johnnybangkok

24 minutes ago, lovelomsak said:

Thanks I always thought transgender was used for both. No need to specify which sex they identity with.Shows how much I know abut that huh. I just assumed if the trans was dressed as a woman it was a male transgender and if the trans was dressed as a man  it was a woman.I quess it needs to be more specific than I thought thanks again. 

  Now I think about it my theory was really off if every one shows up in t shirt and jeans huh.

At least you are trying to learn which is far more than most on this forum.

3 hours ago, lovelomsak said:

Correct me if I am wrong please.

  But to call Christine a transgender woman is not PC . Should she not be addressed as transgender and leave it at that. Not transgender woman or transgender man.. Transgender is transgender it speaks for itself.

It's about what they identify so a woman who used to be a man but identifies as a woman is a transgender women and of course a transgender man is a woman who now identifies as a man. It's correct and in context. 

1 hour ago, yougivemebaby said:

It’s funny to listen to all the ignorant sheeple following the lead of the anti Trump American media. Must be mostly old angry Europeans that follow the lead of bitter Merkel who is completely destroying all of Europe with her open door policy. 

Edit: people also don’t fully understand the motives behind the tariffs either. Most haven’t done their reasearch. Most imported steel originates from China in the first place. America (or most countries) doesn’t want low quality Chinese steel. So places like Canada would import Chinese steel into Canada and put their label on it selling it as Canadian steel. Lower quality. Lowery cost. High profits scamming American companies and government. Many places were doing this and trump put a stop to it. American steel is much better quality and benefits all Americans. 

Are you trying to defend Trump? Do you need to argue your point with using well know Trump regurgitates? Then lets play Trump Defending!!

Just simply choose from the following list when trying to argue your point:-

Hillary - Obama - Democrats - CNN - Sheeple - Snowflake - Libtards - China Bad -  USA, USA - Fake News - Immigrants - Minorities Bad -  Muslims Bad 

This simple game of defending is fun for all the family and will absolutely guarantee that the Cheeto in Chief will never be held responsible for anything that comes out of his mouth or the actions of any of his family or associates. 

(Warning: this game may add to your already high levels of cognitive dissonance and may ruin your country for generations to come) 

1 hour ago, EVENKEEL said:

Whoever that controls space will be the new Super Power. 

Constructing a grammatically correct sentence could also be considered a super power. 

7 minutes ago, Time Traveller said:

And I suspect you are still crying that Hilary didn't win the election.....

Look bro, I totally understand the Adam Smith argument about benefits of international trade v. mercantilism, but what does global economics (globalism) have to do with this?.....use your brain, The President's role is to focus on the interests of AMERICANs....if American companies choose to enhance "bloody shareholder value" by sending jobs to Asia, then they are not benefiting American workers, are they? Trump is the logical choice if you are opposed to globalism and seeing your job moved overseas.  

Global economics has everything to do with this. Companies like HD trade to a worldwide market so obviously they become less competitive when their production costs increase and it's got to be particularly galling when that increase in costs come from the actions of your own President.

POTUS role is indeed to focus on 'the interests of America' so by your own logic how can this frankly stupid trade war be in the interest of Americans? So far HD and other manufacturers are suffering and with a $12 billion subsidy to the farmers (who somehow get different treatment than HD), they too are obviously suffering.

The role of POTUS should be to help US manufacturers not add $100 million to their bottom line.

And if The Orange Buffoon is ' the logical choice if you are opposed to globalism and seeing your job moved overseas', shouldn't he be leading by example by getting all of his own manufacturing immediately changed from the overseas manufacturing that he currently does? A small example of his hypocrisy include:

.

It's really not that difficult to work out. Companies have a responsibility to maximise profits to ensure competitiveness in their chosen markets. This also ensures stability and continued employment for their workforce. HD are not doing this because they want to, they are doing this because The Orange Buffoons tariffs are making it a lot costlier to buy steel in the US. No tariffs - no need to ramp up production elsewhere.

HD have no responsibility to politicians but by singling them out this way as somehow 'unpatriotic' rather than HD just doing what he is forcing them to do, the Orange Buffoon is taking an active role in severely effecting their sales (perhaps to the point of bankruptcy) which cannot be in the remit of any POTUS. Surely the easier route would be to incentivise them through lower corporation tax or other incentives to keep production in the US. This smacks of double standards as he did somehow manage to find $12 billion for the farmers who were also suffering from this badly thought out trade war.

Deflection. Deflection. Deflection. 

It's so obvious that Trump is only doing this to appeal to his base with a mixture of misguided patriotism and more than a hint of racism to take away from all the other legal issues that are mounting up.

Do you see any tweets from him about the far-right protests in Washington coming up?  Actual Nazi's are going to be marching through a major city. The same people who were complicit in the murder of a counter protester in Charlottesville last year and what do you get from Trump? 

