American politics

wiziwig said:
It's simple really . Once, twice, I can pass it off but if you continually persist with your personal attacks that you call politeness, then eventually I will give you some of that politeness back.

Do not try to bully me directly or indirectly for that matter, e.g.: with your comments to another poster, that I'm a follower of Benito Mussolini (post #2461 of this thread).

By all means feel free to challenge any of my opinions, the contents of any video or anything else that I post - we both may even benefit from a civil exchange!

I offer you a truce and a handshake.
Click to expand...

The guy you falsely called an SJW, liberal/leftie on more than one occasion says 'hello snowflake'
 
milo said:
I meant the story about contact between the Trump camp and Russian intelligence, not the intercepts. It is supported by the Newsweek story I linked to above saying that an EU state has intercepted the same

http://europe.newsweek.com/allies-intercept-russia-trump-adviser-communications-557283
Click to expand...
Ah, of course.

But don't you think that there's a difference between reporting on something someone has said and reporting on the existence of hard evidence? If you're saying that there's conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, you at least need to quote someone who has or has seen the evidence. That's just basic journalism.
 
thfcsteff said:
Of sorts...
Click to expand...
It's a pretty good democracy really - even if you don't like it's outcomes.

It has an elected executive branch, held to account by an elected house (with offset elections to reduce the power of both), all held to account by a judiciary. All of this based on a pretty good and balanced constitution for which amendments require an overwhelming majority.

It's about as safeguarded a democracy as is practicable.
 
scaramanga said:
It's a pretty good democracy really - even if you don't like it's outcomes.

It has an elected executive branch, held to account by an elected house (with offset elections to reduce the power of both), all held to account by a judiciary. All of this based on a pretty good and balanced constitution for which amendments require an overwhelming majority.

It's about as safeguarded a democracy as is practicable.
Click to expand...


huge issue with Gerrymandering, huge issue with Lobbying & a huge issue with the amount spent on elections.
 
glorygloryeze said:
Israel's creation is irrelevant here: firstly it was about 60 years ago and its creation is based on what those same Holy Books (which you call hogwash) say.
Click to expand...
The reason I bring up Israel's creation is in response to your comment "Those terms that describe a race, genetic linage and country (Israel) are all based on the same "fairytales" (as you would call them) that are written in the same "Holy Books" that other Godtards you bash follow. I'm sure we can look into those same books and find other races that are based on similar stories written within."

My point is that the creation of the country was based on fairy tales, but genetic lineage and place of birth isn't - those are actual, objective measurements.

glorygloryeze said:
Secondly, there were people practicing Judaism long before the creation of Israel 60 odd years ago, so again irrelevant (I mean would you have had a different attitude to the Holocaust at that time because you or others couldn't point to the existence at that time of a nation called Israel, hence persecution of Jews being acceptable?
Click to expand...
It would have been perfectly valid to ridicule their beliefs just as with any other religion.

Obviously when talking about things like genocide then you are violating human rights which are protected no matter how departed your beliefs are.

glorygloryeze said:
Also does that make ISIS and their "quest" for an "Islamic State" actually seem more relevant for them to say "Islam is a race/ethnicity not just a religion"??).
Click to expand...
No, there's no valid basis whatsoever for an Islamic State and most of those attempting to make it happen are either doing so to silence criticism or to discriminate against others.

glorygloryeze said:
Thirdly, not all those who practice Judaism are Israelis or even link their lineage to Israel (a bit like not all Christians are from Europe or from the Middle-Eastern/Mediterranean region where Christianity is supposed to have sprung from).
Click to expand...
And their religion is as open to ridicule as anyone else's

glorygloryeze said:
All the disgust you have for Islam is the same that Christianity has invoked, and in some places still invokes. "Punishing women purely for being women" could be argued to be inherent from movements that follow Holy Texts where the ultimate being worshipped is said to be a male: i don't think Islam is any worse than Christianity in this regard. Perhaps you are mixing up some of the customs of many groups who live in certain parts of the Middle East with Islam? The way women are treated in societies where Islam is the main religion is practiced varies widely: the brutalities of Regimes in places like Saudi Arabia are not reflected in countries like Malaysia, Indonesia and Iran.
Islam is no better or worse at accepting other religions and varying sexual preferences; plus it has not got a monopoly on trying to stifle debate through violence.
And i'm speaking as somebody who was brought up as a Christian (Catholic) and have left religion nearly two decades ago so i have no in-built emotional reason to defend Islam (or any other religion actually).
Click to expand...
How do you think Niloufar Ardalan feels about Iran's treatment of women? Or anyone who wants to go out without a headscarf? Or anyone gay? Isn't apostasy still punishable by death there?

