34 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Do really know so little about the duties of the President of the United States? 

 

The President has a constitutional requirement to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." which makes him the top-ranking law enforcer in the country. 

 

Remember, the Attorney General is appointed by, reports to, and serves at the pleasure of the President. 

 

You seem extremely intelligent and well informed, I'm surprised you did not know that. 

Ya gotta be kidding me! He only watched the news to see what they said about him. Worst president ever, as widely reported.

 

https://time.com/5518947/donald-trump-intelligence-briefings-national-security/

 

Willful Ignorance.’ Inside President Trump’s Troubled Intelligence Briefings

 

What is most troubling, say these officials and others in government and on Capitol Hill who have been briefed on the episodes, are Trump’s angry reactions when he is given information that contradicts positions he has taken or beliefs he holds. Two intelligence officers even reported that they have been warned to avoid giving the President intelligence assessments that contradict stances he has taken in public.

15 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Funny how my recent posts about Hitler and Goebbels' propaganda have generated so much hype with so few words—and so many illogical fallacies:

• Red Herring: By shifting the focus to the general practice of reading "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes, you divert attention from the specific concern about Trump's use of the text and its implications. This red herring distracts from the original criticism regarding Trump’s references to Hitler and how they may reflect on his political stance.

• False Equivalence: Your argument implies that because it is reasonable for leaders and politically interested individuals to read "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes, it is equally reasonable to overlook the potential implications of Trump's acknowledgment of owning a copy. This creates a false equivalence between the academic study of historical texts and the potential endorsement or association with problematic ideologies.

• Appeal to Tradition: The response suggests that it makes sense for leaders and politically interested individuals to read "Mein Kampf" as if it’s a standard practice. This appeal to tradition assumes that because something has been done or accepted in the past, it is inherently justified or acceptable, without addressing the specific concerns about how Trump’s use of the text might be perceived.

• Straw Man: By framing the argument as whether it makes sense for anyone to read "Mein Kampf," you might be misrepresenting the original critique, which is more about the potential implications of Trump's references rather than the general practice of reading historical texts.

You try to weaken the argument by shifting the focus and failing to address the specific concerns raised about Trump’s use of the text.

Funny how my recent posts about Hitler and Goebbels' propaganda have generated so much hype with so few words—and so many illogical fallacies:

Red Herring: By shifting the focus to the general practice of reading "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes, you divert attention from the specific concern about Trump's use of the text and its implications. This red herring distracts from the original criticism regarding Trump’s references to Hitler and how they may reflect on his political stance.

 

Why don't you go over Trump’s references to Hitler and how they may reflect on his political stance?

 

False Equivalence: Your argument implies that because it is reasonable for leaders and politically interested individuals to read "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes, it is equally reasonable to overlook the potential implications of Trump's acknowledgment of owning a copy. This creates a false equivalence between the academic study of historical texts and the potential endorsement or association with problematic ideologies.

 

Why don't you explain the potential implications of Trump's acknowledgment of owning a copy?

 

Appeal to Tradition: The response suggests that it makes sense for leaders and politically interested individuals to read "Mein Kampf" as if it’s a standard practice. This appeal to tradition assumes that because something has been done or accepted in the past, it is inherently justified or acceptable, without addressing the specific concerns about how Trump’s use of the text might be perceived.

 

Why do you not provide a few reasons why reading it is inherently unjustified or unacceptable? 

 

Straw Man: By framing the argument as whether it makes sense for anyone to read "Mein Kampf," you might be misrepresenting the original critique, which is more about the potential implications of Trump's references rather than the general practice of reading historical texts.

You try to weaken the argument by shifting the focus and failing to address the specific concerns raised about Trump’s use of the text.

 

Why don't you outline the specific concerns raised about Trump’s use of the text? 

