Leaderboard

This is a regular pattern in such processes: a period of hidden, slow decay is followed by a precipitous collapse of the entire structure. And it's here, live and in real time. Why would one need dark prophesies and exaggerations? In three steps: Step 1: a president of the etc cannot be charged criminally because blah Step 2: the Congress, the only body that can check the president is corrupted and dysfunctional. It will not uphold and execute its direct constitutional duty. Step 3: the supreme leader can violate any law and order with complete and total impunity. How can one see and read it in any other way? From the head of the executive branch in an imperfect democracy to the supreme leader in some North American Iran. In three easy steps. Now, why is everybody so smug about it? This is the real, big question.

Can someone find the Soviet Union on a map today?

He's probably still planning missions to kill CEOs.

What creates the cartels? Who pays for them? People who use illegal drugs do. Our neighbours do. Maybe some of us do. And does anybody here seriously believe that gangs in Canada have had a bigger role in creating the US opioid crisis than the US pharmaceutical industry, especially the makers of opioids like OxyContin who lied for years about its highly addictive nature despite being told of it by many doctors. Why isn’t Trump talking about that every day if he cares about addiction in his country? Why isn’t he questioning the fact that the major beneficiaries of OxyContin never went to jail. At least a few of the hoodlums involved in peddling SUBSYS did. Eventually. https://abcnews.go.com/Business/authorities-drugmaker-paid-off-doctors-lied-insurance-companies/story?id=61488372

When trans people and folks like you demand we pretend they are something they are not... we can say no and give a shit. When trans people and folks like you demand we let men pretending to be women into their private spaces.... we can say no and give a shit. When trans people and folks like you demand we let men pretending to be women beat up women in physical sports competitions and steal their medals... we can say no and give a shit. When trans people and folks like you demand we let them lie to and push this madness onto children in schools, wanting to hide it from their parents... we can say no and give a shit. When trans people and folks like you want to butcher and mutilate children, drug them up, so they can appear to be something they are not... we can say no and give a shit.

I do feel bad for the average Ukrainian who is simply trying to live and get by. Nothing that they can do to stop this war. My guess is if they try to leave, they face serious challenges especially if they travel east or south. Second, war tends to deplete your resources so probably can't afford much and it takes money to travel.

Yes, that is what I am saying. For decades and decades we have played the game with drugs and we resort to making it OK to buy them, take them and no consequences for it. Shit, the cops make more arrests than any border people. And then we let them go. Is it OK to make it easier and safer to take drugs and disguise it as the fight against drugs??? No, it is not. $1.3 billion is a drop in the bucket and will not do anything. As for "Trump wanted" .....he will not stop tariffs at all. It is him asserting his power and he will not stop. We, be it Trudeau or his successor, will cave to what Trump wants. We do not have the power.

You don't seem to get it or that it should apply to the conversation. There's all sorts of versions. I took Occam's Razor to what I was told and read and to me it all boils down to him teaching humans how to best behave towards one another in the world - which is to say the way you'd like to treated. His formula was as effective as Einstein's that described the nature of reality.

It can't be anyone that bad... Biden already traded all of them for a mediocre American hating WNBA player...

Like you cowardly hide from me? LOL

Just curious how many threads are going to be made about this.

Oh, you are only half full of shit? I mean... um, OK. There were no verbal agreements. There were no written agreements. The point I am making isn't that if only James Baker had written it down, then it would be official! No, it is that there was no agreement nor did he have any authority to authorize any such agreement. He even said as much immediately after. This is why Gorbachev said as much after. This is why NATO and the US never committed to this after. It was NEVER an agreement. If only you were honest enough to have answered my question, this would be obvious. This was a negotiation. Even the link your other clown show member provided clearly stipulated this. LOL, how are you this stupid? NATO members didn't agree to that.

This is like declaring a sports team won a trade when you don't know who they sent out in the deal. Dumb! I don't think we can totally rule out the possibility that trump was actually trying to free Jared Fogle.

