Jump to content

Political thread


Andrew Reid
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Simon Shasha said:

I can't help but feel that there is a sense of awakening in the air...

There is a serial sex assaulter and a white supremacist in the White House.  And this makes you happy?!

I realize you must be one of those one issue voters but you need to wake up and start seeing the world as the complex thing that it is.  Going on and on about Syria while the sex assaulter in chief appoints a climate change denier to the EPA is delusional.  When the entire planet is polluted no one is even going to remember there was a war in Syria.  Wake up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Damphousse said:

There is a serial sex assaulter and a white supremacist in the White House.  And this makes you happy?!

I realize you must be one of those one issue voters but you need to wake up and start seeing the world as the complex thing that it is.  Going on and on about Syria while the sex assaulter in chief appoints a climate change denier to the EPA is delusional.  When the entire planet is polluted no one is even going to remember there was a war in Syria.  Wake up!

Talk about cherry-picking my words and taking them out of context - I was talking about how there is a sense of awakening in the air regarding the mainstream Western media losing its power and influence.

You don't know me, mate. Drop the condescending attitude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Damphousse said:

There is a serial sex assaulter and a white supremacist in the White House.  And this makes you happy?!

I realize you must be one of those one issue voters but you need to wake up and start seeing the world as the complex thing that it is.  Going on and on about Syria while the sex assaulter in chief appoints a climate change denier to the EPA is delusional.  When the entire planet is polluted no one is even going to remember there was a war in Syria.  Wake up!

Wow, you really have drunk the cool aid!  Trump is no Florence Nightingale but "serial sex assaulter" and "white supremacist"? Come on man, you're making yourself look silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MattH said:

Wow, you really have drunk the cool aid!  Trump is no Florence Nightingale but "serial sex assaulter" and "white supremacist"? Come on man, you're making yourself look silly.

In many western jurisdictions sexual assault is considered any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. Forced kissing and grabbing women by the genitals would appear to fit that definition. There seems to be a line-up of women claiming to have been groped and kissed forcefully and without consent - therefore sexually assaulted - by Trump. These claims that appear to be reinforced by his own words. Are you saying that in your view these claims are baseless and that DT was not speaking the truth on the bus?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now I can't really speak for anyone else, but in regard to the "white supremacist" statement made above I wonder if the author was simply establishing an 'opening position'. He might have done this in the same way that a respected leader might initially say that he will build, I don't know - let's say a 2000 mile long impenetrable "wall", but later say that "wall" really meant a bit of a "fence". So the author might have said "white supremacist" but in following the footsteps of noble and respected leaders, really meant something like "isn't too keen on Mexican criminals". Not so silly after all. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Richard Bugg said:

In many western jurisdictions sexual assault is considered any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. Forced kissing and grabbing women by the genitals would appear to fit that definition. There seems to be a line-up of women claiming to have been groped and kissed forcefully and without consent - therefore sexually assaulted - by Trump. These claims that appear to be reinforced by his own words. Are you saying that in your view these claims are baseless and that DT was not speaking the truth on the bus?

Firstly, surely you cant honestly be telling me the timing of these allegations (and the relevance of this timing) has eluded you? Can you?

Not a peep for 69 years and then pumf, a few weeks before a presidential election they all emerge from no-where with their half assed tittle tattle stories.  I feel sorry if one of them is telling the truth because this was the worst possible time to come out.
This was an obvious last ditch attempt at mud slinging.  Any fool can see that.
And apart from with drama queens the mud hasn’t stuck.

As for whether he has in fact ever committed such an act, I cant say, and neither can you.
To be intellectually honest we must separate fact from opinion.

With respect to the tape, We are not asking whether he has in fact commited such acts, We are not asking whether it is your opinion that he has committed such acts. We are asking whether he is admitting to doing so.  And to be an admission it has to be explicit.