 

 

 

 

14 minutes ago, Silencer said:

Let's see. Trump has...called former President George Bush (WW2) and former Sen. McCain (Vietnam) "losers" for being shot down. He called those who fought on D-Day "suckers" for participating in a war that had no personal gain for them and "losers" for being killed. Then he criticized Gen. Milley for having a wounded veteran sing the national anthem at his ceremony to become Chief of the Joint Chiefs asking "why would you have someone like that" at your ceremony. Lastly he avoided the cemetery (on right, it was the weather!) in Normandy (filled with losers) and avoided a photo with an soldier amputee. Tell me again how proud and respectful Trump is to soldiers and veterans? The Arlington Cemetery is blown up but his campaign were told no photos to be used for political purposes.

- 

 

Fake news. Trump's helicopter was grounded due to weather. The Secret Service refused to allow him to travel as they had not vetted the route. 

 

Get accurate news sources, you're reading way to much leftist propaganda. I bet you're the type that still believes the "fine people" hoax 

23 minutes ago, theblether said:

 

Fake news. Trump's helicopter was grounded due to weather. The Secret Service refused to allow him to travel as they had not vetted the route. 

 

Get accurate news sources, you're reading way to much leftist propaganda. I bet you're the type that still believes the "fine people" hoax 

100% accurate that he called veterans who were wounded losers and suckers. What a horrible person. Stunning anyone could support him.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/09/trump-americans-who-died-at-war-are-losers-and-suckers/615997/

50 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Funny how my recent posts about Hitler and Goebbels' propaganda have generated so much hype with so few words—and so many illogical fallacies:

Red Herring: By shifting the focus to the general practice of reading "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes, you divert attention from the specific concern about Trump's use of the text and its implications. This red herring distracts from the original criticism regarding Trump’s references to Hitler and how they may reflect on his political stance.

 

Why don't you go over Trump’s references to Hitler and how they may reflect on his political stance?

 

False Equivalence: Your argument implies that because it is reasonable for leaders and politically interested individuals to read "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes, it is equally reasonable to overlook the potential implications of Trump's acknowledgment of owning a copy. This creates a false equivalence between the academic study of historical texts and the potential endorsement or association with problematic ideologies.

 

Why don't you explain the potential implications of Trump's acknowledgment of owning a copy?

 

Appeal to Tradition: The response suggests that it makes sense for leaders and politically interested individuals to read "Mein Kampf" as if it’s a standard practice. This appeal to tradition assumes that because something has been done or accepted in the past, it is inherently justified or acceptable, without addressing the specific concerns about how Trump’s use of the text might be perceived.

 

Why do you not provide a few reasons why reading it is inherently unjustified or unacceptable? 

 

Straw Man: By framing the argument as whether it makes sense for anyone to read "Mein Kampf," you might be misrepresenting the original critique, which is more about the potential implications of Trump's references rather than the general practice of reading historical texts.

You try to weaken the argument by shifting the focus and failing to address the specific concerns raised about Trump’s use of the text.

 

Why don't you outline the specific concerns raised about Trump’s use of the text? 

 

Thank you for your response and for engaging with the points I raised. I’m happy to elaborate on the specific concerns about Trump’s references to Hitler and how they may reflect on his political stance.

1. Trump's References to Hitler and Potential Implications: The concern isn't just about owning or reading "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes. It's about the broader context in which Trump has been associated with authoritarian tendencies and inflammatory rhetoric that some find troublingly reminiscent of historical fascist ideologies. When a public figure like Trump acknowledges owning a book like "Mein Kampf," it raises questions about what influence those ideas might have on his thinking and policies. Given the gravity of Hitler’s legacy, any reference to his work or ideology by a contemporary political leader can be unsettling, particularly if it aligns with behavior that appears to echo authoritarianism or demagoguery.

2. Implications of Trump's Acknowledgment of Owning the Book: The acknowledgment of owning "Mein Kampf" could be seen as problematic because it might suggest either a fascination with or a willingness to engage with the ideas contained in the book beyond mere academic interest. The potential implications include concerns about whether Trump might admire or be influenced by the tactics and ideologies that Hitler espoused, particularly regarding propaganda, control of public opinion, and authoritarian governance. This is especially troubling given Trump's own contentious relationship with the media, his polarizing rhetoric, and accusations of inciting division.