Nothing. Nada. Zip.

But some black athletes making a peaceful protest over an important issue gets multiple tweets and 'Stand proudly for your National Anthem or be Suspended Without Pay!" (on a separate note, would someone pleeeese teach this man the correct use of capital letters).

That tells you all you need to know about Trump and if you're agreeing with him then you are no better than a deluded fool.  

46 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

There was a case to be made in just the reverse order.

Bush convinced Blair of WMD's allegedly based on US intelligence reports that were not shared with UK intelligence agencies. In fact the US intelligence report showed there was "no evidence" that Iraq had access to weapons of mass destruction. https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/george-bush-duped-tony-blair-into-backing-2003-iraq-war-says-gordon-brown-1771423

 

George Bush told Blair he was ready to “kick ass”. Blair laughed nervously, and talked of his “epitaph”. Bush urged the junior partner to have cojones – balls. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/04/phone-call-bush-blair-failed-iraq

This doesn't surprise me but it still doesn't forgive Blair for exaggerating the findings from his own intelligence services. 

Everyone was out to prove that Iraq had WMD's and Blair just went along with it despite flimsy evidence from his own intel people who seemed to also want to back up the US.

42 minutes ago, mistral53 said:

RIGHT - whatever doesn't fit your narrative is ill informed.........lol

If the intelligence agencies would have wanted to be heard and clear about their findings, it would have been leaked to the press! The whole MIC wanted war, so they made sheet up on the go and got their war - happens all the time.........

It's ill informed because it's ill informed.

I'm not sure what country you are from but British intelligence is not in the habit of leaking their findings to the media (kinda negates why you are a spy agency in the first place) and the Chilcot Report (have a read it's easily Googleble) clearly states that the blame 'mostly' lies with Blair but the intelligence services were at fault for going along with his exaggerations and trying to prove his narrative. 

I agree that the US wanted war but can't agree that Britain wanted it. But Britain did indeed hand him exaggerated findings to justify it, which is more to do with Blair being Bush's lapdog than anything else. Blaming only the intelligence services like you did in your first post is ill informed.   

2 hours ago, mejomini said:

When will the U.S. stop listening to faulty intelligence from the Brits?  After WMD fiasco in Iraq, one would hope they would stay put until irrefutable proof was at hand. The Enquirer does not qualify.

What an ill informed thing to say.

The intelligence may have been suspect regarding WMD's but it was more Tony Blair presenting the assessment of this intelligence to parliament with a “certainty” not justified by the intelligence provided and then Bush picking it up with such zeel since he was looking for any and all excuses to finish what his father failed to do.

The Chilcot report didn't paint the intelligence services in the best of light more for the fact they didn't argue the faulty conclusions as vigorously as they could and that they went into the investigation with an assumption of guilt and then set about proving that guilt but the Chilcot report concludes: “The assessed intelligence had not established beyond doubt that Saddam Hussein had continued to produce chemical and biological weapons," yet Blair (and eventually Bush) just heard what they wanted to hear and ran with that.  

Although certainly not faultless, it was Blair and Bush who really created the Iraq war.

4 hours ago, nobodysfriend said:

Sorry but I think that this is too simple ... the russians would know that an autopsy would find the cause of death , they would know that by the use of a nerve agent that is exclusively produced in Russia , the world would say that it was the Russians who carried out the attack ... do they want this ? Definitely not .

And after the attack , they ,( the russians ) , would hide a bottle of this deadly poison in a house in London instead of destroying it ? Come on ... I do not think that they would be that stupid .

To me it looks like somebody wants to put the blame on the russians ... !

You are looking for a conspiracy when the most obvious answer is the correct one. 

Do you think Putin gives a damn about being found out about this sort of thing? He has assassinated many, many critics and the common theory is that he wants everyone to know that he is behind these killings as a deterrent to any more would-be opponents. By being so obvious he can even use your excuse of 'would I be that stupid!" and many (like you) would agree but as someone else pointed out in this tread, the British intelligence services have even overheard conversations to Moscow confirming 'the package was delivered" to add to all the other, mounting evidence.

A great deal of people much more knowledgeable than you or I have said it is Russia and you do not get the UK PM to confirm this unless she is pretty damn sure of the facts and you certainly don't get the US to back this up (as we all know how fond Trump is of Putin) without also having some pretty strong facts.

4 hours ago, mtls2005 said:

 

I guess it would be nice to know what was agreed upon in Singapore, and what the details are, then we can measure "performance".

 

Other than not testing nukes, which they already know work, or lobbing missiles, which they also know work, what exactly is "different"?

 

 

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. 

Trump got some much needed positive PR on the back of a 'no-deal' deal and now they are surprised when NK does exactly what they have being doing with Western powers for decades - agree something, deny that they agreed that, reverse what the other thought they agreed (although they didn't agree that anyway) and then do exactly the opposite.

