Derek 2.0 Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 39 minutes ago, bcsapper said: I reckon they're not going to be a problem. You missed the point......those you suggest have infiltrated them (FBI etc), have already be infiltrated by the Oath Keepers, both through serving and retired members. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 BTW, I once read the reason the US and Canada put their security on each other border ,in each other country is because the US military said they wouldn't turn on their own, not sure what Canada feels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 7 minutes ago, Derek 2.0 said: You missed the point......those you suggest have infiltrated them (FBI etc), have already be infiltrated by the Oath Keepers, both through serving and retired members. No, I didn't miss the point, I disagreed with it. I reckon half of them are pretending. There are no checks on membership. They let anyone in. Who's to say whose side any of them are on, really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 9 minutes ago, Topaz said: BTW, I once read the reason the US and Canada put their security on each other border ,in each other country is because the US military said they wouldn't turn on their own, not sure what Canada feels. 'put their security on each other's borders'? I'm not even sure what that means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 12 minutes ago, bcsapper said: Who's to say whose side any of them are on, really? Oh, you mean just like the United States Military and all levels of law enforcement in the United States? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 SMALLC I read that when the US and Canada decide to put their military on each other border OR when it calls for the military to be involved in the US and Canada border...the US military told the feds they would not fire on their own people Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 TOPAZ, where did you read that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 Canada does not have much military to put on anyone's border. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 10 hours ago, Argus said: Toronto the city librarian makes about $240k per year. What a completely absurd statement. You are giving the salary of the equivalent of the CEO of a $190 million corporation, one of the largest library systems in the world. This 'librarian' is not the nice lady in horn rimed glasses that checks out your books. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 I was going to mention the same, Impact, but, somehow, I doubt he's swayed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 (edited) The next revolution in the US will involve a widespread rejection of corporate money in politics And we're starting to see it now with the rise of Trump, the almost-win by Bernie Sanders over a "shure-bet" but corrupt and bought-off Hillary, and in the fallout after Hillary's election loss with calls by those in the Democratic Party to gut the elite and paid-off leadership that they see as having helped lose the election from an electorate that doesn't like or trust them. I don't think this will be a very violent revolution. I think the Republican and Democratic parties can possibly be reformed with grassroots pressure. The difference between the 1st US revolution is that they were fighting against a tyrant king and his armies. But now the people are fighting against corporations and wealthy elite, so essentially money. This means much less violence is needed, all the people need is to voice their opinions within the democracy that exists and looks for certain laws or behaviour to change. If politicians see their power threatened and job in jeopardy because voters want change then politicians will have no choice but to reject corporate money. Edited November 13, 2016 by Moonlight Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 That might follow, except that Trump is far more corrupt than Clinton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesHackerMP Posted November 13, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 20 hours ago, bcsapper said: They have membership without any kind of background checks, according to Wiki. I reckon they're not going to be a problem. Edit> They remind of those guys who used to wander around New York and Los Angeles and such, threatening to protect people. I forget what they were called. Who has membership without background checks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesHackerMP Posted November 13, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 20 hours ago, bcsapper said: They have membership without any kind of background checks, according to Wiki. I reckon they're not going to be a problem. Edit> They remind of those guys who used to wander around New York and Los Angeles and such, threatening to protect people. I forget what they were called. Who has membership without background checks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesHackerMP Posted November 13, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 And Graham, money has always been a part of politics, and not just in the United States. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 5 minutes ago, JamesHackerMP said: Who has membership without background checks? An organization known as the Oathkeepers, which I was discussing with Derek 2.0. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 3 hours ago, Smallc said: That might follow, except that Trump is far more corrupt than Clinton. Based on what exactly? We all agree they are both smelly but how do you know Trump is worse? Technically his dealings were never when he was in office as a politician, Clinton's appear 100% based on her being in office or connected to office so in that respect she's "worse" for me. Trump did all he did out front for himself.. Clinton did it with all kinds of covers and worse still, in the name of the people Their both rapists so to speak but Hilary wore a nun's uniform while Trump did it at a nudist colony bumping into people, its a fine line, they both violated people, but with one you saw it coming, the other you had cover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeferMadness Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 3 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said: The next revolution in the US will involve a widespread rejection of corporate money in politics And we're starting to see it now with the rise of Trump, t Your contention is that the US is rejecting money in politics by electing a trust-fund baby - billionaire with highly questionable business ethics? That's absurd. The very idea only shows that people are not paying attention. Trump is a pretend reformer who will use the presidency to enrich himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeferMadness Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 If there is to be a revolution in America in the near future, it will almost certainly be guided from the presidency. What type of revolution will it be? Who can know? Since Trump ran a campaign based almost entirely on rhetoric (much of it bigoted) and since he is already distancing himself from the few actual promises he made, he's free to do almost anything. There is a concerted effort in the media to normalize Trump and play down fears of what he might do. A commonly heard theme is that that congress or the courts will keep him in line. Some have claimed that he will be impeached. Given that he's already been counted out by the Republicans and the Democrats (and has outmaneuvered both), I don't put much stock in the ability of American institutions to control him. This is a vindictive, thin-skinned guy who ran a campaign mostly based on blaming other people for America's woes, has praised authoritarian leaders like Putin, whose administration is already reaching out to European fascist movements, and who has promised to walk away from international agreements. if you're not concerned, I don't think you're paying attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 The closest we've come to a coup d'etat was when Alexander Haig and Henry Kissinger calmed Nixon down and ensured that he wouldn't do anything really stupid in the weeks leading up to his forced resignation. Normally you'd think of it as being what a 20 year old college student does to pull a student upset about an exam off the ledge, but this involves a President. Oh, and I forgot, the likely promise by Vice President Ford, which I would have supported, to promise a presidential pardon if he left office peacefully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 13, 2016 Report Share Posted November 13, 2016 1 hour ago, Rue said: Based on what exactly? We all agree they are both smelly but how do you know Trump is worse? Technically his Reality? Things that actually happen? http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/10/donald-trump-scandals/474726/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 14, 2016 Report Share Posted November 14, 2016 59 minutes ago, ReeferMadness said: if you're not concerned, I don't think you're paying attention. Many are not concerned because it is exactly what they want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 14, 2016 Report Share Posted November 14, 2016 Many are not thinking clearly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 14, 2016 Report Share Posted November 14, 2016 2 minutes ago, Smallc said: Many are not thinking clearly. No, they are just not thinking like you. It's their right to do so in their own country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.