ForumGarden

I haven't claimed any broken bones, I've merely taken offence at people using emoticons as a shield while throwing insults. It's not what they were designed for.

With all due respect it was you that mentioned emoticons first.................unless the suggestion of the addition of LOL caused the offence.

The first mention was earlier. Search for "wink".

ezworldwide;1506485 wrote: Perhaps. Although I think he may only do one term by choice opening it up for Mike Pence.


Trump is a narcissistic egomaniac, but Pence is an evil, xenophobic sociopath. God forbid it.

Evil quotes by Pence:

"Time for a quick reality check. Despite the hysteria from the political class and the media, smoking doesn’t kill. In fact, 2 out of every three smokers does not die from a smoking related illness."

"For years, we have gotten the message from the mouthpieces of the popular culture that you can have it all, career, kids and a two-car garage...Sure, you can have it all, but your day-care kids get the short end of the emotional stick."

"Obviously, this is Walt Disney’s attempt to add childhood expectation to the cultural debate over the role of women in the military. I suspect that some mischievous liberal at Disney assumes that Mulan’s story will cause a quiet change in the next generation’s attitude about women in combat...Many young women find many young men to be attractive sexually. Put them together, in close quarters, for long periods of time, and things will get interesting¦Moral of the story: women in military, bad idea."

(Matthews): "You say you want to educate the American people about science and its relevance today, do you believe in evolution sir?" (Pence): "Do I believe in evolution? I embrace the view that God created the heavens and the Earth and the seas and all that's in them."

"Frankly, condoms are a very, very poor protection against sexually transmitted diseases."

"Global warming is a myth...There, I said it. Just like the 'new Ice Age' scare of the 1970s, the environmental movement has found a new chant for their latest 'Chicken Little' attempt to raise taxes and grow centralized governmental power. The chant is 'the sky is warming! the sky is warming!'"

"Homosexuality is incompatible with military service because the presence of homosexuals in the ranks weakens unit cohesion."

"Republicans, from George Washington to George W. Bush just have better ideas."

"Congress should oppose any effort to recognize homosexuals as a "discreet and insular minority" entitled to the protection of anti-discrimination laws similar to those extended to women and ethnic minorities."

Referring to homosexuals again: (He's a homophobe) "Congress should support the reauthorization of the Ryan White Care Act only after completion of an audit to ensure that federal dollars were no longer being given to organizations that celebrate and encourage the types of behaviors that facilitate the spreading of the HIV virus. Resources should be directed toward those institutions which provide assistance to those seeking to change their sexual behavior."

Lastly: This one should really light up Spot, who doesn't like American Imperialism: "The timeless values of abstinence and marital faithfulness before condom distribution are the cure for what ails the families of Africa. It is important that we not just send them money, but we must send them values that work."

Trump is Mussolini, a jerk who thinks he's the cure for everything.

Pence is Hitler, a megalomaniacal tyrant and sociopath who wants to dominate everyone and everything.

spot;1506672 wrote: My browser is set not to display emoticons, they are the text equivalent of deliberately insulting the recipient and then intensifying it with "can't you take a joke?". Oscar spent years bullying people with that trick.


That's passive aggressiveness. =^..^=

I'd need to look that up, it's not a term I'm familiar with.

spot, you're not picking on me AGAIN, are you? I have to ask, it's hard to tell.

AnneBoleyn;1506702 wrote: spot, you're not picking on me AGAIN, are you? I have to ask, it's hard to tell.


I really am not, no. I'm extremely prickly on this site when it comes to the suggestion that an emoticon takes all offence out of the preceding text, after having it flung at me year after year by someone determined to stop me posting here. It is a leftover bugbear. My posting rate dropped from ten a day to one a day for two years while that was going on.

Pence's agenda is downright scary.

spot;1506672 wrote: My browser is set not to display emoticons, they are the text equivalent of deliberately insulting the recipient and then intensifying it with "can't you take a joke?". Oscar spent years bullying people with that trick.


:yh_hugs

spot;1506672 wrote: My browser is set not to display emoticons, they are the text equivalent of deliberately insulting the recipient and then intensifying it with "can't you take a joke?". Oscar spent years bullying people with that trick.