Most of it is just a dishonest tactic. They can't really win on the ideas or their merits, they know how absurd it is to force girls to have to compete against boys, that it is fundamentally wrong to watch a girl not get a medal or trophy, standing there having to watch a boy win in their place. So... instead, they just pretend like it is not happening, there is no issue, why are we making such a big deal out of this...

And I thought this was a serious conversation. Silly me.

We often see this with regards to this issue from the left. They both in equal amounts demand That they are acting in the interests of the children safety but also don't want any regulation that protects children safety. At the same time they want to pretend they are including the families wow simultaneously insisting that families should have no say. And meanwhile they insist that sex and gender are the same thing, except that sex and gender are also not the same thing depending on what we're discussing and then sex and gender are not actually a thing at all followed by male and female are the same thing but we shouldn't call a female male a male because it's not the same thing. It's like they live in a weird world where everything can be two things at once. Basically they're Schrodinger's twat.

You read all that? 🤣 I can't read myata's drunken rants. Pidgin English makes my head swim.

If it had been the right main gear this thread would have two extra pages of Duh's LMAO's and inebriated chatter.

It's important to get things in writing when you're dealing with unscrupulous people, and we all agree that the US Gov't can't be trusted.

This dumb f*ck has never been to West Virginia, Kentucky or rural PA.

There you go again... "anti trans" So... this is all proving to be very one way with you. You claim to not support the idea of a kid being trans... and oppose everything that is being done from the right to protect kids and parents rights here from this stuff being pushed onto their kids... but you don't seem to have any of this sentiment towards the left pushing it. Yet again, no they are not. The medical industry is highly regulated with many laws and restrictions on what they can do and how they can do it. Here you are again, using leftist language saying they are targeting a disliked population. You betray yourself yet again. How is it you sit here saying "While I don't think transgender identity is a real thing beyond individuals imagination" but now you refer to them as a "disliked population" This is all just an illogical attack on motives either way. Except... you do care. Only, your care only goes one way here, in opposing anything that is opposed to the various trans the kids efforts while you don't care that those things are being pushed from the left onto the kids and parents. Then, you don't agree, if your position is to just let people pee where they feel comfortable. In the meantime, you want to wait around for an entire civilization to redesign all their bathrooms to accommodate the less than 1% of people you claim are just imagining things. What kind of dishonest person claims to mostly agree with someone and then proceeds to make arguments and comments that clearly show they don't? What kind of dishonest person tries to claim they don't care or that it is about taxes, or about liberty and freedom, but then they don't really hold those positions consistently beyond pushing transgenderism onto kids? You claimed this was all just people imagining things... so why is it the "simple and normal" thing to pretend with them? To change language for them? If you really believe this, why did you ignore my request? It isn't even a matter of it being a promise they can or can't make. These are things parents should know and be informed of. Teachers are employees of the state there to educate children. The public bargain being made is that parents hand of their kids to receive that education. Teachers are not priests, they are not there to have the trust of students beyond their role in educating them. There is no "higher responsibility" there. What do you base this on?

USAID is a foreign policy superpower of US global influence despised by dictators. Russia is obviously a big winner here and China will swoop in as replace the US in many corners of the world. Also Trump has seemingly changed his tune on Taiwan compared to his first term, opening the door for their annexation of that island. And remember the 60% tarrif on China candidate trump promised, now just at 10%. Plus a lot of major US imports from China come through Mexico anyway. Plans to cede renewable energy tech market to China etc It would hardly be possible to more aggressively benefit China's long term path towards becoming the global hegemon.

Right on que.

