Let’s celebrate the left
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Stirlingsays  03 Jan 24 11.34am |
   |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Nicholas91
"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what anything can do for me so I can exploit it to the maximum degree". I've had an aversion to voting in recent years, only doing so where I consider there to be a 'lesser of two evils'. The declaration that politicians lie etc., especially in the states, will be no revelation however I do find it bemusing those who wholeheartedly support and defend an individual whose singular aim is to benefit themselves, often or even at your demise. I consider Biden to be the worst of these in literally saying anything that will give or keep him in power. His senility cannot be used as an excuse as his track record was there as a younger man. I don't think he gives a singular policy or statement any thought beyond 'what purpose does this serve for me'. He has also made appointments to please and therefore maintain the support of the indoctrinated too. He's certainly not alone there but possibly the worst for it, a 'poster boy' if you will. He heads up the prime example of creating an illusion for the masses to benefit the few. Yep, Biden represents the majority of American politicians of either party in the last thirty years quite well. None of them really believe in anything other than what their donors want them to say.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Stirlingsays 03 Jan 24 11.52am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Just for completeness. Dr Moamina Kamal of Cairo University Medical School has suggested that Khufu's pyramid was a truly nationwide project, with workers drawn to Giza from all over Egypt. Effectively, it seems, the pyramid served both as a gigantic training project and - deliberately or not - as a source of 'Egyptianisation'. Mainstream scholars reject the notion that Egypt was a white or black civilization; they maintain that applying modern notions of black or white races to ancient Egypt is anachronistic. In addition, scholars reject the notion, implicit in the notion of a black or white Egypt hypothesis, that Ancient Egypt was racially homogeneous; instead, skin colour varied between the peoples of Lower Egypt, Upper Egypt, and Nubia. The original inhabitants of the Nile Valley were primarily a variety of indigenous Northeast Africans from the areas of the desiccating Sahara and more southerly areas. Whilst Egyptian society became more socially complex and biologically varied over time, the ethnicity of the Niloto-Saharo-Sudanese origins did not change. I would say that's accurate, some of the pyramids are very old....I heard that the time of Cleopatra is closer to us than she was to the Great Pyramids. So I'm not aware if we have the DNA from the period when they were created as they are so old.....but it has to be a fantasy and speculation without evidence to believe they were built by anyone other than people from the Nile delta. We know that from the time of Alexander and thus Cleopatra the ruling class in Egypt were of Greek origin and thus mixed in European but like with the Normans in England that was time limited. But if I'm remembering correctly European DNA is in all Polynesian peoples' to some extent as it also exists within East Asian linage as well as these races branched off the same trees. Not that this makes them European as such because Polynesian is Polynesian and its own people with its own variations.....just as Europeans are. The Egyptians are totally justified to be miffed at the constant claims made of their past which are patently ridiculous.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
PalazioVecchio  south pole 03 Jan 24 10.30pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Cleopatra was not black. Herself and her family were all deeply inbred and inter-married. And so that limits the discussion to just a small number of groups we know. One group of whom worship the same religion found today in Egypt.
Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 03 Jan 24 11.02pm |
|
|---|---|
|
When meritocracy is no longer the barometer for institutions this is what inevitably happens. [Tweet Link]
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| The Dolphin 04 Jan 24 7.35am |
|
|---|---|
|
the right cancels the left for once so the boot is on the other foot - they won't like that in their little woke bubble!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Matov 04 Jan 24 7.59am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by The Dolphin
the right cancels the left for once so the boot is on the other foot - they won't like that in their little woke bubble! I have a different take. The issue for me is if this plagarism is so blatent then how did she get the job in the first place? Even the most basic of academic due dilligence would/should have exposed this woman for being the fake that she so clearly is. The reason she is gone is because she upset the Jewish power brokers. That much is glaringly obvious with this being a pure display of REAL power politics. With a message sent to numerous other people in top positions, promoted there for every reason other than their ability. f*** with the programme and you will be f***ed off. And replaced. With one of their own. Edited by Matov (04 Jan 2024 8.00am)
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 04 Jan 24 8.12am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Matov
I have a different take. The issue for me is if this plagarism is so blatent then how did she get the job in the first place? Even the most basic of academic due dilligence would/should have exposed this woman for being the fake that she so clearly is. The reason she is gone is because she upset the Jewish power brokers. That much is glaringly obvious with this being a pure display of REAL power politics. With a message sent to numerous other people in top positions, promoted there for every reason other than their ability. f*** with the programme and you will be f***ed off. And replaced. With one of their own. Edited by Matov (04 Jan 2024 8.00am) Ironies abound in this story. She has played the race and woman cards for all their worth, blaming white men no doubt for her fall. So where is the irony? The only reason she got the job was a Billionaire agreed to join the Harvard board and inject loads of dosh, but in return wanted a black female President as part of the deal. They chose the wrong black woman of course. Still it was the establishment that appointed her even though her academic record was spotty to say the least, excluding the allegations of plagiarism. Which leads to the 2nd irony, she has now played the race card presumably because whitey has made false allegations about her cheating. Unfortunately for her the allegations of plagiarism come not from whitey but from several distinguished female black academics who complained before she was even appointed that she had stolen their work. Ouch.
