21

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 25, 2025, 09:12:37 AM »

Whisper it quietly, but he might have got this one right.
The ceasefire is holding, for now. Early days yet of course.
And naturally he's going "laa laa laa, can't hear you" at all the intelligence indicating the striker might have not been quite as effective at obliterating the Iranian nuclear sites as he's claiming.

I wonder what is wrong with him that he has to always claim the superlative, always be so absolute. All the "they said this was the greatest..." stuff. Who are "they"? And was it the greatest? (That's just an example, not referring to anything specific, just generally the way he talks such utter bollocks all the time.)

He was raised to believe himself to be the best.  His brain is just broken and now everything has to be at the extreme.  Either extreme great (because he's never wrong according to everyone he pays), or extreme bad (for everything against him).

22

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 25, 2025, 08:44:55 AM »

Sounds to me like Trump announced the cease fire before anyone else was ready to.  Or Iran was done because the US attack did nothing substantial.

23

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 24, 2025, 06:11:03 AM »

ITT:

https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1937296693583839639

Yeah.
Not sure he's being honest here.

24

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 22, 2025, 09:59:43 PM »

https://www.newsweek.com/iran-parliament-vote-close-straits-hormuz-us-attacks-2088968

Will they?
Maybe.
I'm sure Trump will just launch missiles at them until they stop.

25

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 22, 2025, 07:27:56 AM »

It's funny how he just ignores his own intelligence director then forces her to match him.

If Trump supporters don't see that his people are doing whatever he says, not what they should, they're brainwashed.

26

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 20, 2025, 04:09:32 AM »

I do have criticisms about Trump...

You do?  Would you care to share some of them?

I've criticized that in Trump's first term his policies were too weak and he held back too much, giving leftists too many chances and too much leeway. Now that the gloves have come off in his second term Trump is doing what should have been done years ago, and the people love him for it.

https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1935774344732361207

So your criticism isn't criticism.  You just wanted more Trump.  Markjo's point stands: you have no criticism.  No questioning thoughts.  No disliked action.

27

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 17, 2025, 10:51:21 AM »

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-slams-obama-trudeau-pushing-russia-out-g8-summit-years-ago-wouldnt-have-war

And he once again fails to know who was in power at some given time.  Even Fox is calling him out on it.

28

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 15, 2025, 10:07:40 PM »

Come on, this is a safe space, Trump won't read this.

Unless Tom is sending daily reports and we're all on the anti-trump revenge list.


Tho... Trump doesn't even read daily briefings so .... You're probably right.

29

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 15, 2025, 04:09:22 PM »

A railroad across any ocean or to any ocean is not just unreasonable, it is simply stupid.

Right?
I mean, once trade cargo gets off the boat at the port, its stupid to use a train to transport it across the country.  Right?

30

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 15, 2025, 07:15:00 AM »

I think Tom's interpretation is fair.

And how do you think Tom would have interpreted it had Biden said it?
And this is the issue with Tom and the MAGA lot in general. The ones deep in the cult don't care what happens or what is said, they only care who did it. If it's Trump or Vance or one of the other MAGA then it's ThisIsFine.jpg, no matter how egregious what is said or done is. If it's Biden or any other Democrat then it's interpreted in the most unkind and malicious way possible.
It's a level of delusion and intellectual dishonestly which makes debate impossible.

Again: addict.  So addicted to the idea of Trump that logic and reason just does not exist.

31

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 14, 2025, 04:03:51 PM »

So... "Trump fought in WW2 and was very helpful in securing it." - is something you'd understand as USA?  Because typically we'd use the leader of the nation at that time, not currently.

Also, Trump seems to not understand that 80+ years have gone by and governments change, nor the whole cold war propaganda that he literally lived through.

Trump says to World Leader 2 "We lost half a million soldiers in WWII". World Leader 2 then says to someone else, referring to that conversation: "He lost half a million soldiers in WWII" and "He fought with us in WWII" Both of the later two sentences make perfect sense to consider Trump as the USA in this instance, considering that Trump is describing the USA as "we". Especially if during the conversation World Leader 2 clarified that "and he did fight, the US fought" to convey that "he" means the US.

They.
The correct pronoun to use when quoting a person using we, is they.  We is a plural, in this case meaning the people of America.  They, meaning the people of America in which you are not apart of, is how you'd say it.

32

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 14, 2025, 11:36:44 AM »

So... "Trump fought in WW2 and was very helpful in securing it." - is something you'd understand as USA?

He'll understand it whatever way his cult leader tells him to.
Imagine being an "independent thinker" and having such a slavish devotion to a narcissist's whims.
I like to think Tom is just trolling but I have a feeling he really is this much of a sheep.

I'm not sure I'd call him a sheep.
Sheep run when shown danger, even from the Shepard.  MAGA are probably closer to addicts.  They know it's dumb and bad and could kill them... They just don't care.

33

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 14, 2025, 07:36:35 AM »

"I talked to Putin. He lost 51 million people (in WWII) and he did fight… He fought with us in World War II and everybody hates him.”
- Trump

Is that the Putin who was born in 1952?

Stop lying. He is talking about WWII in a geopolitical manner and is referring to countries by their leaders. He is clearly referring to Putin in terms of Russia fought with the USA in WWII, not Putin personally. This is abundantly clear in the below video at the 19 second mark when he says "and he did fight, Russia fought". It is further understood why Putin is referred to as his country when Trump explains how he is referring to a prior WWII conversation with Putin where Putin said "we lost 50 Million people", hence why Trump would say that "he" lost 50 million people, and that "he" fought with the USA in WWII.