Are you sure you want to bring up Malaysia with regard to human rights? Somewhere north of 90% of Muslim women in Malaysia go through FGM. In as striking an example of Islam's disgusting treatment of women you could ever wish for, the same country has a FGM rate of 0% for the Buddhists and Hindus living there.

To my knowledge, the same goes for Indonesia although I stand to be corrected on that.
 
r-u-s-x said:
huge issue with Gerrymandering, huge issue with Lobbying & a huge issue with the amount spent on elections.
Click to expand...
Gerrymandering is currently in front of the Supreme Court, I guess we'll see how that goes.

Lobbying isn't that much of an issue for me. It's heavily regulated and open to anyone who wants to participate.

I don't like the amount spent on US elections, but there's a good body of evidence to suggest that the money goes to the victor rather than the other way around.
 
glasgowspur said:
That's not support, it's gossip.
If trump is so bad, freedom, democracy and the world in general in such danger from him then do something to prove it. Stop hiding behind anonymous sources
It's about they put up or shut up, it's all getting very tedious.
Click to expand...

I don't think that is going to happen when it is leaks from intelligence sources, especially when some of them are from allies. There is plenty of on the record sources (not least Trump himself in his press conference this afternoon) linking the Trump camp and the Russians to take these stories seriously. To get this on the record will probably take either the Congress or Senate to initiate an enquiry.
 
scaramanga said:
Ah, of course.

But don't you think that there's a difference between reporting on something someone has said and reporting on the existence of hard evidence? If you're saying that there's conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, you at least need to quote someone who has or has seen the evidence. That's just basic journalism.
Click to expand...

Intelligence sources only get directly quoted once they have been exposed. Once they have been exposed, they are out of a job. The Newsweek article cannot name the source country because of the damage that it could cause to international relations.

The dossier by the ex-M16 operative, seems to have been taken seriously by the UK and US governments, so that gives us a pretty clear steer on what their own intelligence is telling them.
 
scaramanga said:
Gerrymandering is currently in front of the Supreme Court, I guess we'll see how that goes.

Lobbying isn't that much of an issue for me. It's heavily regulated and open to anyone who wants to participate.

I don't like the amount spent on US elections, but there's a good body of evidence to suggest that the money goes to the victor rather than the other way around.
Click to expand...
Lobbying is only open to those with cash so hardly democratic.

Cash may go to the winners but they will be beholden to donors, again only the rich so hardly democratic
 
r-u-s-x01 said:
Lobbying is only open to those with cash so hardly democratic.

Cash may go to the winners but they will be beholden to donors, again only the rich so hardly democratic
Click to expand...
If corporations are seen as people by the law, if they contribute to the country's coffers, if they're burdened with all the responsibilities of being a citizen, I think it's fair that they have the right to influence politics.
 
milo said:
Intelligence sources only get directly quoted once they have been exposed. Once they have been exposed, they are out of a job. The Newsweek article cannot name the source country because of the damage that it could cause to international relations.

The dossier by the ex-M16 operative, seems to have been taken seriously by the UK and US governments, so that gives us a pretty clear steer on what their own intelligence is telling them.
Click to expand...
Is that always the case with intelligence sources?

I'm sure I've seen plenty of anonymous quotes on that kind of subject through history.
 
scaramanga said:
If corporations are seen as people by the law, if they contribute to the country's coffers, if they're burdened with all the responsibilities of being a citizen, I think it's fair that they have the right to influence politics.
Click to expand...
Democratic though? They have more power and influence than the electorate, come on.
 
At this rate, the only news outlet being positive about Trump will be the Alex Jones channel on Youtube! haha

The 77 minute press conference from today is on youtube too -- it is worth a watch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back