johnnybangkok

1 hour ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Another totally false assertion, and easily provable. Let me guess, you read the Guardian article that claimed Trump was too scared to give Nancy a nickname? It was untrue, all of it.

 

As per Wikipedia Trump gave 3 nicknames to Nancy Pelosi.

 

High Tax, High Crime Nancy Pelosi

MS-13 Lover Nancy Pelosi

Nancy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nicknames_used_by_Donald_Trump

 

Now in light of her flitting off to Hawaii and the Caribbean during a government shutdown over the border emergency he should give her some name to remind the electorate of her appallingly selfish and uncaring behaviour. Air-miles Nancy or something similar?

 

 This nickname giving by Trump has been another demonstration of his genius political acumen. It turned the entire Dem party into the cast of a 3 stooges movie, complete with boings, bells and whistles (as if any further ridicule was needed!!!!).

 

 

'Now in light of her flitting off to Hawaii and the Caribbean during a government shutdown over the border emergency he should give her some name to remind the electorate of her appallingly selfish and uncaring behaviour (sic). Air-miles Nancy or something similar?'

So in your totally unbiased and well balanced opinion this is all the fault of Nancy and the Democrats?

So who would you blame in the following scenario:-

A neighbor of yours comes up to you one day and says they want to grow a big row of Italian Cyprus trees that grow to 50 ft between your two properties. However they need your permission as it will block out much of your natural light. You refuse as it doesn't suit your purpose, both blocking light and ruining your lovely view. The neighbor pleads and begs but you are not having any of it, as is your prerogative. So they kidnap your children and hold them hostage until you agree to the trees.

So is this your fault for a) not agreeing to erecting the trees in the first place and/or b) also for not negotiating with your neighbor once they have kidnapped your kids?

This is how nonsensical your argument sounds.

6 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Well this is interesting. Just in the last week we had the Buzfeed fiasco and it's hysterical and gleefull coverage by news outlets. We then had the fake narrative that the racist catholic kids were bullying an elderly native American and the gleefull and hysterical coverage by news outlets - until social media users who had seen the whole footage discovered the opposite was true. It was recently exposed that CNN's 2014 journalist of the year award winner Claas Relotius was a total and complete fraud and made up stories to suit the extreme left bias of mainstream media, and has since admitted he needs help for his addiction to making up fake news. And yet, implausibly we now read that nationalist leaders(I am reading Trump as intended by the author) are the liars and that the fake news is the truth. This is stretching the bounds of responsible journalism.  Trump's tweets are worth more than the whole of MSM combined.

 Now as to where the doomsday clock should be, who knows. But thanks to Trump the Guam citizens are not hiding in bunkers waiting for the minutemen to start raining down on them. Might I humbly suggest that in reality we are at slightly less of a dire situation than last year. I know, I know, one mustn't give Trump any credit for anything, orange man bed etc etc, but really, we are a bit better than at the end of 44's term.

It is easy to cherry pick situations to suit your narrative but the cold hard facts are according to The Fact Checker Database (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-claims-database/?utm_term=.cdf11d0088c6), even before 2018 began, President Trump had already made 1,989 false and misleading claims. However, by the end of 2018, Trump really surpassed himself and had accumulated more than 7,600 untruths — averaging more than 15 erroneous claims a day This is almost triple the rate from the year before and vastly more than any other president in history.

But yeah you go and tell us about the 2 incidents you mentioned (one of which is still highly debatable).

Your beloved leader lies multiple times on a DAILY basis, invented the phrase Fake News (because they have a tendency to point these things out) and has divided a country like never before. 

But yeah. The main stream media is to blame. 

2 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Another example of extreme TDS, absolutely nothing he accomplishes will be acknowledged beyond adolescent memes. Seems like some liked it better with threats of missiles fired at US soil.

I promise you that if Trump does manage to accomplish anything meaningful with NK then I will personally come on this forum, admit I was wrong (something you never hear from a Trumpster) and praise the man to the high heavens. Us libtards are good like that.

BUT since NK has gone down this route on at least 6 other separate occasions and NEVER actually dismantled any nukes or come remotely close to denuclearisation, I think my humility might remain intact.    

In other words 'I believe I can string this idiot along long enough to get my missiles working well whilst not giving him a anything of real merit. Once my missiles can reach the US then we can REALLY talk.'