3. Why Reading "Mein Kampf" Might Be Unjustified or Unacceptable: While reading "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes isn’t inherently wrong, the context in which a political leader references or acknowledges the book matters. For a figure like Trump, who has been accused of authoritarian tendencies, references to Hitler’s work can be seen as particularly inappropriate or alarming. It’s not just about the act of reading the book, but how that knowledge is applied or interpreted in a political context. If it appears to influence policy or rhetoric in a way that echoes harmful ideologies, it becomes a cause for concern.

4. Specific Concerns Raised About Trump’s Use of the Text: The specific concerns relate to the potential normalization of extremist ideas and the possibility that Trump might find inspiration in the propaganda techniques or authoritarian practices described in "Mein Kampf." This is particularly worrying given Trump's sometimes divisive and inflammatory rhetoric, which has drawn comparisons to the methods used by authoritarian leaders to consolidate power and control public discourse. The fear is that Trump's acknowledgment of owning the book might not be purely academic, but could reflect a deeper alignment with some of the strategies employed by historical dictators to manipulate public opinion and maintain power.

I hope this clarifies the concerns and why these issues are significant when discussing Trump’s references to such a historically charged text.
 

24 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Thank you for your response and for engaging with the points I raised. I’m happy to elaborate on the specific concerns about Trump’s references to Hitler and how they may reflect on his political stance.

Very well posted, I enjoyed form and arguments 😀

11 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

So do you think the Harris' attacks on Trump make the families of the dead servicemen that invited Trump feel better or worse?  

 

 

The Harris campaign has not made "attacks" as you claim. On the contrary, the Harris campaign remained silent for some time, until finally forced to issue a statement two days ago. VP Harris stated the obvious;

“Let me be clear: the former president disrespected sacred ground, all for the sake of a political stunt,”

Arlington is a “solemn place where we come together to honor American heroes … not a place for politics.”

 

It is the Trump campaign that has been attacking  everyone who dared to  respect the rules of decorum at the cemetery.   

It was Trump campaign senior official Chris LaCivita who called the US Army spokespersons “hacks.”

It is the Trump campaign who denigrated and insulted the cemetery official by calling her mentally ill when she tried to prevent the abuse of the premises.

It was the Trump who is blaming the families now.

With Trump, it is always some else's fault.

 

The reality is that the campaign screwed up and no one wants to admit it and say, sorry we made a mistake. Mistakes happen. It's how we  handle our mistakes that define our character.  With the Trump collective it's the same M.O.  of doubling down on a lie and pushing a false narrative.

 

2 hours ago, theblether said:

 

Fake news. Trump's helicopter was grounded due to weather. The Secret Service refused to allow him to travel as they had not vetted the route. 

 

Get accurate news sources, you're reading way to much leftist propaganda. I bet you're the type that still believes the "fine people" hoax 

 

Please provide your source, because there is no source that supports your revisionist history.  The only source for the weather as a cause for the cancellation of the visit was from John Bolton, who had offered a neutral statement that weather conditions did not permit a cemetery visit.  He did not say that  President Trump was unable to fly because of the weather. There is no documented record of the US Secret Service ordering the cancellation of the visit.  Mr. Bolton's   comment has since been taken out of context to support the Trump story. The claims that the rain would dishevel the Trump comb over and hairspray hold, are not substantiated. It is most likely, that Trump just did not want to go out on a  wet and blustery day to attend a ceremony that was not about him.

 

The sad reality is what was at the heart of the event and why so many people were disgusted.   The original source for Trump's actions and statements on that day was an article in the Atlantic by Jeffrey Goldberg titled: “Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers.’” The writer relied on 4 people who  were present and knowledgeable of the events. He stated that;

1. Trump cancelled a visit to Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris in 2018 because he did not believe it was important to honour American war dead. and quoted  Trump's conversation with senior staff members on the morning of the scheduled visit, where Trump  reportedly stated  "Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers".