Lets take the easiest first.  The grabbing by the pussy comment. Could it be be admitting to actually grabbing a women by the crotch as soon as he meets them? It's possible. I cant say for sure it isn't.  But could he mean something else? Please be honest with yourself.  In my opinion it is highly unlikely that he would suddenly admit this in this situation.  What it clearly is in my opinion is a ridiculous hypothetical.
Imagine, for example, he had said “grab em by the pussy like scorpion from mortal combat”.  Would that be an admission that he fires a grappling hook from his wrist in to womens groin. Or would you accept it as a ridiculous hypothetical.

As for the “I don’t wait” comment.  Where in that sentence does he make any reference to consent?
Waiting, as far as I am aware, relates to time, not consent.  Could he be saying that he kisses women immediately even if they don’t want to? Possibly. But could he also be saying that he just does't mess around going on dates, and he goes in for the kill at the earliest reasonable occasion? Any honest non drama queen would have to accept that he could be saying this also.  He also could be bullshitting completely. That is another possibility.

So I hope that you can concede that this notion that he admitted anything has been thoroughly debunked.

As for my opinion of what he has done.  Say we had a crystal ball and could watch his entire life and could bet on it.   I would bet that on occasion he has been more forward with women then I ever would be. Probably kissed them when they were to embarrassed to shut him down. I doubt he has ever said “Can I kiss you?” or acquired written permission, but seriously, who has?  Would I bet that he has ever forced himself on someone in any way more than this. No I wouldn’t.
That is my hunch, which is as good as your hunch. But they are both hunches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, MattH said:

Firstly, surely you cant honestly be telling me the timing of these allegations (and the relevance of this timing) has eluded you? Can you?
...
So I hope that you can concede that this notion that he admitted anything has been thoroughly debunked.
 

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts. You have an interesting take on the matter. However, it might not surprise you that I don't agree with your conclusions. In the first instance, the timing has no relevance as to wether or not an assault(s) actually took place. It either did or it didn't and the timing of the publicising of the matter won't change that one iota. What will matter is evidence, both Trump's apparent confession, the evidence of the women involved, and any other relevant evidence. There would undoubtably be political relevance in making the matter public, but not legal relevance. Second, I don't concede that his apparent admission has been debunked. It is neither bunked, nor debunked by your opinion, or mine. There may be other explanations, such as he was trying to impress the reporter with his aggressive machismo by making things up, but I find it more likely that he was trying to impress the reporter with his aggressive machismo simply by describing what he has done and felt that he could get away with when he thought he wasn't being recorded. Your alternative suggestions seem a little too creative and forced for my mind. It will be interesting to see if the matter makes it to court. I was hoping the Trump University matter would proceed to trial, but alas not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Richard Bugg said:

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts. You have an interesting take on the matter. However, it might not surprise you that I don't agree with your conclusions. In the first instance, the timing has no relevance as to wether or not an assault(s) actually took place. It either did or it didn't and the timing of the publicising of the matter won't change that one iota. What will matter is evidence, both Trump's apparent confession, the evidence of the women involved, and any other relevant evidence. There would undoubtably be political relevance in making the matter public, but not legal relevance. Second, I don't concede that his apparent admission has been debunked. It is neither bunked, nor debunked by your opinion, or mine. There may be other explanations, such as he was trying to impress the reporter with his aggressive machismo, but I find it more likely that he was simply describing what he has done and felt that he could get away with when he thought he wasn't being recorded. Your alternative suggestions seem a little too creative and forced for my mind. It will be interesting to see if the matter makes it to court. I was hoping the Trump University matter would proceed to trial, but alas not.

Thank you. You have in a way agreed to what I said, though you said it in such a way to try and save face.  The fact that you accept there are other possible meanings for what he said disqualifies his comments from being declared an admission or confession.   As an admission would have to be explicit.  A confession would have to be an admission of all facts neccesary for conviction of a crime.

As for the timing of the allegations. It is true that the timing has no bearing on whether the allegations are true or not.  I didn't say that it did.  What the timing has a great bearing on is whether people believe the allegation are true.  It effects the believing, not the truth itself.
It should also be noted for the record that an allegation existing also has no bearing on whether it is true or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The guy admited commiting these acts. Spending so much mind power to try to prove the unprovable is plain sad. 

