placeholder

An all-purpose comment unbacked by evidence. You've got nothing.

Stop raising straw men. You can quote whomeover you like on any subject whatsoever. No one's denying your right to do so. Just as it's my right to point out that you made a pretty poor choice in the case of Barr.

Can you please share with us what criminal acts Joe Biden has committed? James Comer and company tried their best and failed to come up with sufficient evidence to get enough of their Republican colleagues to support impeachment. In fact, the allegations all fell apart. And typical of Trumpistas, you emulate your leader in getting facts wrong. Those were intelligence officials. Not all, or even nearly all were from the CIA. What's more, none of them who signed were government employees at the time. All were retired from govt service. Moreover they did not assert that the laptop was Russian disinformation. "While the letter’s signatories presented no new evidence, they said their national security experience had made them “deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case” and cited several elements of the story that suggested the Kremlin’s hand at work. “If we are right,” they added, “this is Russia trying to influence how Americans vote in this election, and we believe strongly that Americans need to be aware of this.” https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276 And keep in mind that even after the Justice Dept Inspector General said there was no evidence of a conspiracy against Trump in the Justice Dept, William Barr went ahead and got himself another special prosecutor, John Durham, to try and prove otherwise. . Durham, despite his best efforts and extremely strong support from Barr, came up with nothing to prove that and had to concede as much.

Really? It was the general opinion that all the trials would be underway? I don't ever recall seeing that. It's not a matter of whether I agree with Barr or not. Clearly, he's extremely biased and not above misrepresenting evidence and rejecting evidence that doesn't support his prejudices.

And Mukasey was wrong. And if there are 2 William Barrs speaking on the subject, one must have been cloned recently.

Sure. Making the face of Brexit the face of the Reform Party. That sounds like a winning plan. In Oppositeworld.

But you think George Galloway might not be? Really?

And with that comment you've given the game away.

It is also natural for plenty of species to engage in homosexuality. It is also normal evolutionarily for members of some species to contribute to survival of shared genes even though they don't reproduce. So are you maintaining, that in a political speech, Galloway was just making a parenthetical comment about biology? Or did he make the address at a conclave of evolutionary biologists? Does "disingenuous" mean anything to you?"

First off, by your standard then it's not normal to be Jewish either. And should a politician say so, that would in no way betray any prejudice on their part? So your contention is that Galloway was simply noting a statistical fact in a political speech? Or do you believe that he was addressing some sort of scientific symposium.? Your disingenuousness is blatantly unbelievable. Also, a common synonym for normal is "natural". So when it's said of someone that they are not normal, it's rarely meant as a neutral statement or a compliment. normal Definition for normal adjective as in common, usual Compare Synonyms SynonymsAntonyms Strongest matches natural,orderly,ordinary,regular,routine,traditional,typical

And if he said being Jewish is not normal, that would be okay too? Please. In both cases there's a history of prejudice against Jews and gays. And, of course, you're either not a native speaker of English or you're being willfully blind to the range of meanings that "normal" has in common usage.

I don't think Barr has any charges pending against him. At least, I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere.

The milk sold as Chokchai Farm milk doesn't actually come from Chokchai farms. For some reason, they sold their licensing rights long ago. Umm! Milk is actually from Chokchai. "With a budget of 10 million baht for 2007 marketing budget, Farm Chokchai Group has lanuched its homemade ice cream and dairy product brand "Umm!...Milk" in the local premium market, where it says its superior freshness, quality ingredients and rich taste can compete with competitors including imported products. To support its retail business, Farm Chokchai Groups is planning to open eight outlets of "Umm!...Milk Dairy Shop" in Bangkok's prime locations by the end of 2007, expecting the first-year sales to grow by 20 per cent. Choak Bulakul, managing director of Farm Chokchai Group, said, "We plan to position Umm!...Milk as premium dairy products in Thailand." https://www.ryt9.com/en/prg/49370 "FYI, products from Chokchai Farm is now branded as Umm! Milk as they have sold off their Chokchai Milk brand back in 1994 as they restructure their operations." https://www.roadtrippers.asia/places/chokchai-farm/

My favorite milk is the milk offered by Dairy Home. It's pasteurized the old-fashioned low temperature way so it tastes like raw milk. That's the way milk used to test before high temperature pasteurization and ultra pasteurization took over the market. They offer lots of varieties including one that comes from cows that graze only on pasture.

The reason your comment in nonsense is the same reason that Abbott's was. In both cases you and she are pretending that there is no history of strong and dangerous prejudice against both Jews and gays. So that mentioning them is innocuous. Unlike Jews and gays, I kind of doubt gingers were ever sent to death camps because of the color of their hair.

Is this the same William Barr who was castigated by a federal judge for misrepresenting the conclusions of the Mueller report? Is it the same William Barr who who publicly questioned the results of the report from the Inspector General of the Justice Dept. that there was no conspiracy to investigate Trump? And who strongly backed a special prosecutor who spectacularly failed to prove otherwise? Or is it a different William Barr?

But they were not a target. Her apology proves that she acknowledged it was wrong to minimize that singling Jews out was the same as mentioning gingers. Whether her apology was sincere is obviously open to serious doubt. But whether her motivation was honorable or not, it acknowledges that claiming that singling out Jews as insignificant as singling out gingers is ridiculous. Nobody with any sense would claim the Abbott's comments were exploiting some kind of animus against gingers.

Seriously doubt away. If you believe that the Israelis despicable conduct on the West Bank after Oct 7 hasn't hurt their case, you're being willfully blind.

The point of her comment was to minimize the significance of Jews being singled out. The reason she mentioned gingers was to make the singling out of Jews seem utterly inconsequential. She was not targeting gingers.

Another way of putting it is moving on from your imagination.

You made a claim. It's incumbent on you to back it up. Back it up. From the landing page of the World News Forum: "Any alleged factual claims must be supported by a valid link to an approved credible source."

Not defending Abbott at all. Just pointing out that JonnyF's claim about gingers being singled out by politicians was ridiculous..

I'm not sure what you think that update proves. And WCK is just one player out of many. And here's another quote from the guh in charge of the World Central Kitchen's program: Addressing the severe food insecurity in Gaza, Torpey confirmed reports of Gazans consuming animal feed and drinking sewage water. The regional director of the World Health Organization also highlighted the dire conditions, urging for the opening of borders to facilitate aid distribution. https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/israel-at-war/artc-world-central-kitchen-reports-steady-flow-of-aid-trucks-into-gaza

More B.S. from Kogat. There's a live war going on in that area right now. Not only would that be a risk enough in itself, but in the past, Israel hasn't been too scrupulous about refraining from attacking these convoys. To put it mildly. In fact, COGAT had made a similar claim a few months ago and it turns out that the IDF was intentionally killing police sent to accompany the shipments.

Thanks for the invitation.