 2. A little while later, Trump reportedly upset some staffers when he  described the 1,800 + US personnel KIA in WWI at Belleau Wood as ‘suckers’ for getting killed in a war they didn't have to fight.

 

Trump has repeatedly denied these statements and has claimed that he has witnesses who can  support him. To date, not one person has come forward to  support Trump's account of the events.  NOT ONE PERSON can corroborate Trump's  claims.

 

Trumps claims were further discredited by his own White House chief of staff John F. kelly's statements in 2023 when he dismissed Trump as the man who  “rants that our most precious heroes who gave their lives in America’s defense are ‘losers’ and wouldn’t visit their graves in France.”

 

Trump's actions were so vile, that it is understandable that those who hold him in high regard do not want, nor cannot accept that the man  did what he did. They will deny the  events and invent   excuses for him because to accept  the events as document is to admit that they are supporters of a morally bankrupt person and that they have erred.

 

Both are unqualified candidates for the post of the President,

But: 

if #Harris than another 4 years of Biden and he is senile

Else

if #Trump than maybe some peace will be restored in the Middle East and that bleeding conflict in UA?

and that vicious "nuclear clock" will turn back few "minutes" backward.

 

Betting on Harris is betting on Biden again. Didn't he damage the world enough for last 4 years and 8 years of Obama?

 

22 minutes ago, NativeBob said:

Both are unqualified candidates for the post of the President,

But: 

if #Harris than another 4 years of Biden and he is senile

Else

if #Trump than maybe some peace will be restored in the Middle East and that bleeding conflict in UA?

and that vicious "nuclear clock" will turn back few "minutes" backward.

 

Betting on Harris is betting on Biden again. Didn't he damage the world enough for last 4 years and 8 years of Obama?

 

Not a sound argument given that Trump isn't a sound individual. How many of his followers are now in jail? If he's not elected, he could be next. Horrible world leader.

15 minutes ago, Roo Island said:

Not a sound argument given that Trump isn't a sound individual. How many of his followers are now in jail? If he's not elected, he could be next. Horrible world leader.

agree Roo. but I have relatives in Holy Land, and they pray for "Orange Don"

 

Uncle said good-bye to his daughter going to work. (Haifa)

about 20 minutes later there was a warning on the radio about bomb at bus stop she supposed to be at, he called her - no answer. for hours. Luckily she missed the bus, but ...

That day successful 70 years old jeweler turned into crying (accidently) wimp. Obama's reign.

31 minutes ago, NativeBob said:

agree Roo. but I have relatives in Holy Land, and they pray for "Orange Don"

 

Uncle said good-bye to his daughter going to work. (Haifa)

about 20 minutes later there was a warning on the radio about bomb at bus stop she supposed to be at, he called her - no answer. for hours. Luckily she missed the bus, but ...

That day successful 70 years old jeweler turned into crying (accidently) wimp. Obama's reign.

I've been to almost 150 countries. Israel is one I would not revisit. Too much tension. Too much religious bs. There's more to life than reading the Bible or other religious book.

5 minutes ago, Roo Island said:

I've been to almost 150 countries. Israel is one I would not revisit. Too much tension. Too much religious bs. There's more to life than reading the Bible or other religious book.

How was Nigeria and Kazakhstan?

1 minute ago, NativeBob said:

How was Nigeria and Kazakhstan?

Nigeria isn't easy to visit. Kazakhstan was great! As was all the other countries in that area. Spent months there.

5 minutes ago, Roo Island said:

Nigeria isn't easy to visit. Kazakhstan was great! As was all the other countries in that area. Spent months there.

Respect.

Even James Bond went to less countries than you @Roo Island

I knew one rabbi who visited 30-40 countries for Kosher licenses, but 150?!

What did you do there for months? (if I may ask of course). 

Wow!

Should write a book (IMO)

11 hours ago, NativeBob said:

Both are unqualified candidates for the post of the President,

But: 

if #Harris than another 4 years of Biden and he is senile

Else

if #Trump than maybe some peace will be restored in the Middle East and that bleeding conflict in UA?

and that vicious "nuclear clock" will turn back few "minutes" backward.

