America - The Official Thread

[DDastardly00]

"Creepy?" What did she tweet that was creepy?

Search Rep Omar's deleted tweets.

"Let's take a moment to remember that the offended millions here are a group that largely overlaps with the group that moans about "political correctness" and "snowflakes" and people generally being too quick to feel offended these days. Kinda makes this whole thing hard to take seriously as a good faith argument.

Which group is that?

"He's untwisting your nonsense comparisons to Hitler.

Except I wasn't comparing her to Hitler. I gave two other examples of anti-Semetic speech to highlight the dangers of it, nothing more.

So without any meaningful evidence and absolutely zero benefit of the doubt, you are absolutely and completely sure she is a Jew hater, and further that anyone that disagrees with you "also, by association, [is] defending Neo-Nazis, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the KKK". Do you not see how ridiculous this position is? I'm defending Omar, in this instance.

At this point I am skeptical of Rep Omar's statements, there is enough smoke to wonder if there is a fire. I've stated multiple times in this thread that I do not know her personally.

You going to label me a Nazi, KKK, or Ayatollah sympathizer?

I will if you start making anti-Semitic statements and/or hateful statements towards Jews.

You don't think it's telling that they voted to condemn Antisemitism and not condemn Rep Omar?

That fact that they chose not to name her directly doesn't mean it wasn't directed at her. She was also publically rebuked by members of her own party, pretty clear the vote was a reaction to her appalling tweets.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

At this point I am skeptical of Rep Omar's statements, there is enough smoke to wonder if there is a fire. I've stated multiple times in this thread that I do not know her personally.

I will if you start making anti-Semitic statements and/or hateful statements towards Jews.

That fact that they chose not to name her directly doesn't mean it wasn't directed at her. She was also publically rebuked by members of her own party, pretty clear the vote was a reaction to her appalling tweets.

It also doesn't mean it WAS directed at her. But the fact that they didn't condemn her does actually mean that they didn't condemn her.

You are consistently ignoring the more reasonable/logical conclusion, based on the evidence provided, and instead grasping at the ones that make the most assumptions.


Ugh. I'm bored of this. Time for something else:

Julian Assange has been indicted on 17 fresh counts, under the espionage act.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/julian...ase-of-chelsea-manning-docs-today-2019-05-23/

To paraphrase The Joker, I think this guy looks like a squealer. If he has anything to squeal about, I have a feeling he is about to do it. Interested to see where this goes.

 

[huskeR32]

Search Rep Omar's deleted tweets.

All I see are more tweets like what we've been discussing: poorly worded attempts to criticize lobbying, as well as some observations that the "anti-semite" label is often used to shut down anybody who criticizes the state of Israel in lieu of actually having a reasoned rebuttal. I don't see anything "creepy" at all. Perhaps you'd like to find a specific tweet or quote to help me understand? Or are you just throwing negative words at her because you dislike her?

Which group is that?

What? I just laid out which two groups overlap.

A lot of the people who are choosing to find offense in Omar's comments are the same people who think our culture is too quick to find offense.

Except I wasn't comparing her to Hitler. I gave two other examples of anti-Semetic speech to highlight the dangers of it, nothing more.

I feel like there's a word that means, roughly, "example used to highlight an aspect of something similar." Starts with a 'C.' Ah well, I'm sure it'll come to me eventually.

At this point I am skeptical of Rep Omar's statements, there is enough smoke to wonder if there is a fire. I've stated multiple times in this thread that I do not know her personally.

For not knowing her personally, you seem pretty confident in your pronouncements of what she does and doesn't think.

I will if you start making anti-Semitic statements and/or hateful statements towards Jews.

That's a bit of a backpedal from this:

If you are going to defend her then know you are also, by association, defending Neo-Nazis, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the KKK who all spew the same hateful crap as Rep Omar, they just do it without all of the political doublespeak.

EDIT:

Are you really that dense?

Didn't you just complain about ad-hominem attacks a page or two ago?

 

[DDastardly00]

It also doesn't mean it WAS directed at her. But the fact that they didn't condemn her does actually mean that they didn't condemn her.

You are consistently ignoring the more reasonable/logical conclusion, based on the evidence provided, and instead grasping at the ones that make the most assumptions.

Are you really that dense? Clearly the vote was directed at her, and you're completely ignoring the public statements from her constituents when that vote was passed, some of which I posted in this thread. They NAMED her directly in those statements, I mean WOW.



Now it's my turn to ask, are you really serious? It that really what you are going with? They just randomly held a vote condemning Anti-Semitic speech despite all the very public statements given by the very same people that voted for it?