The people he said that he will put in his government are favorable of the white power movement and pro-guns. He even said that he would prefer teachers have guns to control violence in schools. KKK,yes, the famous one, not the Kupa Keep one (Cartman's team in Stick of Truth) declares that for the first time there is a worthy president, and from 3 things that he thank just after his election, one was the NationalGunAssociation.

The guy said on public television "that if she wasn't my daughter, I would date her", he has insulted almost every minority in the whole world (except KKK ofcourse), women, lgbt community, muslims, latinos, blacks, poor, eastern European countries, Germany, South European countries, Japan, Korea, and I am sure some others for sure, he respecta Putin and Erdogan, 2 of the most autocratic and imperialistic rulers (that rule since forever by the way, because of the new laws they discover everytime), he born ultra super rich (not a working class hero I guess) and he always was consider women as his trophys.

You can vote for whatever you want, and I will support your right (as I did here as well, I commented 4-5 times and didn't insult anyone for his vote) but do not play with logic, reasoning and common sense, some things are objective, and you are not only "loosing face" (what a degrading term, only fools loose face, wise people learn from their mistakes and they are open to other people's wisdom or knowledge) but your whole substitute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kisaha said:

The guy admited commiting these acts. Spending so much mind power to try to prove the unprovable is plain sad. 

The people he said that he will put in his government are favorable of the white power movement and pro-guns. He even said that he would prefer teachers have guns to control violence in schools. KKK,yes, the famous one, not the Kupa Keep one (Cartman's team in Stick of Truth) declares that for the first time there is a worthy president, and from 3 things that he thank just after his election, one was the NationalGunAssociation.

The guy said on public television "that if she wasn't my daughter, I would date her", he has insulted almost every minority in the whole world (except KKK ofcourse), women, lgbt community, muslims, latinos, blacks, poor, eastern European countries, Germany, South European countries, Japan, Korea, and I am sure some others for sure, he respecta Putin and Erdogan, 2 of the most autocratic and imperialistic rulers (that rule since forever by the way, because of the new laws they discover everytime), he born ultra super rich (not a working class hero I guess) and he always was consider women as his trophys.

You can vote for whatever you want, and I will support your right (as I did here as well, I commented 4-5 times and didn't insult anyone for his vote) but do not play with logic, reasoning and common sense, some things are objective, and you are not only "loosing face" (what a degrading term, only fools loose face, wise people learn from their mistakes and they are open to other people's wisdom or knowledge) but your whole substitute.

I feel for you man.  I'm all for criticising people where criticism is due.  It's nonsense and blowing things out of proportion that irritate me.  I think its interesting that you have basically regurgitated the whole CNN media narrative, proven by the fact that you have actually missed the one element that Trump should be criticised on more than any other: The fact that he supports waterboarding and 'stronger than waterboarding'.  Of course the media stopped talking about that because it wasn't juicy enough to put in their headlines.  The fact that he said that and you are whinging about what he said about his daughter:  That tells me what I need to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Simon Shasha said:

Talk about cherry-picking my words and taking them out of context - I was talking about how there is a sense of awakening in the air regarding the mainstream Western media losing its power and influence.

You don't know me, mate. Drop the condescending attitude.

Take your own advice.  Your rants about agent orange, depleted uranium, and white phosphorus tells me you don't know anything about the US media.  All those topics have been reported on extensively.  Even several multimillion dollar lawsuits have been won.  I'm sorry but if you don't know about agent orange, depleted uranium, and white phosphorus that is your fault not the American media's.  Stories and lawsuits have been rolling out for years...

Quote

A proposed settlement has been reached in a big class-action lawsuit against Monsanto. The case is connected to the company's production of the controversial herbicide "Agent Orange," the defoliant the military sprayed over Southeast Asia during the Vietnam War.