The man is a fool. But unfortunately he is a dangerous one.

On 8/3/2018 at 3:58 PM, riclag said:

Off the cuff remarks by a citizen who pretends to be a politician! The video is just a small example of the nonsense that's been happening!They have called him a racist,pedophile,hitler,incest with his daughter,traitor,rapist,dictator,baby killer,fascist,Nazi!The media isn't the media,they are pretending to be . But I do think the three sides need to ratchet it down ,GOP,DEM's and the ...

42:00 -43:00

 

Are you a Republican? Do you need someone other than Trump to blame for Trumps own actions? Then lets play Trump Deflection!!

Just simply choose from the following list to use as a scapegoat for this mans action:-

Hillary - Obama - Democrats - CNN - Fake News - The Media - Immigrants - Minorities -  Muslims - Science - Mueller - Facts

This simple game of deflection is fun for all the family and will absolutely guarantee that the Cheeto in Chief will never be held responsible for anything that comes out of his mouth or the actions of any of his family or associates. 

(Warning: this game may add to your already high levels of cognitive dissonance and may ruin your country for generations to come) 

13 hours ago, Trouble said:

Let me get this straight.  If someone on a campaign staff meets with someone to dig up dirt on a political opponent and some consider it collusion,  or whatever, then there should be a lot of people in trouble. It just hasn't worked that way over the years as this is what campaigns do. It really doesn't bother me in the least as that's just politics like it or not.  Now if people are upset that it was because it was a meeting some Russian lawyer and they also consider that treason, then the same people should be just as upset that the Hillary campaign and DNC actually paid someone for opposition research to dig up dirt on Trump from information obtained through Russian sources in the Steele dossier. I guess it is okay if you hire it to be done through a third party.  It really is time to move on. Collusion as used in this matter is not a crime anyway. The Dems should be more incensed by the fact that the DNC colluded with Hillary to keep Bernie at bay.  It's all so hypocritical that it's laughable. 

Are you a Republican? Do you need someone other than Trump to blame for Trumps own actions? Then lets play Trump Deflection!!

Just simply choose from the following list to use as a scapegoat for this mans action:-

Hillary - Obama - Democrats - CNN - Fake News - Immigrants - Minorities -  Muslims - Science - Mueller - Facts

This simple game of deflection is fun for all the family and will absolutely guarantee that the Cheeto in Chief will never be held responsible for anything that comes out of his mouth or the actions of any of his family or associates. 

(Warning: this game may add to your already high levels of cognitive dissonance and may ruin your country for generations to come) 

1 hour ago, rgraham said:

And the Trump bashing continues, fact of the matter is he is the president. He was not peddling influence prior to being elected as his opponent was.

I think you are literally missing this whole article and debate. He was. His son was. His campaign adviser was. His lawyers was. Christ probably his maid was.

Everyone around him was and all that needs to be proven now is that he knew about it all. Just a mattter of time.

11 minutes ago, sfokevin said:

Truths!... ?

The Uranuim One conspiracy theory was even debunked by FoxNews!...

You are being conned and brainwashed by the Hannity’s you watch...

 

 

Absolutely excellent and well done for highlighting what we all knew all along. It is probably the only way to part way convince your average Trump supporter (lets admit there is little hope for some of them) when you have one fox person Hannity (who by the way does opinion pieces NOT news) against the another Fox person, Smith (who does do news).

Hannity is such a Trump groupie it's embarrassing but because he is so prominent, many Trump acolytes believe he actually tells the news when all he does is peddle half truths, opinion pieces and conspiracy theories. You might as well get your news from Alex Jones or Breitbart.

Fox gains some credit by at least having Smith try and right the wrongs of many of his co-presenters who wouldn't know a bit of news if it bent down, unzipped their trousers and started sucking them off. He also came out (no pun intended) and called it for what it was when Trump threw his own intelligence service under the bus so you have to at least give the guy credit for trying to stick to the facts and be a proper journalists.

Anyway. I really enjoyed that so thank you for showing what really needs to be seen in such an obvious but highly effective way.

2 hours ago, riclag said:

Why would I waste my time doing your research.I never watched those people ,you called comedians.But I have watched the number 1 cable news(Hannity) and the second most trusted news network in the world!

I think Twitter did the best when Ivanka announced she was giving up what by all accounts was a failing business:

'On the upside, no American jobs will be lost'

'..but how will all those foreign sweatshop workers make a living now?'

'fashion should be in quotation marks'

'There's no greater honour for a father than to see his child follow in his footsteps'

Classic

1 hour ago, FitnessHealthTravel said:

Do it, get it done!!!

You idiocy is showing YET AGAIN as YET AGAIN you are just supporting the orange buffoon despite plenty of people here telling you that most of the people already have their security clearance revoked and that his actions are unconstitutional. 

You are either an idiot or a troll.

Or an idiotic troll.