Oscar ended up even getting kicked out of the BNP (or more to the point, 'asked to resign').

Have they got a emoticon for resignation ?

Bruv;1506728 wrote: Have they got a emoticon for resignation ?


yes...

No need to shout Saint.

Oh sorry. The whole "narcissistic egomaniac president" thingy gets me hyper.

Never say Swedes have no sense of humor...

FourPart;1506723 wrote: Oscar ended up even getting kicked out of the BNP (or more to the point, 'asked to resign').


What? Did she pass an intelligence or something.

spot;1506904 wrote: Never say Swedes have no sense of humor...






Saw that today as a Tweet.........are you a Twitterer ?

spot;1506904 wrote: Never say Swedes have no sense of humor...






It was the one allan key (sp?) that really made me giggle

Bruv;1506915 wrote: Saw that today as a Tweet.........are you a Twitterer ?


Good lord no - the BBC reported the tweet and I saw it there.

This is the Triumvirate addressing leaders of the Praetorian Guard at their headquarters.







From the left: Lepidus; Octavius still hyped after ceremonially castrating Hillarius; and the legions' favorite general Mark Anthony.

This first term is going to be quite a ride. They look pretty mean.

If you look closely, that is definitely a Roman legion standard on the wall complete with eagle and the initials SPQR underneath. The symbolism is uncanny.

That photo has dictatorship written all over it.

He did a good job last night, whatever your politics.

That depends on whether you believe his bombastic platitudes or not. This White House is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

He's less offensive than your smirking chimp, I'll give you that, but I suspect he'll wreak more havoc.

spot;1507060 wrote: That depends on whether you believe his bombastic platitudes or not. This White House is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

He's less offensive than your smirking chimp, I'll give you that, but I suspect he'll wreak more havoc.
His performance was much better than expected. Has nothing to do with his actions, but then again it appears that actions don't matter so much over here any more. What matters is selling it.

Watching the address, I wondered why the cameras focused on the Republican side of the chamber. I really love watching the sour****es on the other side.

I didn't watch. He makes me sick.

Well, it did show that he is capable of focusing for an hour, and reading a teleprompter.

Another "you couldn't make it up" moment...China may soon be home to Donald Trump-themed escort services.

Preliminary approval has been granted for 38 trademarks for Trump-branded escort services, massage parlors, and bars in China, according to public documents.

Approval comes as the US President and his family prepare to develop a range of branded businesses in the nation, despite Trump previously slamming it for gobbling a lot of American jobs.

While The Donald was campaigning to become president in April 2016, his lawyers had applied for trademarks in the Middle Kingdom; trademarks which were provisionally approved on 27 February and 6 March by the China Trademark Office.

As long as the trademark bureau receives no official objections, the trademarks will be officially recognized in 90 days, 35 of them in the name of Donald Trump himself.

Of course, if the most controversy-friendly president of the millennium receives any special treatment in securing trademark rights, he would be found to be in violation of the constitution, which prohibits public servants from accepting benefits from foreign governments without the approval of Congress.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/03/0 ... _in_china/







This is the American President?

Perhaps Hollywood will make it into a comedy with inflatable Donalds and "the full experience is an extra fifty yuan, sir".

Bah !! More fake news........close down The Register

Bruv;1507334 wrote: Bah !! More fake news........close down The Register


It's hard to decide with a story like that, it's to totally unbelievable. I've posted it because I have always found The Register to be trustworthy, I'm sure they checked it was true before they printed it. If it turns out to be fake I'll come back and say so.





https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-approv ... 22447.html

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=trump+tradema ... a+&ia=news

spot;1507348 wrote: It's hard to decide with a story like that, it's to totally unbelievable. I've posted it because I have always found The Register to be trustworthy, I'm sure they checked it was true before they printed it. If it turns out to be fake I'll come back and say so.


I was speaking on behalf of President Trump.........hasn't he said it yet ?

This electronic surveillance argument relating to Trump Towers before the election.

There's nothing in US law to stop US agencies from bugging foreigners, the only restrictions relate to US citizens. The British are foreigners from an American perspective.

