In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On October 15 2016 11:54 zlefin wrote: I know what the words mean RiK; and none of what you said contradicts my point or its correctness. your non-reply is not helpful, but bespeaks of a trollish nature; so please avoid doing such.
You can't go through life assuming that when people point out fallacies in your life as "trolls", maybe you can but its pretty sad.
I replied you when you said that those two aren't the same thing.
Well character is made of characteristics.
So you can't separate the two.
And beside, I already wrote what was released so far, the magnitude and frequency of Hillary's corruption have been greater than that Trump's scandals which you ignored.
one being made of the other doesn't mean they're the same thing; they are different. Related, but different; and you were not using the word correctly. There are also clear shades of meaning issues.
And you did not point out my fallacy, you made a mistake of your own which I pointed out. Then you incorrectly claimed I was wrong.
Also, you have no actual decent evidence of Hillary corruption, everything you've ever posted has been rebutted, or been reduced to merely mildly indicative. You should not assert things as fact which are not true. And Trump clearly has massive problems with fitness himself, including considerable evidence of corruption. As well as being far less competent and numerous other things. There's been plenty of time to observe how you have processed the information, and to glean sufficient info about who is doing a better job of parsing a difficult case. I hereby dunning-kruger you.
On October 15 2016 11:54 zlefin wrote: I know what the words mean RiK; and none of what you said contradicts my point or its correctness. your non-reply is not helpful, but bespeaks of a trollish nature; so please avoid doing such.
You can't go through life assuming that when people point out fallacies in your life as "trolls", maybe you can but its pretty sad.
I replied you when you said that those two aren't the same thing.
Well character is made of characteristics.
So you can't separate the two.
And beside, I already wrote what was released so far, the magnitude and frequency of Hillary's corruption have been greater than that Trump's scandals which you ignored.
one being made of the other doesn't mean they're the same thing; they are different. Related, but different; and you were not using the word correctly. There are also clear shades of meaning issues.
And you did not point out my fallacy, you made a mistake of your own which I pointed out. Then you incorrectly claimed I was wrong.
Also, you have no actual decent evidence of Hillary corruption, everything you've ever posted has been rebutted, or been reduced to merely mildly indicative. You should not assert things as fact which are not true. And Trump clearly has massive problems with fitness himself, including considerable evidence of corruption. As well as being far less competent and numerous other things.
No you clearly said we should be discussing characters which are made of characteristics so logically you can't separate the two.
Nothing have been rebutted here regarding Hillary, the emails released by Wikileaks haven't even been denied by herself.
On October 15 2016 11:54 zlefin wrote: I know what the words mean RiK; and none of what you said contradicts my point or its correctness. your non-reply is not helpful, but bespeaks of a trollish nature; so please avoid doing such.
You can't go through life assuming that when people point out fallacies in your life as "trolls", maybe you can but its pretty sad.
I replied you when you said that those two aren't the same thing.
Well character is made of characteristics.
So you can't separate the two.
And beside, I already wrote what was released so far, the magnitude and frequency of Hillary's corruption have been greater than that Trump's scandals which you ignored.
one being made of the other doesn't mean they're the same thing; they are different. Related, but different; and you were not using the word correctly. There are also clear shades of meaning issues.
And you did not point out my fallacy, you made a mistake of your own which I pointed out. Then you incorrectly claimed I was wrong.
Also, you have no actual decent evidence of Hillary corruption, everything you've ever posted has been rebutted, or been reduced to merely mildly indicative. You should not assert things as fact which are not true. And Trump clearly has massive problems with fitness himself, including considerable evidence of corruption. As well as being far less competent and numerous other things.
No you clearly said we should be discussing characters which are made of characteristics so logically you can't separate the two.
Nothing have been rebutted here regarding Hillary, the emails released by Wikileaks haven't even been denied by herself.
So that's a lie.
well, it seems we've been taught slightly different shades of meaning in use of the term "character" and "characteristics", and you refuse to recognize or admit to that. and again, that they are related does not mean they are the same.
You are now lying, and have proven yourself a troll; as I did not specify a time frame, and over the course of the past year in this thread, a large number of claims about hillary have been rebutted. So you claim I am lying, when you are provably factually incorrect in your claim of me lying, and in your claim of nothing having been rebutted here. As you are demonstrably trolling, and arguing in bad faith, I shall speak to you no further, until I forget.
On October 15 2016 11:54 zlefin wrote: I know what the words mean RiK; and none of what you said contradicts my point or its correctness. your non-reply is not helpful, but bespeaks of a trollish nature; so please avoid doing such.
You can't go through life assuming that when people point out fallacies in your life as "trolls", maybe you can but its pretty sad.
I replied you when you said that those two aren't the same thing.
Well character is made of characteristics.
So you can't separate the two.
And beside, I already wrote what was released so far, the magnitude and frequency of Hillary's corruption have been greater than that Trump's scandals which you ignored.
one being made of the other doesn't mean they're the same thing; they are different. Related, but different; and you were not using the word correctly. There are also clear shades of meaning issues.
And you did not point out my fallacy, you made a mistake of your own which I pointed out. Then you incorrectly claimed I was wrong.
Also, you have no actual decent evidence of Hillary corruption, everything you've ever posted has been rebutted, or been reduced to merely mildly indicative. You should not assert things as fact which are not true. And Trump clearly has massive problems with fitness himself, including considerable evidence of corruption. As well as being far less competent and numerous other things.