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I served a long time ago, and I can honestly say that if a "transgender" or anyone that even looked a bit "that way" had actually joined up, s/he would have had a hard time of it- they'd never had been accepted, along with homosexuals.

I don't know any macho guys that serve in the teeth corps now, but I can't see their attitude having changed much. Warriors aren't into touchy feely much, and the battlefield is no place for political correctness.

Apparently, since women have been admitted into more general military roles, the sexual abuse situation has risen dramatically, and only to be expected, given it's guys that kill people for a living.

Nowadays I couldn't care less if a guy wants to get his bits cut off and wear a dress, but I'm a lot older now than I was when I was in the green machine.

 

IMO, if enough TGs wanted to join up, as long as they could pass all the tests that the guys do ( no easy passes ), they could have a special unit with just them in it.

 

If they are allowed in, NO WAY they should be given any special treatment, drugs or surgery, and be assigned as the sex that they are genetically.

By your own admission you served a 'long time ago' yet here you are, supplanting other commentors who have much more recent experience (and are saying this isn't an issue) with your own bias and out of date thinking. You say that homosexuals aren't accepted and comment that 'sexual abuse' is to 'be expected' -  a truly horrendous thing to say.

You want people segregated because other people cannot control their urges and the fault of all of this doesn't lie in the hands of the perpetrators but in the hands of the victims.

Like many Trump fans (of which I know you are a fervent one), your thinking belongs in the 1950's and is so seriously backward as to not be remotely funny any more. 

You have a choice in life to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem. It's obvious which way you decided to go.   

4 hours ago, Cobby said:

I do not understand why all the fuss

its better to have a no deal 

as a country we can stand alone we can survive very well 

england dose not need any one else 

we import 70% more than we export 

its Europe that needs us 

German cars 

French cars

itslian cars

spanish cars 

then it’s the wine

all foods the list goes on 

a no deal means the whole world will deal with us 

imigration

we can choose who we want to come to England 

???????????????????????????? 

it’s time now to put the great back into Britten 

 

and England to rule the waves again 

Long live 

 

 

 England ???????????????????????????? 

I'm guessing you're not the sharpest tool in the box with your 'little England' nonsense and primary school understanding of world economics but you have demonstrated something that keeps coming up more and more these days from Brexit fans and that's your willingness to embrace a 'no deal Brexit'.

This is something that never fails to amaze me about you Leave fans. At no stage in the referendum was a 'no deal Brexit' even mentioned never mind championed but here you all are in your myopic approach to getting out of Europe at any cost that you are now actively promoting possibly the very worst scenario for the UK imaginable. Literally everyone;  politicians from all sides, economists, business leaders even the pro-Brexit media all readily admit that a no-deal Brexit would be a catastrophe for the UK but you in your little Britain bubble think it's ok because 'they need us more than we need them'. I hate to bust said bubble but they don't.

Having turned down May's Brexit deal (the one she was always likely to get) because it's not the milk and honey deal you were all promised, you would rather see the UK descend into chaos with a no-deal than admit that this was always going to be a fiasco and Brexit was never going to end up well for the UK. 

If you fancy educating yourself a bit, please read this   https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/11/24/the-truth-about-a-no-deal-brexit and perhaps start understanding the precipice the UK is teetering on as we speak and maybe, just maybe try to become part of the solution rather than the problem.

47 minutes ago, evadgib said:

1. Reunification would be my preferred option but I cannot see it in my lifetime; at least not on terms agreed by both sides.

2. Gallilao and our share in various other projects & buildings wipe this slate clean.

3. Cameron promised (and we voted) OUT.

5(4!). Any drop renders the likes of the NHS better able to serve everyone else. If you're referring to Doctors etc I see no reason why anything should change.

6. They're under a different umbrella (& Ours are by far the best in Europe!)

 

We (UK & Ireland) would arguably be better off applying to join the US as one or two states than we ever will be by staying in the EU and in doing so would solve Irish unification and neuter the SNP in a single stroke.

 

I might give ol' moggy a ring! ????

1. Reunification would be my preferred option but I cannot see it in my lifetime; at least not on terms agreed by both sides.

- So no solution then as that DEFINITELY isn't going to work. Just ask the DUP and the whole of the protestant population of NI.