 

Betting on Harris is betting on Biden again. Didn't he damage the world enough for last 4 years and 8 years of Obama?

 

The post you shared seems to be structured in a way that mimics the logic of a faulty "if-else" statement in a programming language, together with logic and reasoning errors in the body text.
 

Nevertheless, during his presidency, when did Trump ever restore peace in the Middle East instead of exacerbating it.

Trump promised a plan for Middle East peace, yet he only gratified himself and his crime family, with the Abraham Accord quid pro quo, which only normalized relations between Israel and several Arab countries who were never at war.

Trump's policies, including moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem and a peace plan favoring Israel, alienated Palestinians and contributed to current ongoing regional tensions, contrary to his claims of fostering peace.

20 hours ago, LosLobo said:

Thank you for your response and for engaging with the points I raised. I’m happy to elaborate on the specific concerns about Trump’s references to Hitler and how they may reflect on his political stance.

1. Trump's References to Hitler and Potential Implications: The concern isn't just about owning or reading "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes. It's about the broader context in which Trump has been associated with authoritarian tendencies and inflammatory rhetoric that some find troublingly reminiscent of historical fascist ideologies. When a public figure like Trump acknowledges owning a book like "Mein Kampf," it raises questions about what influence those ideas might have on his thinking and policies. Given the gravity of Hitler’s legacy, any reference to his work or ideology by a contemporary political leader can be unsettling, particularly if it aligns with behavior that appears to echo authoritarianism or demagoguery.

2. Implications of Trump's Acknowledgment of Owning the Book: The acknowledgment of owning "Mein Kampf" could be seen as problematic because it might suggest either a fascination with or a willingness to engage with the ideas contained in the book beyond mere academic interest. The potential implications include concerns about whether Trump might admire or be influenced by the tactics and ideologies that Hitler espoused, particularly regarding propaganda, control of public opinion, and authoritarian governance. This is especially troubling given Trump's own contentious relationship with the media, his polarizing rhetoric, and accusations of inciting division.

3. Why Reading "Mein Kampf" Might Be Unjustified or Unacceptable: While reading "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes isn’t inherently wrong, the context in which a political leader references or acknowledges the book matters. For a figure like Trump, who has been accused of authoritarian tendencies, references to Hitler’s work can be seen as particularly inappropriate or alarming. It’s not just about the act of reading the book, but how that knowledge is applied or interpreted in a political context. If it appears to influence policy or rhetoric in a way that echoes harmful ideologies, it becomes a cause for concern.

4. Specific Concerns Raised About Trump’s Use of the Text: The specific concerns relate to the potential normalization of extremist ideas and the possibility that Trump might find inspiration in the propaganda techniques or authoritarian practices described in "Mein Kampf." This is particularly worrying given Trump's sometimes divisive and inflammatory rhetoric, which has drawn comparisons to the methods used by authoritarian leaders to consolidate power and control public discourse. The fear is that Trump's acknowledgment of owning the book might not be purely academic, but could reflect a deeper alignment with some of the strategies employed by historical dictators to manipulate public opinion and maintain power.

I hope this clarifies the concerns and why these issues are significant when discussing Trump’s references to such a historically charged text.
 

 

Trump's References to Hitler and Potential Implications: The concern isn't just about owning or reading "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes. It's about the broader context in which Trump has been associated with authoritarian tendencies and inflammatory rhetoric that some find troublingly reminiscent of historical fascist ideologies. When a public figure like Trump acknowledges owning a book like "Mein Kampf," it raises questions about what influence those ideas might have on his thinking and policies. Given the gravity of Hitler’s legacy, any reference to his work or ideology by a contemporary political leader can be unsettling, particularly if it aligns

 

-What authoritarian tendencies and inflammatory rhetoric?

 

-And who is associating Trump  with authoritarian tendencies and inflammatory rhetoric?