The case was filed on behalf of people who lived, worked and went to school in the small town of Nitro, West Virginia. For about two decades ending in 1971, Monsanto produced the herbicide 2,4,5-T there, which was used in Agent Orange. The lawsuit claims the company polluted the town with toxic substances, including dioxins, and

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2012/02/23/147302639/monsanto-reaches-settlement-on-agent-orange-class-action-suit

And yeah man we've read your posts and we know exactly where you are coming from.  Your broad sweeping statements about complex issues aren't going to solve any problems.

It's tactics like yours that have turned me off to a lot of documentaries.  With the cheap cameras available we should be living in the golden age of documentaries but when I watch these things inevitably they veer off into conspiracy land.  Anyone that says the US media hasn't covered Agent Orange is just living in an alternate universe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When someone tells you who they are, believe it. 

9 minutes ago, Damphousse said:

It's tactics like yours that have turned me off to a lot of documentaries.  With the cheap cameras available we should be living in the golden age of documentaries but when I watch these things inevitably they veer off into conspiracy land.  Anyone that says the US media hasn't covered Agent Orange is just living in an alternate universe.

Eh, just like narrative movies there are a lot of people that can do it, but can't necessarily do it well.

Don't give up on the genre simply because it's polluted with the mundane. Just search out the good stuff.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Damphousse said:

Take your own advice.  Your rants about agent orange, depleted uranium, and white phosphorus tells me you don't know anything about the US media.  All those topics have been reported on extensively.  Even several multimillion dollar lawsuits have been won.  I'm sorry but if you don't know about agent orange, depleted uranium, and white phosphorus that is your fault not the American media's.  Stories and lawsuits have been rolling out for years...

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2012/02/23/147302639/monsanto-reaches-settlement-on-agent-orange-class-action-suit

And yeah man we've read your posts and we know exactly where you are coming from.  Your broad sweeping statements about complex issues aren't going to solve any problems.

It's tactics like yours that have turned me off to a lot of documentaries.  With the cheap cameras available we should be living in the golden age of documentaries but when I watch these things inevitably they veer off into conspiracy land.  Anyone that says the US media hasn't covered Agent Orange is just living in an alternate universe.

I never "ranted". In fact, I only mentioned it once...

Regardless, the U.S mainstream media is rubbish. Absolute filth. A morally corrupt conglomerate of six-corporations that control 90% of all news media made in the U.S.A. Complicit for decades with the U.S. military industrial complex and the cronies on Wall Street with whom they share financial. business and social ties.  Any defense you try to mount for it will be in vain to those that are well aware of the lying shit-pile that is the U.S. mainstream media.

Media critic, historian, and Bernie Sanders delegate, Norman Soloman, summed it up well; “One way or another, a military-industrial complex now extends to much of corporate media. In the process, firms with military ties routinely advertise in news outlets. Often, media magnates and people on the boards of large media-related corporations enjoy close links - financial and social - with the military industry and Washington’s foreign-policy establishment.”

It is getting worse, and more concentrated, as time goes on, too. In 1983, 90% of the U.S. mainstream media was owned by 50 companies. Now, that 90% is owned by 6 companies. Four of the top-ten U.S. mainstream media companies have major defense contractors on their boards of directors:

William Kennard: New York Times, Carlyle Group

Douglas Warner III, GE (NBC), Bechtel

John Bryson: Disney (ABC), Boeing

Alwyn Lewis: Disney (ABC), Halliburton

Douglas McCorkindale: Gannett, Lockheed-Martin.

And no, there hasn't been "extensive coverage" regarding Iraqi civilian deaths at the hands of U.S. forces, nor has there been "extensive coverage" or in-depth reporting on the use and abuse of Depleted Uranium used against Iraqi civilians by U.S. and coalition forces. No in-depth reporting, nor war-crimes charges, or anything even remotely close to war-crimes charges, no compensation for the Iraqi civilians (and the majority of U.S. soldiers that loaded Depleted Uranium rounds).