2. Gallilao and our share in various other projects & buildings wipe this slate clean.

- Galileo (which i assume you mean) costs 13.7 Billion. That just leaves approx. 24 billion in the divorce settlement and the cost of EU pension contributions, security, science and the many, many other EU projects the UK is committed to.  

3. Cameron promised (and we voted) OUT.

Not really an answer but the gist is you just want us to leave our biggest trading partner with no deal and no customs agreements? That sounds like it'll work well for the UK economy. 

5(4!). Any drop renders the likes of the NHS better able to serve everyone else. If you're referring to Doctors etc I see no reason why anything should change.

63,000 NHS staff in England are EU nationals - Just 800 EU nurses came to the UK last year, compared to 6,382 in 2016/17 and 9,389 in the year of the Brexit vote. Nearly 4,000 EU nurses alone left last year. That's what changing even if you don't want to acknowledge it. 

6. They're under a different umbrella (& Ours are by far the best in Europe!)

No they're not. It is through the EU that you exchange criminal records and passenger records and work together on counter-terrorism. This could be a major problem if we have any contradictory laws that don't match. 

We (UK & Ireland) would arguably be better off applying to join the US as one or two states than we ever will be by staying in the EU and in doing so would solve Irish unification and neuter the SNP in a single stroke.

Wow, just wow!! You don't want us anywhere near the EU but you would gladly see us hitched to Trump as a vassal of the US? Incredible, just simply incredible.  

So in summary you have no real concrete, workable ideas? It's just 'lets leave and work out the problems after'.

That's why sane people don't want Brexit. You don't have a better alternative.

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Of course it was, but I was responding to animalmagic's attack on Trump and included a reference to the Kurds in my post. Your off topic post had ZERO to do with the topic.

It has everything to do with this post.

Saudi Arabia is currently conducting a war in the Yemen literally killing thousands and giving rise to one of the worst humanitarian disasters ever seen; they are killing journalists with impunity and are guilty of some of the worst human rights abuses in the world yet they don't get 'warnings' or reprisal from The Donald because, you know, they're mates and they've got oil.

Turkey merely threatens Kurdish militia (not condoning it, just stating facts) and all hell breaks loose.

The hypocrisy is something truly to behold.   

2 hours ago, jesimps said:

No such thing as "Hard Brexiteers", just people who want the government to deliver what they voted for and won. You people just want to muddy the waters to sabotage Brexit, the choice was "Remain" or "Leave", and leave won. Now where's the "rubbish" in that?

'Leave means leave' - 'remoaners' - 'we won, you lost' - blah, blah, blah. 

I've noticed a VERY common denominator with you Leave lot in that you are all up for the brain dead slogans but very short on the ideas of how to handle the immense problems that Brexit has thrown up.

So I'll give you all a chance. Please let me know what YOU would suggest to sort out the following:-

1. The Northern Ireland border.

2. Britain's financial obligations to the EU?

3. The EU single market & customs union and the subsequent insistence from the EU that entry to the single market/customs union also comes with free movement of EU nationals?

5. The drop in the number of EU immigrants and it's effect (already being felt) on the NHS, social care and construction?  

6. Security - once EU law has no more effect on the UK, how do you handle things like Europol and the European Arrest Warrants that both require EU law to work?  

That's only 6 of then many, many, many problems.

I'm all ears.

3 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Why bother with anymore elections ever? It was all decided last time!

 

Or should we just keep having them till you like the result then stop?

 

Democracy - as long as you like the result !

Many of you guys that still go on with ‘the vote must be respected’ stance and ‘leave means leave’ surely must be questioning the validity of this argument. There was lies from both sides but it is now clearly evident that the Leave argument is no where near what was promised.

‘£350m a week for the NHS’ -  This was one of the most infamous claims of the 2016 referendum campaign, famously written on the side of a bus. The claim read: “We send the EU £350m a week to the EU. Let’s fund our NHS instead”. This has widely been debunked with even Nigel Farage admitting it was a load of hogwash. Papers published by the Office for Budget Responsibility, a Treasury watchdog, predict the United Kingdom will have to still be paying the same amount of £37.1bn up to 2023 and since the UK has still to pay its share of EU pension contributions, large payments will continue until 2064.