 

[DDastardly00]

What? I just laid out which two groups overlap.

You are playing coy with me, why? I will ask you specifically, what are the names of these two groups?

For not knowing her personally, you seem pretty confident in your pronouncements of what she does and doesn't think.

Does the word skeptical mean confident in your vocabulary? Because it doesn't in mine.

That's a bit of a backpedal from this:

Not really. A lot of people take positions they don't fully understand the consequences of.

 

[TexRex]

Wow that's twisted. Go back and read what I said and try again. You basically just took what I said entirely out of context threw it in the spin cycle and that's what came out on the other side.

Heh.

True, except when the fact is not a fact and is actually a lie. AIPAC does not donate directly politicians and it's not a Political Action Committee either. The PAC in AIPAC stands for Public Affair Committee. What Rep Omar said was a lie.

So you can parrot the official line. Nice. In its current role, it may well be illegal to officially donate to campaigns. They could position themselves differently so that such activities would be above board, but why bother when they've gotten so far traipsing below board?

What AIPAC has is donors and supporters, people that they've demonstrated an uncanny ability to motivate and rally up legal support for those who further their agenda or attacks against those who hinder it?

What AIPAC also has is a history of heads caught bragging to donors and prospective recipients of favor about how much pull they have in Washington and the people that they "have".

This is semantics; they don't have influence, really, but they really have influence.

Search Rep Omar's deleted tweets.

Nope; you said they exist and so it's on you to offer them up. You can also expect to be asked why they're "creepy" (whatever that means) if you decline to explain, so how about you do so.

Except I wasn't comparing her to Hitler.

I mean...

Hitler used this stuff to gain power, and take over a country (nearly the world).

...?

I gave two other examples of anti-Semetic speech to highlight the dangers of it, nothing more.

Examples intended to illustrate that this is that, but you still haven't shown your work. Why are these the same? Why are all these things anti-Semitism? Where's the line? Is the "boat bris" cartoon in my post that you quoted an example of it? Why (/not)?

I will if you start making anti-Semitic statements and/or hateful statements towards Jews.

I did no such thing and that's precisely what you called me because I was defending Omar.

Oh but I haven't defended Omar; not then and not since. What I have done is highlighted the hypocrisy on display when Republicans cite what Democrats have said on the subject and yet everything else Democrats say falls on deaf Republican ears. I've also referred to the moving target that what constitutes anti-Semitism is, but then I suspect this is by design so that people can pick and choose when things are offensive.

 

[DDastardly00]

This is so off base I don't even know where to start.

Heh.


So you can parrot the official line. Nice. In its current role, it may well be illegal to officially donate to campaigns. They could position themselves differently so that such activities would be above board, but why bother when they've gotten so far traipsing below board?

Is this your way of saying sorry, you are right? because it comes across as bitter to me and not much of an apology. Look, all I did was highlight the FACT that AIPAC does not donate directly to candidates which DIRECTLY REFUTES Rep Omar's claim which was a LIE.

What AIPAC has is donors and supporters

Yup, like any other lobby group in the US, okay, go on...

people that they've demonstrated an uncanny ability to motivate and rally up legal support for those who further their agenda or attacks against those who hinder it?

Wait, what? Are you trying to say AIPAC is some sort of legal attack dog, going to need a link for that.

What AIPAC also has is a history of heads caught bragging to donors and prospective recipients of favor about how much pull they have in Washington and the people that they "have".

So they are good at selling themselves as a lobby group in order to obtain more donations, which is what any other lobby group does, Um Yawn?

This is semantics; they don't have influence, really, but they really have influence.

Of course they have influence, they are a lobby group. Next you are going to tell me water is wet.

Do you know who donates not only more, but far more to the US every single year? South Korea, and it isn't even close. In fact, Israel isn't even the second or third on list of largest foreign donors, they might be fourth behind Saudi Arabia and Japan, it's been awhile since I checked.

Nope; you said they exist and so it's on you to offer them up. You can also expect to be asked why they're "creepy" (whatever that means) if you decline to explain, so how about you do so.

Uh huh,, and I posted two of the on the previous page, the rest people can google.

Examples intended to illustrate that this is that, but you still haven't shown your work. Why are these the same? Why are all these things anti-Semitism? Where's the line? Is the "boat bris" cartoon in my post that you quoted an example of it? Why (/not)?[/

Let's play a game, Anti-Semite or not Anti-Semite.

Bob says to Jim one day, you know all them

Jews own the US govt right?

Is this:

A. not Anti-Semitic
B. Anti-Semitic
C. Not sure
D. mommy?

I did no such thing and that's precisely what you called me because I was defending Omar.