There's nothing in UK law to stop UK agencies - the GCHQ references - from bugging foreigners, the only restrictions relate to UK citizens. Americans are foreigners from the UK's perspective.

There's a long-standing agreement in place that US and UK intelligence agencies can each look at the data held by each other's agencies.

The suggestion is that data relating to pre-election Trumpite phone and internet communications might have thereby been available to the Obama White House. Not "bugging" in any physical sense, I doubt UK agencies can do that in the US, but electronic monitoring? I'd have thought it was easily possible.

The idea that these agencies actively and deliberately monitor allies is demonstrably true, right up to Presidential level. The Merkel phone-monitoring scandal is an instance.

The one thing that would demonstrate falsity would be transparency in the operation of the agencies concerned, and that doesn't exist. There is no evidence, because these issues are secret. The only proof would involve a relevant leak and there is no such leak. But the lack of evidence doesn't make the background of intelligence sharing false, or the respective legality of monitoring foreigners.

As for blustering denials from GCHQ itself, the only information the denial provides is that GCHQ would prefer not to be shown to have done it. Honesty and spying are not compatible, the denials carry no weight. Whether true or false, they'd say the same words either way.

Trump chocolate cake the mother of all bombs and..........Iraq ?

What a knob...........(excuse me ladies.)

There are moments when I'm just relieved I have no FlashPlayer installed.

spot;1508384 wrote: There are moments when I'm just relieved I have no FlashPlayer installed.


You must have seen or heard about the chocolate cake and Trump mistakenly thinking the supreme technology of American armaments dropping missiles onto Iraq.....sorry Afghanistan ?

More Monty Python then POTUS

Not a word, no.

He's doing what I wanted him to do. He's completely destroying any pretension that the US is a superpower. That's all President Trump is about. The USA is not the Roman Empire reborn, the USA is an embarrassing laughing stock of would-be bully-boys who can't take life in the real world. Yankee go home.

I never saw the advantage of meaningless red lines and leading from behind.

tude dog;1508387 wrote: I never saw the advantage of meaningless red lines and leading from behind.


Could you translate that into English English.

spot;1508386 wrote: Not a word, no.

He's doing what I wanted him to do.


He is not even doing what he himself wants to do

Bruv;1508389 wrote: Could you translate that into English English.


It was in reference to failed policies of Obama

Obama’s Blurry Red Line

The Obama doctrine: Leading from behind

tude dog;1508395 wrote: It was in reference to failed policies of Obama

Obama’s Blurry Red Line

The Obama doctrine: Leading from behind


It is easy to talk now, lets see how The Trumpster gets on....................if any of us survive to talk about it that is.

spot;1508453 wrote: If you can't follow the points that's your problem. Your country did not begin as an Empire, okay? Neither did Rome. They became Empires when they started acquiring foreign territory. Look up "Empire" in a dictionary if you can't grasp that bit.


Although Native Americans might argue that the expansion of the original colonies/states won from the British Empire began almost immediately and that that expansion was by force. Very quickly that expanded to claiming territory that had been previously claimed by the French and Spanish empires within North America. But I agree that the expansion to include territories outside NA didn't happen until a century later.

The Native Americans had no vote - neither did women, Hispanics, Chinese, children, anyone even slightly descended from slaves - but the states, as they expanded and proliferated, had federal representation in Washington which was elected by citizens within the state. I think that's a distinguishing mark. It distinguishes any of those newly-acquired US States from, for example, Panama after the building of the canal.

spot;1508458 wrote: The Native Americans had no vote - neither did women, Hispanics, Chinese, children, anyone even slightly descended from slaves - but the states, as they expanded and proliferated, had federal representation in Washington which was elected by citizens within the state. I think that's a distinguishing mark. It distinguishes any of those newly-acquired US States from, for example, Panama after the building of the canal.


They didn't have a vote in Washington because we didn't allow it. Doesn't the fact that they assembled "armies" to defend against the land grab indicate that they were not in favor of it?

spot;1508453 wrote: If you can't follow the points that's your problem. Your country did not begin as an Empire, okay? Neither did Rome. They became Empires when they started acquiring foreign territory. Look up "Empire" in a dictionary if you can't grasp that bit.


