2020 US Presidential Election. (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Wisbech Eagle Online  Truro Cornwall 09 Jan 21 9.19pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
Correct matov. Let's see if the posters thinking it's ok when its british gas or southern water or electric companies cutting people off through non paid Bills. Not really valid comparisons. They are all privatised utilities who carry with them the legal obligations placed upon them whilst publically owned. Private companies cannot ever do whatever they like. They have every bit as much responsibility to operate lawfully as everything else. So if our lawmakers decide that the social media companies need to be controlled in some way then that's what will happen. I suspect the trend will though be for them to be required to exercise more oversight, rather than less. That's what most of us think is needed, although not here.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
croydon proud  Any european country i fancy! 09 Jan 21 9.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Matov
The US has been in its 'war on terror' since 2000. The risk of a group of whoever storming the Senate building must have been deemed a definite 'what if' on all kinds of peoples radars, especially on a day like that. And with a much higher risk factor valued in that in a normal electoral process for all kinds of reasons. Yet we see that group of misfits and freaks do that? Imagine if they had been serious? Come in with assault rifles and so on? If that was a coup it was the s***iest one I have ever seen. Those people should not have been within 100 metres of that main entrance. Let alone able to breach those doors. Surely they have some kind of emergency barriers in place? The ability to close that entire complex down just in case somebody with serious intent decides to have a day out in it? Especially in a country with the US's history of mass shootings and so on? This goes beyond incompetence.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Teddy Eagle  09 Jan 21 9.32pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
I'm going to miss that awkward but strangely warm and then angry and then warm again Trump/Kim Jong Un relationship. My absolute favourite moment was when Trump talked about them being handsome and thin....while the mega fat Kim stood opposite him. They had their golf in common. Kim finished his first round 38 under par so with a bit of practice....
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Matov 09 Jan 21 9.37pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by croydon proud
Except I believe, and am more than willing to be corrected on this, that security for the building falls under the remit of the DC police. Who are Democrat controlled. My rule of thumb for these events is who stands to gain most from it? If we can discount this as a serious coup attempt then the question has to be, who would gain from having that particular event disrupted? All I have seen is grief fall on the Republicans. Even the killing of that lady, which I suspect if the other way around i.e a BLM 'protesters' would have probably garnered a lot of more publicity along with questions asked about why the entire building was not declared a murder scene, as would have been the case of a UK equivalent, especially given the lady was not armed. Now I kind of get why that shot was fired. The security guy had no real idea of what he was facing and I suspect that he deemed the actions of the protesters as being a risk to life. To be honest, once you breach the security of a building like that then you have to be assumed as a real threat. No other option. But she was unarmed. And a military veteran. With no criminal record. And yet her death seems to barely make the news. She should never have been in that building. As simple as that. That is where the focus of the enquiry should be. Why was she able to present that threat with such tragic consequences.
"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 |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Online Truro Cornwall 09 Jan 21 9.50pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
Where did he advise to enter that building? You cannot judge this by what he said during his speech to the "protest" on Wednesday. You have also to consider what he said and did in the weeks and months prior to that. You must also consider what he didn't say and the nods and winks he gave. "Will no-one rid me of this troublesome priest?"is a powerful incentive to the indoctrinated to do harm. Plausible deniability has long been a Trump instinct. There are strong rumours now circulating that Trump replacing the leadership in the Pentagon with some of his closest stooges might have had something to do with the pathetic security response on Weds. We will find out in time no doubt.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Matov 09 Jan 21 9.57pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
There are strong rumours now circulating that Trump replacing the leadership in the Pentagon with some of his closest stooges might have had something to do with the pathetic security response on Weds. We will find out in time no doubt. Except the Pentagon are not involved in the security. It is this lot... [Link] Now I do not know enough about them to comment, not able to even hazard a guess at the level of political influence but its chief officer resigned this week so I guess heads are already rolling. And for once, I am trying to play it neutral on this. Always interested in this kind of detail but would only add that this force in particular should be on the ball given that it is their primary remit. And I suspect are bloody well funded. Edited by Matov (09 Jan 2021 9.58pm)
"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 |
|
| Matov 09 Jan 21 10.06pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Actually my apologies. Policing in Washington DC seems confusing. Apparently this lot is directly responsible for the entire Congress...
"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 |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Online Truro Cornwall 09 Jan 21 10.07pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
I see n Korea are ramping it up already. Kim is just playing games and milking the mess the USA have become under Trump. Controlling him is probably best left to the Chinese. He was only ever playing with Trump anyway.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Online Truro Cornwall 09 Jan 21 10.39pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
This is a link to an average of polls, showing him on 41.9 percent yesterday. If you look at polls underneath you will see a wide variance with some of the polls touching even 50 percent for Trump. Considering the near one way traffic of media bias against him it's impressive. So what I said is basically true, there wasn't much reaction to his numbers from this event. It even proved popular in some polls. Edited by Stirlingsays (09 Jan 2021 6.34pm) I haven't looked at the 538 poll of polls for weeks. Unsurprisingly this is one of the worst results for him I have ever seen. You are factually incorrect. None of them "touch" 50% approval. Rasmussen is at 48% and they are always outliers. I prefer to describe them as out and out liars myself. 538 adjust them down to 43%! Without them it would be below 40%. As Rasmussen and 2 of the others were all taken, or at least started, before Weds I don't think too many conclusions can be drawn just yet.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Lombardinho London 09 Jan 21 11.16pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
You cannot judge this by what he said during his speech to the "protest" on Wednesday. You have also to consider what he said and did in the weeks and months prior to that. You must also consider what he didn't say and the nods and winks he gave. "Will no-one rid me of this troublesome priest?"is a powerful incentive to the indoctrinated to do harm. Plausible deniability has long been a Trump instinct. There are strong rumours now circulating that Trump replacing the leadership in the Pentagon with some of his closest stooges might have had something to do with the pathetic security response on Weds. We will find out in time no doubt. If you'd listened to his speech, Wisbech, you'd know all the troublesome priests have been dealt with.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| matthau South Croydon 09 Jan 21 11.24pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Nancy Pelosi wants trump not to have access to the nuclear codes, wants him impeached (even tho he’s apparently leaving office in just over a week. ie she wants him to lose command of the military. Why would she press this now of all times? He’s not trigger happy. And has days left. Never put America’s young men to war once during his time. Because the democrats and corrupt republicans too for that matter are about to be put under mass arrest. Why do you think the media hates trump so much? They’ve made you want to hate him. Why do you think he took on a twitter account and was on there mostly? Because that was up until now the only way no one could mince his words Enormous silent war happening and most are oblivious and let their brain washed brains hatred of trump fog the obvious truth.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
cryrst  The garden of England 09 Jan 21 11.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by SW19 CPFC
‘Not a word whilst Trump was in power’ Er - yes he has been ‘quieter’ since 2018 but to say ‘not a word’ is completely false For starters, from fat boy himself... ‘The mentally deranged behaviour of the US president openly expressing on the UN arena the unethical will to “totally destroy” a sovereign state, beyond the boundary of threats and regime change or overturn of social system, makes even those with normal thinking faculty think about discretion and composure.’ ‘we will consider with seriousness exercising a corresponding, highest level of hard-line countermeasure in history. ‘I will surely and definitely tame the mentally deranged US dotard with fire.” Etc etc several ballistic and cruise tests etc etc Let’s not just make s*** up to suit our own narrative, eh? Somewhat discredits the objectiveness and validity of your opinions Edited by SW19 CPFC (09 Jan 2021 8.54pm) Well according to one on here I'm an expert on covid and thick as s*** other than that. My opinions are generally nonsense.
|
|
| 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.