Why has there been no charges? No mass outcry? No major compensation for the victims? Because they great majority of people don't even know about it...

The only organisations that reported in-depth on the use of Depleted Uranium on Iraqi civilians were health organisations and journals, like WHO and The Lancet.

And even then, Hans von Sponeck, a former UN assistant secretary general and UN humanitarian coordinator for Iraq (who resigned in protest of U.S.-backed sanctions) said "I saw in Geneva how a WHO mission to conduct on-spot assessments in Basra and southern Iraq, where depleted uranium had led to devastating environmental health problems, was aborted under U.S. political pressure."

Do you think they want the masses to be aware of this? Do you think the six-corporations that own the mainstream media want people to know about this? I'm sure General Electric, which owns COMCAST(NBC, MSNBC, CNBC), and made $11.6 billion in 2012 from military contracts with the U.S. government, wants their viewers to be anti-war. I'm sure General Electric is telling the media companies they own to publish Depleted Uranium stories "extensively"...

"Reported on extensively by the U.S mainstream media" - give me a break. Sorry if this offends you, but that is a rather demeaning remark to say, especially with respect to the victims of Depleted Uranium...

What's "extensive" to you? A few news briefs, a few short-wire stories? I'd say "extensive" is one article a week, no?

The war began in 2003 (though the ramifications still continue until this day), with the U.S. military officially withdrawing on the 18 December, 2011.

That's 8 years and 8 months (448 weeks). Please provide an "extensive" list of coverage. At least 448 articles/news reports published/broadcast by the U.S mainstream media about the use of Depleted Uranium on Iraqi civilians by U.S. and coalition forces. If not, please provide at least half that...

Pointless, anyway. Your mind is made up, as is mine.

I will say this before I leave indefinitely. I do believe there is a media, and journalists, out there that are honorable. That seek the truth. That are not controlled by corporations and boards of directors. They exist, and I know they exist, because they are the small, exceptional, subtle few that did write about Depleted Uranium and Iraqi civilians deaths by means of their own independent ways.  And I think their voices are growing ever stronger and the people are listening ever more intently. In a world where the mass mainstream media has become so concentrated and controlled by the few, whom have the power to influence the many, the rise of independent voices can only be a good thing. Though I supported neither Trump nor Hillary (I supported Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein), the one good thing that has come out of this shit-show of an election is, what seems to be, the beginning of the end of the mainstream media...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, MattH said:

I feel for you man.  I'm all for criticising people where criticism is due.  It's nonsense and blowing things out of proportion that irritate me.  I think its interesting that you have basically regurgitated the whole CNN media narrative, proven by the fact that you have actually missed the one element that Trump should be criticised on more than any other: The fact that he supports waterboarding and 'stronger than waterboarding'.  Of course the media stopped talking about that because it wasn't juicy enough to put in their headlines.  The fact that he said that and you are whinging about what he said about his daughter:  That tells me what I need to know.

It's not a shame to admit that you are a KKK/White Power/buy guns everywhere/Wannabe Ultra rich/Trophy girlfriends/Chauvinist sympathizer. This is the government you vote for, you must be proud.

Haven't watched CNN not even 15 minutes for the whole year by the way.. 

P.S Of course you are not, but this is what you vote for. Maybe you are a victim of your system. Only 2 political parties? This is not democratic at all..Check the Swiss democratic system to note the vast differences between them.

Anyway, this is what John Weaver, (Republican) said about Bannon (you know him, right?) “The racist, fascist extreme right is represented footsteps from the Oval Office. Be very vigilant America.”. He is not trying to be poetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a more light hearted note, I just listened to an old piece that Frank Zappa wrote 51 years ago. It's called Troble every day, and it's from his debut albulm named Freak Out. Some years later he also cut a track called I am the slime (forget which albulm that's from) anyway I reckon both tracks are so relevant to today's media they could have been written yesterday.

On an even more light hearted I'll let Billy Connolly say a few words

  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...