‘We’ll take control of the UK’s borders’’ - There was never any chance that Brexit could lead to an end to immigration as it only controls the flow of EU nationals. An estimated 219,000 citizens from other EU countries immigrated to the UK in the year to June 2018, and about 145,000 emigrated abroad. So EU ‘net migration’ was around 74,000—the lowest level recorded since the year to September 2012. However latest figures show that 285,000 people come to the UK each year from countries outside the EU. Most immigrants have always come from countries outside the EU, and that hasn’t changed. If the government really wanted to stop immigration, it could have could stop it already. Britain has always had this ability.

‘We’ll get a trade deal with the EU as it needs us more than we need it’ - The one bit of being part of the EU which almost everyone likes is the ability to trade with European countries so the Leave campaign promised (and many of you still are) that the EU needs the UK more than the UK needs the EU. This is of course nonsense as the trade disparity is immense. It is of course possible to be in the single market even though you’ve left the EU IF you’re willing to accept that the EU makes the rules and one of those rules is the free movement of EU nationals. Another sticking point for all the xenophobes.

Northern Ireland – Johnson, Gove and the rest of the Leave campaign promised “no change to the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic”. But how was that ever going to be possible? At the moment, there is freedom of movement between Northern Ireland and Ireland. The UK says it wants to end freedom of movement with the EU when Brexit takes place and given that Northern Ireland is in the UK and Ireland is in the EU, that means ending freedom of movement between Northern Ireland and Ireland - doesn’t it?

The economy will not suffer because of Brexit – Possibly one of the most blatant lies of them all. The Government’s latest economic forecasts - which they tried to keep secret - suggest the economy will be smaller by two per cent if we stay in the single market, five per cent if we sign a trade deal and eight per cent if we fall back on WTO rules. Many economists actually think this is very conservative. As I’m sure many of you living here in Thailand have seen, the pound continues to fall and everyone but everyone is predicting a fall in GDP coupled with growing inflation. If that’s good I’d hate to see your definition of bad.

And the end result is – a No Deal Brexit - Separate assessments from Whitehall and the Bank of England have painted a grim picture of the impact of a no-deal Brexit on the UK economy. In a nutshell, the pound could plummet, inflation may soar and Britain’s growth would nosedive should we crash out of the bloc. When did a no deal Brexit even become a thing? Was that in the Leave campaigns election manifesto?

It’s like you Leave supporters are merrily walking towards a cliff and despite people screaming and shouting at you that there is indeed a cliff ahead of you and you are going to fall off and do yourself a lot of harm, you would rather choose to ignore them because, ‘well I set out on this course and I’ll be damned if anyone is going to persuade me otherwise’.

As a business man myself, if I entered an agreement with a client that promised me all of this at the beginning but 2 years later I ended up with what is now the ACTUAL deal, I rightly would be running miles from it. And if they said ‘well you agreed to the deal’ I would very rightly point out that THIS IS NOT THE DEAL I AGREED TO and walk away.

It amazes me that so many of you just can’t.

12 hours ago, Jack100 said:

As a naïve non American  , can I ask what work these immigrants actually do when they hop across the border ?

And who employs them  ?

I dont ever remember seeing or hearing  any kind of documentary or discussion  about this .

You have inadvertently hit on one of the many problems with illegal immigrants and the possible solution to the problem.

Someone has answered where these people work, but it has been known for quite some time that the solution to illegal immigration is not to try and stop them getting into the country (an almost impossible task) but to stop the market for illegal immigration by going after the employers rather than the workers. There are currently systems in place that could do this if only there was enough finance to police it (and $5 billion would go a long way to help that) and enough political will to roll it out across the country.

A wall is not going to stop illegal immigration; others have pointed out quite correctly that the majority of illegal immigrants are visa over-stayers. During 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) found that 701,900 immigrants with visas remained in the U.S. past their expected departure date which is more than double the 303,916 immigrants apprehended at the border during that same time frame. The report by the Center for Migration Studies found this pattern to be true for every year since 2007.

This is why so many people are against the wall. Not only will it not be effective in stopping illegal immigration (as the majority are not using the border crossing and airplanes can get over walls), but the vast amount of money to build and maintain the wall (estimated at anything between $25 billion and $70 billion) would be much better spent looking at  more effective solutions - such as going after employers. The problem is that these solutions don't play to his panicked, xenophobic base who believe that illegal immigrants are the root of all evil.

Sane people aren't protesting the wall because they don't want controls over illegal immigration; they are protesting it because it just doesn't make sense.