This makes no sense, I didn't call you anything.

Oh but I haven't defended Omar; not then and not since. What I have done is highlighted the hypocrisy on display when Republicans cite what Democrats have said on the subject and yet everything else Democrats say falls on deaf Republican ears. I've also referred to the moving target that what constitutes anti-Semitism is, but then I suspect this is by design so that people can pick and choose when things are offensive.

What do Republicans have to do with this? The majority of people condemning Omar's tweets are Democrats.

I started this entire conversation with one basic question which was, Why is Anti-Semitism on the rise? Some how it became about Rep Omar, which is rather interesting really.

 

[Dennisch]

People like the 2 callers need to have some serious sense beaten into them.

Massive respect for the channel not apologizing to the crybabies missing the game.

 

[DDastardly00]

Circling back to where this started, this is a good reuters article which has some actual data on the blight that is happening worldwide. Attacks are up 13% led by the US, Britain, France and Germany.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...018-led-by-us-west-europe-study-idUSKCN1S73M1

"Anti-Semitism is no longer and issue confined to the activity of the far left or far right and radical Islamists triangle - it has mainstreamed and became an integral part of life, the report said."

 

[DDastardly00]

People like the 2 callers need to have some serious sense beaten into them.

Massive respect for the channel not apologizing to the crybabies missing the game.

I have a sister that moved to a suburb of Tulsa, been worried about her for the last few days. The Tornadoes are bad enough but the flash flooding is even worse.

 

[TexRex]

This is so off base I don't even know where to start.



Is this your way of saying sorry, you are right? because it comes across as bitter to me and not much of an apology. Look, all I did was highlight the FACT that AIPAC does not donate directly to candidates which DIRECTLY REFUTES Rep Omar's claim which was a LIE.



Yup, like any other lobby group in the US, okay, go on...



Wait, what? Are you trying to say AIPAC is some sort of legal attack dog, going to need a link for that.



So they are good at selling themselves as a lobby group in order to obtain more donations, which is what any other lobby group does, Um Yawn?



Of course they have influence, they are a lobby group. Next you are going to tell me water is wet.

Do you know who donates not only more, but far more to the US every single year? South Korea, and it isn't even close. In fact, Israel isn't even the second or third on list of largest foreign donors, they might be fourth behind Saudi Arabia and Japan, it's been awhile since I checked.




Uh huh,, and I posted two of the on the previous page, the rest people can google.




Let's play a game, Anti-Semite or not Anti-Semite.

Bob says to Jim one day, you know all them

Jews own the US govt right?

Is this:

A. not Anti-Semitic
B. Anti-Semitic
C. Not sure
D. mommy?





This makes no sense, I didn't call you anything.



What do Republicans have to do with this? The majority of people condemning Omar's tweets are Democrats.

I started this entire conversation with one basic question which was, Why is Anti-Semitism on the rise? Some how it became about Rep Omar, which is rather interesting really.

You're just dicking around; every move an effort to forestall further inquiry. You REPEATEDLY refuse to explain why something is anti-Semitism and then expect someone to play a "game" where you ask what constitutes anti-Semitism?

You said that my defense of Omar (which doesn't actually exist) is tantamount to defending the KKK, Ayatollah Absolutelynothingtodowiththetopicathand and others. I reported this as it was an attack on me, and then you had the audacity to propose I be referred to as one of the "ad-hominem brothers".

Edit: I'm not going to tell you not to respond to this, rather I'll inform you that I won't see said response.

 

[kembro]

Looks like they're the third biggest bribers of the US, behind Japan and South Korea. AIPAC spent the most of the lobbying groups.

 

[DDastardly00]

You're just dicking around; every move an effort to forestall further inquiry. You REPEATEDLY refuse to explain why something is anti-Semitism and then expect someone to play a "game" where you ask what constitutes anti-Semitism?

You said that my defense of Omar (which doesn't actually exist) is tantamount to defending the KKK, Ayatollah Absolutelynithingtodowiththetopicathand and others. I reported this as it was an attack on me, and then you had the audacity to propose I be referred to as one of the "ad-hominem brothers".

Edit: I'm not going to tell you not to respond to this, rather I'll inform you that I won't see said response.

I didn't attack you at all, and to report me over that is quite frankly ridiculous. I explained how the statement was anti-Semitic multiple times. Since then my words have been twisted and contorted in every which way imaginable to the point they are barely recognizable. BUT, I still played along.

The one thing I didn't do was take my ball and go home or block people that don't agree with me, which is very childish.