How was he assured? You notice how you frequently snip everything I quote? A lot of the time, the material I quote backs up what I say. This time is no exception. The very title of the article you snipped out makes this rather clear. Perhaps you can actually read what I quoted this time around. Once more, from the top: ** Documents show Gorbachev was assured US wouldn't expand NATO into Central and Eastern Europe U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s famous “not one inch eastward” assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was part of a cascade of assurances about Soviet security given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991, according to declassified U.S., Soviet, German, British and French documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University (http://nsarchive.gwu.edu). The documents show that multiple national leaders were considering and rejecting Central and Eastern European membership in NATO as of early 1990 and through 1991, that discussions of NATO in the context of German unification negotiations in 1990 were not at all narrowly limited to the status of East German territory, and that subsequent Soviet and Russian complaints about being misled about NATO expansion were founded in written contemporaneous memcons and telcons at the highest levels. The documents reinforce former CIA Director Robert Gates’s criticism of “pressing ahead with expansion of NATO eastward [in the 1990s], when Gorbachev and others were led to believe that wouldn’t happen.”[1] The key phrase, buttressed by the documents, is “led to believe.” President George H.W. Bush had assured Gorbachev during the Malta summit in December 1989 that the U.S. would not take advantage (“I have not jumped up and down on the Berlin Wall”) of the revolutions in Eastern Europe to harm Soviet interests; but neither Bush nor Gorbachev at that point (or for that matter, West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl) expected so soon the collapse of East Germany or the speed of German unification.[2] The first concrete assurances by Western leaders on NATO began on January 31, 1990, when West German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher opened the bidding with a major public speech at Tutzing, in Bavaria, on German unification. The U.S. Embassy in Bonn (see Document 1) informed Washington that Genscher made clear “that the changes in Eastern Europe and the German unification process must not lead to an ‘impairment of Soviet security interests.’ Therefore, NATO should rule out an ‘expansion of its territory towards the east, i.e. moving it closer to the Soviet borders.’” The Bonn cable also noted Genscher’s proposal to leave the East German territory out of NATO military structures even in a unified Germany in NATO.[3] ... Read entire article at National Security Archive ** Source: https://www.historynewsnetwork.org/article/documents-show-gorbachev-was-assured-us-wouldnt-ex

"Possibly" is the best you got. For any audience members that may not be sure as to what robosmith is referring to, I imagine it's a word in the title of an article from the mainstream media publication The Daily Mail that I quoted. The full title is "Estonian Foreign Ministry confirms authenticity of leaked phone call discussing how Kiev snipers who shot protesters were possibly hired by Ukraine's new leaders". My response is that that title is just the tip of the iceberg. Even the Daily Mail article itself suggests that far from just a possibility, it is in fact probably the truth. Once again quoting from said article: ** Leaked phone call suggests anti-government protesters hired the snipers Call between EU's foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton and Estonia's foreign affairs minister Urmas Paet Paet appears to claim opposition leaders hired the snipers that killed 94 By JOHN HALL Published: 13:14 EST, 5 March 2014 | Updated: 04:28 EST, 6 March 2014 Estonia has confirmed the authenticity of a leaked telephone call between its foreign minister and an EU chief which suggested the sniper killings in Ukraine last month were ordered by the new coalition. The 11-minute call between the EU's foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton and her Estonian counterpart Urmas Paet was made on February 25 in the aftermath of the massacre. During the call, Paet claims a doctor told him both protesters and police were shot by snipers during clashes in Kiev allegedly on the orders of the opposition. ** I also notice that robosmith never answered the question I asked him, nor said a word about the -other- article I linked to. Once more, the question and the other article: ** So, as I asked you before, why do think the EU and the Ukrainian government were so disintereted in investigating this evidence? As I also wrote in the past, this UK Daily Mail article wasn't the only article that strongly suggested that Yanukovych's government wasn't behind the killings. An article from Global Research also did that, citing an Italian documentary that interviewed 3 snipers of Georgian nationality who claimed to have participated in the massacre. That article can be seen here: https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-hidden-truth-about-ukraine-italian-documentary-bombshell-evidence-kiev-euromaidan-snipers-kill-demonstrators/5619684 **