 

Implications of Trump's Acknowledgment of Owning the Book: The acknowledgment of owning "Mein Kampf" could be seen as problematic because it might suggest either a fascination with or a willingness to engage with the ideas contained in the book beyond mere academic interest. The potential implications include concerns about whether Trump might admire or be influenced by the tactics and ideologies that Hitler espoused, particularly regarding propaganda, control of public opinion, and authoritarian governance. This is especially troubling given Trump's own contentious relationship with the media, his polarizing rhetoric, and accusations of inciting division.

It could be seen as problematic by who, the left?

Harris’ father was/is a Marxist Economist, I assume she has at least read and likely owns copies of “Capital” and the “Communist Manifesto”. Why is this not problematic?

Why Reading "Mein Kampf" Might Be Unjustified or Unacceptable: While reading "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes isn’t inherently wrong, the context in which a political leader references or acknowledges the book matters. For a figure like Trump, who has been accused of authoritarian tendencies, references to Hitler’s work can be seen as particularly inappropriate or alarming. It’s not just about the act of reading the book, but how that knowledge is applied or interpreted in a political context. If it appears to influence policy or rhetoric in a way that echoes harmful ideologies, it becomes a cause for concern.

 

-Who is accusing Trump of authoritarian tendencies, what might those tendencies be, and what references to Hitler’s work?

 

Specific Concerns Raised About Trump’s Use of the Text: The specific concerns relate to the potential normalization of extremist ideas and the possibility that Trump might find inspiration in the propaganda techniques or authoritarian practices described in "Mein Kampf." This is particularly worrying given Trump's sometimes divisive and inflammatory rhetoric, which has drawn comparisons to the methods used by authoritarian leaders to consolidate power and control public discourse. The fear is that Trump's acknowledgment of owning the book might not be purely academic, but could reflect a deeper alignment with some of the strategies employed by historical dictators to manipulate public opinion and maintain power.

 

-Potential normalization of what extremist ideas?

 

-What propaganda techniques or authoritarian practices described in "Mein Kampf" might Trump find inspiration in?

 

-Who finds Trump's rhetoric divisive and inflammatory?

 

-Who is drawing comparisons to the methods used by authoritarian leaders to consolidate power and control public discourse?

 

-Who is afraid that Trump's acknowledgment of owning the book might not be purely academic?

 

I hope this clarifies the concerns and why these issues are significant when discussing Trump’s references to such a historically charged text.

 

-It does not. These are the questions I asked:

 

1.      Why don't you go over Trump’s references to Hitler and how they may reflect on his political stance?

You did not provide a single quote from Trump.

2.      Why don't you explain the potential implications of Trump's acknowledgment of owning a copy?

You only provided a list of things that might happen, and nothing that indicates anything on the list has any significant probability of happening.

3.      Why do you not provide a few reasons why reading it is inherently unjustified or unacceptable.

Again, you do not seem to provide a reason why reading anything is inherently unjustified or unacceptable, except to say that something might happen. Do you think reading books about homosexuality will turn people into homosexuals?

4.       Why don't you outline the specific concerns raised about Trump’s use of the text?

Again, you claim there is possibility. Is that not what you would call possibiliter ergo probabiliter, which is the logical fallacy of taking something for granted simply because it is possible?

8 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

Trump's References to Hitler and Potential Implications: The concern isn't just about owning or reading "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes. It's about the broader context in which Trump has been associated with authoritarian tendencies and inflammatory rhetoric that some find troublingly reminiscent of historical fascist ideologies. When a public figure like Trump acknowledges owning a book like "Mein Kampf," it raises questions about what influence those ideas might have on his thinking and policies. Given the gravity of Hitler’s legacy, any reference to his work or ideology by a contemporary political leader can be unsettling, particularly if it aligns

 

-What authoritarian tendencies and inflammatory rhetoric?

 

-And who is associating Trump  with authoritarian tendencies and inflammatory rhetoric?