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 04 Jan 24 9.31am |
|
|---|---|
|
People should note who it is taking over from Gay, they have exactly the same politics. They differ in the one way the donors who had withdrawn their money would approve. Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Jan 2024 9.44am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 04 Jan 24 10.41am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
People should note who it is taking over from Gay, they have exactly the same politics. They differ in the one way the donors who had withdrawn their money would approve. Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Jan 2024 9.44am) It's the arrogance that gets me. I have had many women bosses who were good and far smarter than me. However I have noticed in my life women who trumpet their feminism can be just as arrogant as the males they are complaining about and some black women are even worse. Ready to dish it out but don't like to take it. These women have lost their jobs through stupidity. When they were asked about antisemitism all they had to do was give a politician's answer e.g. I reject all forms of hate speech including antisemitism. Instead they thought they would be clever with the Congressman by using word salad and playing the I support free speech argument. Of course this was shown as a lie when multiple examples of them banning or de platforming people because they didn't like what they said surfaced. * Just because you are the smartest person in the room doesn't mean you are the cleverest or most astute, a trap was set for them and they walked right into it. * 3rd irony politicians spend all their time arguing against each other which means they are quite skillful at setting traps for each other (match fit). I wonder if by banning and de platforming your opponents means you don't learn the art of debate and seeing the traps that others set for you? Edited by Badger11 (04 Jan 2024 10.49am)
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| silvertop Portishead 04 Jan 24 11.34am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Yep, Biden represents the majority of American politicians of either party in the last thirty years quite well. None of them really believe in anything other than what their donors want them to say. The alternative being Trump, a person less tethered to those who fund than to his base who support. I can see how that makes him a better candidate. The trouble is, I loath much of what his base supports and I am not sure Trump thinks more along my lines than theirs. That is, cronyism v insincerity. One of the posters described the last election as a choice between toilets 3 days into Glastonbury, and this one will be even worse. The people I really feel for are those alienated by Trump's ultra-right, blow-hard populism who see only Biden as an effective non-Trump vote. I predict a low turn out.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 04 Jan 24 11.51am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by silvertop
The alternative being Trump, a person less tethered to those who fund than to his base who support. I can see how that makes him a better candidate. The trouble is, I loath much of what his base supports and I am not sure Trump thinks more along my lines than theirs. That is, cronyism v insincerity. One of the posters described the last election as a choice between toilets 3 days into Glastonbury, and this one will be even worse. The people I really feel for are those alienated by Trump's ultra-right, blow-hard populism who see only Biden as an effective non-Trump vote. I predict a low turn out. Personally I'm of the view that Trump is just as tethered to his donors as Biden is....in fact maybe even more so because most of Trump's normaie base don't really care or even know much about politics other than 'CNN bad' or 'woke bad'.....whereas a significant base of the Democrats don't like their donors much (something they have in common with the smaller 'America first' crowd). Also, I really have no idea what makes you think Trump is 'ultra right'. I mean seriously....can you name me any of Trump's policies that were 'ultra right'? I mean what did Trump actually do that fits that description.....he's a salesman....an Alf Garnet figure.....Ultra right?.....yeah I wish. The only 'ultra right' thing Trump is likely to do once he takes over is to do what the Democrats did to him and go after his enemies.....that means he's going to actually sack a hell of a lot of people. He's going to craft the courts and prosecute some of them. But this isn't 'ultra right' as the Democrats decided on the same stupid policy. If he wins, which is more likely than not (if they don't black swan him), he's going to have to deal with significant unrest. However, if Biden wins the same thing will happen.....but it won't be on the same 'mostly peaceful riots' scale. Secession and non state non compliance will be back on the menu. Where I would agree with you is that these are bad candidates. In fact the whole situation is beyond ridiculous. But that's where we are.....the Democrats literally made Trump the certain pick of the GOP base by going after him....they must have wanted him otherwise it's beyond stupid. Whatever happens, just hope that we aren't in WW3 by November or after it and that we all get to see whatever insanity unfolds. Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Jan 2024 11.52am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| silvertop Portishead 04 Jan 24 12.02pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Personally I'm of the view that Trump is just as tethered to his donors as Biden is....in fact maybe even more so because most of Trump's normaie base don't really care or even know much about politics other than 'CNN bad' or 'woke bad'.....whereas a significant base of the Democrats don't like their donors much (something they have in common with the smaller 'America first' crowd). Also, I really have no idea what makes you think Trump is 'ultra right'. I mean seriously....can you name me any of Trump's policies that were 'ultra right'? I mean what did Trump actually do that fits that description.....he's a salesman....an Alf Garnet figure.....Ultra right?.....yeah I wish. The only 'ultra right' thing Trump is likely to do once he takes over is to do what the Democrats did to him and go after his enemies.....that means he's going to actually sack a hell of a lot of people. He's going to craft the courts and prosecute some of them. But this isn't 'ultra right' as the Democrats decided on the same stupid policy. If he wins, which is more likely than not (if they don't black swan him), he's going to have to deal with significant unrest. However, if Biden wins the same thing will happen.....but it won't be on the same 'mostly peaceful riots' scale. Secession and non state non compliance will be back on the menu. Where I would agree with you is that these are bad candidates. In fact the whole situation is beyond ridiculous. But that's where we are.....the Democrats literally made Trump the certain pick of the GOP base by going after him....they must have wanted him otherwise it's beyond stupid. Whatever happens, just hope that we aren't in WW3 by November or after it and that we all get to see whatever insanity unfolds. Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Jan 2024 11.52am) What he said was ultra right blow hard populism. I didn't say he actually did anything that was ultra right. Hence the allegation of insincerity. The administrative wing of government simply carried on with the odd tweak and the judicial wing went a bit righter on certain issues. Otherwise, largely business as usual.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.