It is fairly understandable what he is saying, and it is apparent that you are playing dumb to make your argument.

https://twitter.com/BulwarkOnline/status/1933207285733756966

So... "Trump fought in WW2 and was very helpful in securing it." - is something you'd understand as USA?  Because typically we'd use the leader of the nation at that time, not currently.

Also, Trump seems to not understand that 80+ years have gone by and governments change, nor the whole cold war propaganda that he literally lived through.

34

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 13, 2025, 05:26:36 PM »

^If anyone can find a more incoherent attempt to state anything resembling sense, please do.

Trump started the riots in LA.

Jesus, fucking christ...there are liars and shit bags and then there is LD.

First, this might help with reading.
https://www.hookedonphonics.com

As for Trump starting the riots..

https://www.coursera.org/learn/crash-course-in-causality

Maybe learn some causality.

35

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 13, 2025, 01:39:05 PM »

Fuck that shit, LD.

I never said any of it is ok.

It is MORE stupid or more NOT OK to approach a goddamn police line after fucking curfew, ignore multiple directives to leave the area, and expect nothing to happen.

Except...
The curfew didn't go into effect until the 12th or 13th.  This video was posted on the 10th.
And why the fuck would you, wanting to go home, leave the fucking area?  You really are just a sheep, aren't you?  Cops say stay away from your house because we said so and you just say 'yes sir!  I love being kept from my home for no reason.  Thank you, master.'

It is even more stupid to post this in a thread about Trump and try to act like he had anything to do with this. Sheer stupidity.

You should have started a new thread about the LA mayor, ignoramus supreme.

Because Trump literally started it.  His mass ICE raids started it, then his decision to bypass the governor AND MAYOR and send in the national guard and marines made it worse.

Thats why it's here.

Not all rubber bullets have a metal core.

Is your point now to claim she was struck with a rubber bullet that is less lethal?

WTF are you trying to argue?

Yes.  At that range a rubber bullets with a metal core and one that doesn't would have different effects.  Which might explain why she walked away and not fell down on the sidewalk and started to bleed.

36

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 13, 2025, 07:43:41 AM »

She was a good 10-20 feet away from the line.

if you get a direct hit in the torso at that range you are going to buckle over instantly and possibly bleed out since rubber bullets have a metal core and can penetrate the skin.

since all i have to go on is a performative tiktok video where the person filming switches it to selfie mode before "rendering aid" i am going to take it with a grain of salt. if she files a lawsuit and provides some evidence of injury i am happy to be proven wrong. my random hot take is that she didn't actually get hit. but since she would need medical attention if she did i am sure there will be evidence of any harm caused because in the best case you are looking at massive bruising. worst case is internal bleeding, ruptured spleen, broken rib(s), and other bad things.

Not all rubber bullets have a metal core.


So I found her tictok with the extended version.  Which doesn't show much in terms of new information or evidence.

I'm not gonna dismiss your claims because
1) no injuries were shown. Which is pretty important.
2) the woman never appears on camera close up so we can see her face.  Maybe intentional to avoid cops IDing her. 
3) no follow up information Or news outlets picking it up beyond the video.
4) in the tictok video she meets another protester who she talks to about it.  Doesn't mean anything but it's there so maybe another angle was gotten by someone else.

None of this proves one thing or another but it does make me doubt the validity of the claim tho the lack of info and follow up is easily explained away.

Which is a sad thing in this world.

The cop's gun recoils.
So unless the cop is in on it...he fired a shot.

37

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 13, 2025, 04:26:15 AM »

LD, the expert cop.

The cops were doing what they are going to do.

You want that to change or if you have a real beef about it, move back to the US, stop being the griping AI bot, and change it.

The woman was likely a paid actor.

So you think it IS ok.
Glad we had this chat.

Also: paid actor?  Really?

Not gonna claim the cop was a paid actor too?  Since he shot her for the film?

38

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 12, 2025, 07:15:36 PM »

I was now able to see the video LD posted.

The woman said she was trying to get to her apartment.

A. There is no evidence provided she had any business in that area.

II. The police told her to leave the area.

c. She ignored the situation.

You guys were all here cheering on the draconian response to covfefe.

Spare us your wails of anguish over this incident as they ring hollow.

A) Well, she likely had an ID that had her address on it.  Which the police could have asked for.  But no... they didn't.  They didn't even GIVE her the chance to show she had business. 

B) Of course, like a good boy, I'm sure you'd be like "Yes sir, I'll just sleep in the streets tonight,sir." >_>  What about all that love of freedom?  Doesn't apply to cops?

C) I think her standing a good 20ft away was not an "I'm ignoring the situation" kinda thing.  If she tried to walk through the line then sure, I'd probably agree.  But she didn't. 

So, do you think shooting her, when she was far from the line, not in the area, claimed to have business there, AND posed no threat... was appropriate behavior?

39

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 12, 2025, 12:42:32 PM »

If you read the LA Times article, it does not get into the particulars about which you ask.

It simply states the woman entered an area that had been cordoned off by police.

Hence, my question to you.

Would you, like the woman, enter an area cordoned off by police?

If yes, what would you expect to happen?

So you didn't watch the video, or you'd know that she did not cross the police line.  She was a good 10-20 feet away from the line.

So unless cops have a habit of blocking off areas they stand several feet inside to stop people from entering... There was no reason for their reaction.

40

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 12, 2025, 11:50:53 AM »

LD, if an area has been cordoned off by the police, are you going to enter that area?

If so, what do you expect to happen?

At what point did she enter the area cordoned off?
And why was her residency blocked from residents?