 

[DDastardly00]

View attachment 822977
Looks like they're the third biggest bribers of the US, behind Japan and South Korea. AIPAC spent the most of the lobbying groups.

I knew they were 3rd or fourth, just been awhile since I checked. I knew South Korea was the # 1 but the rest usually vary from year to year.

 

[Danoff]

Circling back to where this started, this is a good reuters article which has some actual data on the blight that is happening worldwide. Attacks are up 13% led by the US, Britain, France and Germany.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...018-led-by-us-west-europe-study-idUSKCN1S73M1

"Anti-Semitism is no longer and issue confined to the activity of the far left or far right and radical Islamists triangle - it has mainstreamed and became an integral part of life, the report said."

13%!!!!

 

[DDastardly00]

13%!!!!

I know it's crazy. I mean I knew it had ticked up a bit, but even so, I still found that stat to be rather alarming.

 

[Dotini]

I know it's crazy. I mean I knew it had ticked up a bit, but even so, I still found that stat to be rather alarming.

Perhaps, in an era of exploding polarization, L&R populism and identity politics, the tender, fearful and disturbed persons will clutch at any straw, no matter how hackneyed, to differentiate themselves from "the other".

 

[DDastardly00]

Perhaps, in an era of exploding polarization, L&R populism and identity politics, the tender, fearful and disturbed persons will clutch at any straw, no matter how hackneyed, to differentiate themselves from "the other".

Dotini, I think you just nailed it, that was genius. I think when you have polarization like we are experiencing, it also can give rise to the fringe groups and bolster their numbers, which is what we are seeing on the far right and far left. The thing that I fear the most is that polite discourse, freedom of speech and the sharing of ideas is under rampant attack and not just by fringe groups but in our very own educational institutions. When people get beat down for a thought or an idea on a college campus by the thought police, we should be very worried. One look back in history at the Brown shirts and we will immediately see why.

 

[mustafur]

These Neocons are really going forward with this crap, wasn't Trump elected to be less involved in wars, he seems to be a puppet Like W Bush while Cheney made sure all the wars happen, and in this case it's John Bolton doing it.
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/...equiring-congress-sign-off-before-iran-strike

The Constitution only has power if it's enforced and it certainly isn't at the moment.

 

[Danoff]

The other day I saw a headline that said "Trump vows to end Iran if the US is threatened" or somesuch. The actual quote was this:

Warning the Islamic Republic that if it wants a fight, it would be “the official end of Iran.“

How does something like this make you feel if you're Iranian. You hear this and you think, " Awesome. If my leaders do something stupid, then the American leaders are going to do something stupid and I'm going to die." How does this kind of nonsense posturing help anyone? Walk softly, carry a big stick. How does he not understand (at this point in the presidency especially) the nuance that needs to be involved with these kinds of statements. The damage from this kind of junk will ripple for years.

Leadership, not threats.

 

[DDastardly00]

Wouldn't we risk war with Russia if we attacked Iran? I mean the thought worries me, but that would be incredibly costly, too costly for either side to really follow through on.

 

[Danoff]

Wouldn't we risk war with Russia if we attacked Iran? I mean the thought worries me, but that would be incredibly costly, too costly for either side to really follow through on.

All the more reason not to say it.

 

[mustafur]

Going by what John Bolton is saying it's a matter of time, they have put extremely strong Sanctions on Iran's oil and blockaded their ships from using the Gulf it's likely to implode the Economy and make them have a similar situation to Venuezuela(also caused by US Sanctions).

Russia needs to plant some troops in Iran to deter the US at this point as it's looking imminent for a US attack.

It must be highlighted that Iran was following the nuclear agreement before it was thrown out, anything that happens from this is solely the fault of this administration, they are the aggressors here.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

So many heads on fire in this thread.

Trump has a big mouth. You know it, I know it, the whole world knows it. Big deal.

Meanwhile...

Associated Press:
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Thursday granted Attorney General William Barr new powers to review and potentially release classified information related to the origins of the Russia investigation, a move aimed at accelerating Barr’s inquiry into whether U.S. officials improperly surveilled Trump’s 2016 campaign.

Trump directed the intelligence community to “quickly and fully cooperate” with Barr’s probe. The directive marked an escalation in Trump’s efforts to “investigate the investigators,” as he continues to try to undermine the findings of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe amid mounting Democratic calls for impeachment proceedings.*

You guys just wait until this stuff starts coming out. This is going to be way bigger than Watergate.

Source: https://apnews.com/9e926bfccb5947d5a5f8eb260cb0a7e6

* Deemphasized because opinion. I was going to italicize it because it was slanted, but turns out everything in a quote box is italicized.