 

Implications of Trump's Acknowledgment of Owning the Book: The acknowledgment of owning "Mein Kampf" could be seen as problematic because it might suggest either a fascination with or a willingness to engage with the ideas contained in the book beyond mere academic interest. The potential implications include concerns about whether Trump might admire or be influenced by the tactics and ideologies that Hitler espoused, particularly regarding propaganda, control of public opinion, and authoritarian governance. This is especially troubling given Trump's own contentious relationship with the media, his polarizing rhetoric, and accusations of inciting division.

It could be seen as problematic by who, the left?

Harris’ father was/is a Marxist Economist, I assume she has at least read and likely owns copies of “Capital” and the “Communist Manifesto”. Why is this not problematic?

Why Reading "Mein Kampf" Might Be Unjustified or Unacceptable: While reading "Mein Kampf" for educational purposes isn’t inherently wrong, the context in which a political leader references or acknowledges the book matters. For a figure like Trump, who has been accused of authoritarian tendencies, references to Hitler’s work can be seen as particularly inappropriate or alarming. It’s not just about the act of reading the book, but how that knowledge is applied or interpreted in a political context. If it appears to influence policy or rhetoric in a way that echoes harmful ideologies, it becomes a cause for concern.

 

-Who is accusing Trump of authoritarian tendencies, what might those tendencies be, and what references to Hitler’s work?

 

Specific Concerns Raised About Trump’s Use of the Text: The specific concerns relate to the potential normalization of extremist ideas and the possibility that Trump might find inspiration in the propaganda techniques or authoritarian practices described in "Mein Kampf." This is particularly worrying given Trump's sometimes divisive and inflammatory rhetoric, which has drawn comparisons to the methods used by authoritarian leaders to consolidate power and control public discourse. The fear is that Trump's acknowledgment of owning the book might not be purely academic, but could reflect a deeper alignment with some of the strategies employed by historical dictators to manipulate public opinion and maintain power.

 

-Potential normalization of what extremist ideas?

 

-What propaganda techniques or authoritarian practices described in "Mein Kampf" might Trump find inspiration in?

 

-Who finds Trump's rhetoric divisive and inflammatory?

 

-Who is drawing comparisons to the methods used by authoritarian leaders to consolidate power and control public discourse?

 

-Who is afraid that Trump's acknowledgment of owning the book might not be purely academic?

 

I hope this clarifies the concerns and why these issues are significant when discussing Trump’s references to such a historically charged text.

 

-It does not. These are the questions I asked:

 

1.      Why don't you go over Trump’s references to Hitler and how they may reflect on his political stance?

You did not provide a single quote from Trump.

2.      Why don't you explain the potential implications of Trump's acknowledgment of owning a copy?

You only provided a list of things that might happen, and nothing that indicates anything on the list has any significant probability of happening.

3.      Why do you not provide a few reasons why reading it is inherently unjustified or unacceptable.

Again, you do not seem to provide a reason why reading anything is inherently unjustified or unacceptable, except to say that something might happen. Do you think reading books about homosexuality will turn people into homosexuals?

4.       Why don't you outline the specific concerns raised about Trump’s use of the text?

Again, you claim there is possibility. Is that not what you would call possibiliter ergo probabiliter, which is the logical fallacy of taking something for granted simply because it is possible?

Have a good evening 🙂

2 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Have a good evening 🙂

That's what I thought. Go with God brother. 

18 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

That's what I thought. Go with God brother. 

 

You're wasting your time. The old adage "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me" was never more appropriate. Lets talk about fools - people who believed: 

 

The "fine people" hoax. 

 

The Invermectin hoax. 

 

The Russiagate hoax. 

 

These hoaxes are so appalling and damaging that those who did believe them cannot bring themselves to admit their fault. This is the level of moral and intellectual decay you are dealing with, wrapped in Dunning-Kruger malicious stupidity. 

7 minutes ago, theblether said:

 

You're wasting your time. The old adage "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me" was never more appropriate. Lets talk about fools - people who believed: 

 

The "fine people" hoax. 

 

The Invermectin hoax. 

 

The Russiagate hoax. 

 

These hoaxes are so appalling and damaging that those who did believe them cannot bring themselves to admit their fault. This is the level of moral and intellectual decay you are dealing with, wrapped in Dunning-Kruger malicious stupidity. 