That is a meaningless assurance then. Sadly, I agree with you. U.S. officials' statements are generally worthless. That was not my statement. Ofcourse not, it was mine. I'm pretty sure what you're -trying- to say is that my response to your statement suggests I misinterpreted yours. So, by all means, tell me how Mr. Baker's statements on NATO expansion during his February 9, 1990 meeting with Gorbachev were anything other than worthless. I'll quote from an article from the National Security Archive on exactly what Mr. Baker said to Gorbachev so you can appreciate the context: ** Not once, but three times, Baker tried out the “not one inch eastward” formula with Gorbachev in the February 9, 1990, meeting. He agreed with Gorbachev’s statement in response to the assurances that “NATO expansion is unacceptable.” Baker assured Gorbachev that “neither the President nor I intend to extract any unilateral advantages from the processes that are taking place,” and that the Americans understood that “not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.” (See Document 6) ** Full article: https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

When folks like you demand we pretend the Gulf of Mexico isn't we just laugh our asses off.

Says the guy who has to make up fake quotes Because he can't argue with the truth. Speaking about respect, Everyone here recognizes you as a drunk loud with no brains and an inability to cope mentally with when he loses an argument. Do you really think anybody cares what you think about them respect-wise? It would be like being highly concerned with a dung beetle thought of you

If only they could learn from such a shrewd businessman as yourself, who tripled the value of his home with a credit card

I'm sure most normal conservatives do care about their own personal responsibility but when national or partisan responsibility is called for blaming others seems to be the default setting. And this is not just a recent phenomenon conservative governments have always preferred to take the war on drugs to the suppliers. It's always been their fault - we're the victims here. The reason nothing has changed in this approach simply seems to come down to the inability of politicians, their parties and hard-boiled base of support to admit they might have been wrong. Of course if anyone did admit it was wrong someone might be held liable for the massive numbers of deaths and ruined economies caused by waging the war in other people's countries.

We had a recreational property in the US for nearly 30 years and after we sold it we used to go to SoCal for 3 months in the winter. I worked in the US for five years contracted to a Japanese company. I used to laugh at people who said the US is the only country we really had to fear. I'm not laughing now, I'm one of them.

The law in Iowa makes the point I just did, that it is for medicinal purposes. It is not so that minors can drink alcohol just to drink and party or get drunk. Even then... I am highly dubious that the Child Protective laws would not apply to getting drunk with your parents. No, medical decisions are not by default a private matter when we are dealing with those medical decisions being carried out by a highly regulated professional health care industry. The medical industry is not anarchy. We have many laws regarding this and standards of care. Just because you want to kill yourself... you can't. Parents are also prevented from doing harm to their kids... they can't just decide to let them die, prevent care, etc... And again... we are talking about CHILDREN. They do not have the capacity to consent to such things, nor are parents allowed to harm their children in many ways. No, not mostly at all. That is maybe 10% of the discussion, but allowing children to be mutilated is certainly one of the most impactful aspects of this. As I said before, these are children, they do not have the capacity to consent to these choices nor do parents have the capacity to consent to harming their children either. You are conflating general mental health issues with very specifically talking about gender affirming care. No one is "screened" for being transgender and I would 10000000% oppose such nonsense. That is no longer providing care when needed, it is absurdity in search of a problem. How exactly is this harmful? This is a law specifically dealing with the madness going on in schools where teachers and administrators are hiding that they are providing gender affirmation or care to their children without their consent. And schools should not be providing any kind of mental health care without parental consent. Most schools require signed permission slips just to give a kid Tylenol, but sure, they should totally be allowed to engage in changing a kids gender without telling the parents. So... your issue with with tax payer funded schools then? Meanwhile, in reality, schools have sports and they are funded by taxes as part of a kids education. So, you are just fine with passing laws that stipulate in these programs, that boys who think they are girls can't compete with the girls (e.g. girls are not forced to play against boys?) Do you support any of the Title 9 legislation meant to level the playing field in sports to give girls equal opportunities? This is a strawman. I made no argument about assualts, but there are examples of this happening. The point is privacy. The problem being fixed is that the folks pushing the transgender madness are insisting on changing those policies and laws to force boys who think they are girls into those traditionally girl only spaces. Good, because that is exactly what left wing places are doing. Ah... this is the same game being played by those pushing this madness, they are equating transgenders to being gay and you are once again betraying yourself. You claim to not believe this stuff... but now you are here pushing the position that does. No one is being "outed" if you really believe what you claim you do. These are kids with a mental issue and it is not the schools place to hide that from their parents and "affirm" those kids in a delusion. Do you support a school actually going through with a students request here or just not telling parents the request was made? Moving forward, you shall henceforth refer to me in all of your responses as Your Royal Highness and my pronouns are "The Amazing"