Stop being an arrogant putz.

a group of nations or peoples ruled over by an emperor, empress, or other powerful sovereign or government: usually a territory of greater extent than a kingdom, as the former British Empire, French Empire, Russian Empire, Byzantine Empire, or Roman Empire.

I don't care to argure the point.

posted by spot

The Roman Empire adopted multiple Emperors from around 200CE onward, and in 330CE the Emperor Constantine moved the seat of the Roman Empire to Constantinople. The Western Roman Empire fell in 410CE, the Eastern Roman Empire flourished for another thousand years, falling in 1453CE. That gives a continuous Roman Empire of 150 years under the Republic followed by 1500 years under the Emperors, which you may if you like call 1650 years. I called it 1400 because I wasn't doing mental arithmetic, I was writing a sentence.


Good point, like most europeans I tend to think anything happening oiutside of europe outside of europe is of less import even though I do know better. The largest land empire in history was the mongol empire it always amuses me that they didn't really with europe because there was nothing worth having.

the british empire and the americanse have in common the absurd belief that they are somehow more moral than all the other empires, they were also both driven by commerce, industry and empire walking hand in hand over anyone in their way. Manifest destiny takes many forms we just kid ourselves that we are actually any diffeent from those who went before. Mind you I wish ukip and the tories would realise the days of empire are actually over.

The republic ended when an apparent saviour came riding in to sort out the corrupt ruling elite. Not drawing any parallels just saying

tude dog;1508462 wrote: I don't care to argure the point.If your point is that America was an empire either in 1776 or in 1889 then I'm not surprised. You know it wasn't, I know it wasn't, but it's what you claimed at http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/curre ... ost1508403.



Wandrin;1508460 wrote: They didn't have a vote in Washington because we didn't allow it. Doesn't the fact that they assembled "armies" to defend against the land grab indicate that they were not in favor of it?I'm sure they weren't in favor of it. Yorkists rose against King Henry VIII over the reformation of the church and got slaughtered in droves. Around a third of all adult Cornishmen were killed a few years later for the same reason. The Cornish, the men of Yorkshire and the Native Americans were not an independent nation, they were subject peoples. The fiction that Native American territory was sovereign by treaty has never held any practical truth outside of operating casinos.





gmc;1508465 wrote: The largest land empire in history was the mongol empireI'm not sure why you think that. Can you see any reasonable claim on the Internet that the Mongol Empire exceeded either the population or the area, by proportion or by magnitude, of the British Empire (Wikipedia: By 1913, the British Empire held sway over 412 million people, 23% of the world population at the time, and by 1920 it covered 35,500,000 km2 (13,700,000 sq mi), 24% of the Earth's total land area)? I can't.

posted by spot

I'm not sure why you think that. Can you see any reasonable claim on the Internet that the Mongol Empire exceeded either the population or the area, by proportion or by magnitude, of the British Empire (Wikipedia: By 1913, the British Empire held sway over 412 million people, 23% of the world population at the time, and by 1920 it covered 35,500,000 km2 (13,700,000 sq mi), 24% of the Earth's total land area)? I can't.


That's why I said the largest land empire - as in one created solely from land conquests. I'm quite well aware the british empire was bigger but that was due due to our dominance at sea which was itself the luck of history and also a technological advantage ( thanks to that concentration on naval power) that is a major advantage if you have a considerable technological advantage like when using cannon and later machine guns against those who don't have them. Had the mongols in the 13th century headed for central europe we wouldn't have been able to stop them any more than the russians did

So, that was the first hundred days.

Overall, in broad terms, I can't see that he's done anything which could upset me. Not bad, could have been lots worse.

What's he succeeded in doing? He met the Chinese man in charge. He's not killed many people. He's placated his military without letting them do anything significant.

"America has rarely seen such Presidential success", as the advert says.

Oh, and he's raised $15 million for his re-election campaign.

A lot of his potential damage was mitigated by the spending bill negotiated within Congress. He doesn't get his wall or some of the drastic spending cuts to health and science and he only gets a portion of what he wanted for military.