It is amazing how he bloviates paragraph after paragraph without answering a question. Probably an education major. 

The left really does not care about what the families of dead soldiers think because they generally not on the left. All the left cares about is maintaining power.

 

They call Trump out for “bone spurs”, but don’t care about Clinton running away to Canada or Biden’s “asthma”. Remember they spit on Viet Nam vets when they came home.

 

They called George W. Bush a draft-dodger for being in the National Guard, but stolen valor Walz is a proud 24-year veteran, and don’t you dare point out how many times he’s lied about his service.

 

The left only cares about the left. They can say virtually anything, and the press (the propaganda wing of the Democrat party) will run cover for them.

 

Harris does not even have to lie, the press lies for her.

A troll post with a photoshopped image has been removed.

8 hours ago, LosLobo said:

The post you shared seems to be structured in a way that mimics the logic of a faulty "if-else" statement in a programming language, together with logic and reasoning errors in the body text.
 

Nevertheless, during his presidency, when did Trump ever restore peace in the Middle East instead of exacerbating it.

Trump promised a plan for Middle East peace, yet he only gratified himself and his crime family, with the Abraham Accord quid pro quo, which only normalized relations between Israel and several Arab countries who were never at war.

Trump's policies, including moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem and a peace plan favoring Israel, alienated Palestinians and contributed to current ongoing regional tensions, contrary to his claims of fostering peace.

The Abraham Accords - United States Department of State

27 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

It is amazing how he bloviates paragraph after paragraph without answering a question. Probably an education major. 

 

They accuse Republicans of being dumb and believe any utter garbage poured down their necks by their own press. 

 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

The Abraham Accords - United States Department of State

 

Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize for nothing - the committee just wanted an excuse to meet him. 

 

If Obama or Biden had managed to get a single country to sign the equivalent of the Abraham Accord they would have been showered with awards and had a ticket tape parade with marching bands  through the streets of Oslo. 

 

And here we have Democrats arguing against the most important moves in Middle East peace for decades. It's quite frankly bordering on evil. 

23 minutes ago, theblether said:

 

They accuse Republicans of being dumb and believe any utter garbage poured down their necks by their own press. 

Remember when the press was largely working class? My how times have changed. 

 

The lefties here believe the same press (and candidate) that swore for years that Biden was sharp as a tack and was so healthy and robust that the aids had trouble keeping up with him. And called anyone a liar that said otherwise. 

 

Right up until ten minutes into the debate, when it became clear how diminished Biden really was, when CNN, likely in cahoots with the DNC threw Biden under the bus. 

 

Immediately the press did an about face (again, likely in cahoots with the DNC) and attacked Biden relentlessly for two weeks until it became clear that Biden would have to step down, and Harris (previously the brunt of even the left's jokes) would be the anointed one. 

 

Immediately the press did another about face and praised Biden to the roof as a selfless elder statesman, and even comparing him (no kidding) to George Washington, and began worshiping Harris as the greatest woman the world has ever known. 

 

Oprah ($3B?) Barrack & Michelle Obama ($100M?) on stage talking about being victims and attacking the "greedy rich". 

 

It is nothing if not amusing. 

 

 

40 minutes ago, theblether said:

 

Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize for nothing - the committee just wanted an excuse to meet him. 

 

If Obama or Biden had managed to get a single country to sign the equivalent of the Abraham Accord they would have been showered with awards and had a ticket tape parade with marching bands  through the streets of Oslo. 

 

And here we have Democrats arguing against the most important moves in Middle East peace for decades. It's quite frankly bordering on evil. 

TheWolf will likely regurgitate ten pages on why Afghanistan, Israel and Ukraine are all Trump's fault. 

 

Why did Putin not invade Ukraine while his puppet was in office? He'd have been in Kyiv years ago. 

 

 

 

On 9/2/2024 at 6:39 PM, NativeBob said:

those look like a porn-award. Esp that uber-tattoed on the left. 

and posters complain about Trump attacking family members of deceased soldiers!