You did. You distinctly said that the destruction is one-sided. You claimed the Israelis did it all as if it wasn't a conflict with two sides. You didn't mention the attack that precipitated it, you didn't mention the militants fighting in those streets that led to them being turned into rebel, I noticed you neglected to comment on the rockets being fired from the rooftops. If you want to recant now that's fine but that is absolutely what you said. Just hate the Israelis then? The active agent is Hamas. They started the war, they chose to hide behind the civilian population and build hundreds of miles of tunnels under the cities that required demolition, they could have surrendered at any time. Trump was not the president, nor did the person who was the president start the war or dictate the conditions I get that trump is generally irritating for many people to listen to and that's fair. But what is not fair is to suggest that somehow the united states is responsible for some sort of humanitarian crisis as a result of two countries engaging in a conflict that the other side started.

Because blaming America's beautiful beautiful corporations is woke - like going after Big Tobacco, who we know were treated horribly...it was a horrible awful witch hunt. Not withstanding Big Vax of course.

A lot more nationalist than I was a few weeks ago.

This is good news. Wokeism is vile

He's never seen a word of CNN propaganda that he didn't instantly incorporate incraporate into his daily drivel.

That’s about where I’m at. If Canadians have become so soft and dependent on big government that they aren’t willing to assert Canadian culture and make the sacrifices to defend it, let the Yanks run it. It might be better than the current arrangement. We can’t even win at men’s hockey anymore. WTF?!

You really don’t understand how despised your country is in Canada. It isn’t just about Trump anymore, it’s all you Aholes who are letting him get away with it.

For the win.

Weirdo.

lol. Now THIS is funny:

Some people are too simpleminded to distinguish between American people and their govt policies. Posted in both sides of the border threads. Meanwhile, I suggest a new NHL policy for Canadians. Cheer loudly rather than sing the Canadian anthem. Sit in dead silence with middle fingers extended for the US anthem.

Well, I will take this as half a victory as you are not conceding how bad of a point you made, rather just saying you are not interested in trying to defend it.

Trump is the major factor. He can seriously damage Poilievre’s chances if he goes all out against us. In that case, there’ll be support for the Libs right across the political spectrum including from many who haven’t voted in a while and disillusioned Liberal voters who might have sat this one out. Plus Danielle Smith might be a little preoccupied with events closer to home to play at Trump whisperer again. Best case for PP is that this round of tariffs is the last, the whole disgraceful story peters out and he glides in on what’s left of his lead. Has anybody asked Trump about the political effect he is having up here?

Unburdened by what has been 🤣 I LOVE it!

Don't count on that continuing. Our depressed dollar has made the US much less attractive and I don't think you understand how really p*ssed off Canadians are at how they are being treated by people they had always assumed were friends. Never underestimate the animosity of a betrayed partner. We are in Mexico and have friends here from Quebec. They say that all the Quebecers they know who have gone to Florida for years and own homes there are trying to dump their properties and leave. The result is a glut of homes on the market and depressed prices for everyone, not just Canadians.

Trump’s tariffs on businesses and ordinary people will be spent on tax giveaways to the ultra-rich and the deportation industry.

You love to buy into their bullshit, don't you? Every car they make loses sales if it doesn't offer a hybrid version, PHEVs are EVs and the sale of BEVs is still increasing every year. You can't go outside without seeing a Tesla within 10 minutes. So if you wish to judge electrification as a failure you're nuts. Canadians are buying EVs at a bigger rate than Americans, in spite of bigger US incentives. Or are you hoping Trump f*cks over the Canadian sales so good you can stick out you chest and say told ya so?