 

[SestoScudo]

Going by what John Bolton is saying it's a matter of time, they have put extremely strong Sanctions on Iran's oil and blockaded their ships from using the Gulf it's likely to implode the Economy and make them have a similar situation to Venuezuela(also caused by US Sanctions).

Russia needs to plant some troops in Iran to deter the US at this point as it's looking imminent for a US attack.

It must be highlighted that Iran was following the nuclear agreement before it was thrown out, anything that happens from this is solely the fault of this administration, they are the aggressors here.

The problem is Iran does not trust Russia either.

Bad blood between them goes back centuries.

Even if they have a common enemy aka the USA dont expect Russia to come to Irans aid. Russia even barely protects Syria to be honest look how Israel is raiding the country even to the point where they hid behind a Russian transport plane where a Syrian defence missile blew it up and Russia did not do anything apart from condemning Israel.

Russia could even save Serbia. Russia even says it is not a fire brigade to extinguish tensions. Iran is all but alone. But maybe we might see Russian Mercs getting set like the Wagner group to help Iran just like they were to sent to Venezeula to help Maduro.

 

[Joey D]

Remember when Obama gave a bunch of money to the banks and auto industry? Everyone cried socialism (and rightfully so). Apparently, Trump needs to, well, Trump that by giving farmers $16 billion.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/23/us/politics/farm-aid-package.html

So because Trump illegally started a trade war, we need to use tax dollars to make sure farmers (who already get subsidies) need to get more free money from the government. Please tell me how taxation isn't just theft designed to steal money from me and give it to those who really don't deserve it.

Farmers largely supported Trump too, so really they shot themselves in the foot over this one and now the American people need to prop them up.

Oh and I wonder what will happen once farmers realize there's a shortage of seasonal migrant worker from Mexico. Will they want another bailout so they can hire legal workers at a minimium wage (or let's face it, $15 an hour to pick fruit)?

As far as I'm concerned, nothing thus far has shown me Trump is nothing more than a Communist. People who support him are Communists too.

 

[Dotini]

You guys just wait until this stuff starts coming out. This is going to be way bigger than Watergate.

Watergate was a very big deal at the time. Everything seemed to stop and hinge on the outcome. But compare Politics to Geology and understand that back then we were still in the Uniformitarian era, nothing ever changed but slowly. Is what we have today necessarily Catastrophism in Politics? Maybe we will survive it just fine with institutions stronger than ever? But I think not. Many of our basic institutions are unraveling. We may be headed for chaos.

 

[Tornado]

The other day I saw a headline that said "Trump vows to end Iran if the US is threatened" or somesuch. The actual quote was this:



How does something like this make you feel if you're Iranian. You hear this and you think, " Awesome. If my leaders do something stupid, then the American leaders are going to do something stupid and I'm going to die." How does this kind of nonsense posturing help anyone? Walk softly, carry a big stick. How does he not understand (at this point in the presidency especially) the nuance that needs to be involved with these kinds of statements. The damage from this kind of junk will ripple for years.

Leadership, not threats.

Though sadly, now if Iran actually does do anything before 2020 Trump could be running against a presidential bid from Jesus/Ghandi and would still sweep.

 

[Blitz24]

Though sadly, now if Iran actually does do anything before 2020 Trump could be running against a presidential bid from Jesus/Ghandi and would still sweep.

I believe Iran is run by a "very stable genius" as well. So by that logic, we will all be dead by next Thursday.

 

[huskeR32]

You are playing coy with me, why? I will ask you specifically, what are the names of these two groups?

I'm not playing coy about anything. If you're trying to bait me into attributing this to a certain political party or viewpoint, I'll pass. It's already quite clear what hypocrisy I'm pointing out, and whoever is engaging in it shouldn't be taken seriously on this matter.

Does the word skeptical mean confident in your vocabulary? Because it doesn't in mine.

So you sprinkled the word "skeptical" in your statements. Good for you. Doesn't change that you're proclaiming (not wondering, but proclaiming) that her remarks are anti-semitic, even though people have pointed out to you other possible interpretations; and that people defending her are also anti-semitic.

Now, in a world where you weren't insisting her remarks were anti-semitic, I'd probably give you the benefit of the doubt, and say that while your posts might seem to be confidently pronouncing what someone you've never met is thinking, you were actually just expressing skepticism or wondering aloud. But, well, you get what you give.

Not really. A lot of people take positions they don't fully understand the consequences of.

So anybody defending her isn't being open minded, and allowing for other possible interpretations; rather, they're too stupid to understand what they're defending? Got it. Well, I suppose I should feel grateful that you've dropped by to bless us with your superior insight then.