No you clearly said we should be discussing characters which are made of characteristics so logically you can't separate the two.
Nothing have been rebutted here regarding Hillary, the emails released by Wikileaks haven't even been denied by herself.
So that's a lie.
well, it seems we've been taught slightly different shades of meaning in use of the term "character" and "characteristics", and you refuse to recognize or admit to that. and again, that they are related does not mean they are the same.
You are now lying, and have proven yourself a troll; as I did not specify a time frame, and over the course of the past year in this thread, a large number of claims about hillary have been rebutted. So you claim I am lying, when you are provably factually incorrect in your claim of me lying, and in your claim of nothing having been rebutted here. As you are demonstrably trolling, and arguing in bad faith, I shall speak to you no further, until I forget.
I've been taught that you can't discuss a superset without discussing its subset.
You wanted to box me in not talking about the specific to which I successfully called you on it.
If Donald Trump have the characteristic of breaking down the political curtain, then he is a character that breaks down the political curtain AND/OR he have the character of breaking down the political curtain.
No logical violation here.
Now you are upset because Hillary's recent Wikileaks do contain items that are higher in magnitude than Trump's scandals.
That's not a characteristic, more of a behavior. It's also not really true, except insofar as he ruins everything. it's also clear that you can discuss a superset without having to talk about its subset(s). And the recent leaks are unreliable trash. furthermore, we were never only discussing the most recent ones, so the soundness of my points stands. as numerous other things, including other leaks, have been rebutted in the past in the thread.
And you make false assertions as to my feelings. You are a troll, and I shall respond to you no further, except to indicate I will not talk to you further, until I forget, or screw up again and do it anyways.
On October 15 2016 12:38 zlefin wrote: That's not a characteristic, more of a behavior. It's also not really true, except insofar as he ruins everything. it's also clear that you can discuss a superset without having to talk about its subset(s). And the recent leaks are unreliable trash. furthermore, we were never only discussing the most recent ones, so the soundness of my points stands. as numerous other things, including other leaks, have been rebutted in the past in the thread.
And you make false assertions as to my feelings. You are a troll, and I shall respond to you no further, except to indicate I will not talk to you further, until I forget, or screw up again and do it anyways.
Most of Hillary's weaknesses have been exposed by the recent findings anyways.
On October 15 2016 12:29 RealityIsKing wrote:... Now you are upset because Hillary's recent Wikileaks do contain items that are higher in magnitude than Trump's scandals.
Okay, give me an example of this. From the recent Wikileaks stuff, mind you.
On October 15 2016 12:29 RealityIsKing wrote:... Now you are upset because Hillary's recent Wikileaks do contain items that are higher in magnitude than Trump's scandals.
Okay, give me an example of this. From the recent Wikileaks stuff, mind you.
I love that we have posters on this board defending Assange while even Alex Jones admitted that we got trolled. Everybody still thinking that wikileaks is relevant should notice that they are further out there than the guy who is convinced that Obama is a demon, as in literally a demon
So on the previous page Wikileaks twitted a weird poll about Obama doing foreign policy stuff for the benefit of Hillary's election campaign, in which they mentioned that the US announced a cyber war against Russia today. Here's what that's all about.
The Obama administration is contemplating an unprecedented cyber covert action against Russia in retaliation for alleged Russian interference in the American presidential election, U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News.
Current and former officials with direct knowledge of the situation say the CIA has been asked to deliver options to the White House for a wide-ranging "clandestine" cyber operation designed to harass and "embarrass" the Kremlin leadership.
The sources did not elaborate on the exact measures the CIA was considering, but said the agency had already begun opening cyber doors, selecting targets and making other preparations for an operation. Former intelligence officers told NBC News that the agency had gathered reams of documents that could expose unsavory tactics by Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Vice President Joe Biden told "Meet the Press" moderator Chuck Todd on Friday that "we're sending a message" to Putin and that "it will be at the time of our choosing, and under the circumstances that will have the greatest impact."
When asked if the American public will know a message was sent, the vice president replied, "Hope not."
The article later mentions that the problem with all this is that it will probably have a painful tit-for-tat response if they hit anything of consequence. Mess with the dealings of Russian banks, and Russia will mess with the dealings of American banks, and so on. Also kind of stupid to announce anything like this if it actually is a plan of action and not just rhetoric.
On October 15 2016 12:38 zlefin wrote: That's not a characteristic, more of a behavior. It's also not really true, except insofar as he ruins everything. it's also clear that you can discuss a superset without having to talk about its subset(s). And the recent leaks are unreliable trash. furthermore, we were never only discussing the most recent ones, so the soundness of my points stands. as numerous other things, including other leaks, have been rebutted in the past in the thread.
And you make false assertions as to my feelings. You are a troll, and I shall respond to you no further, except to indicate I will not talk to you further, until I forget, or screw up again and do it anyways.
Oh for crying out loud!!!
This whole time you could have simply said: "Okay by character I mean how people view him in a personal, common way; as in whether he is friendly or aggressive, whether he seems knowledgeable or not. I don't mean more abstract characteristics like how corrupt he/she is or their technical proficiency in economics"
But instead you typed 6 responses which only aggravated him (and readers like me) further, pointlessly. Why is it so difficult for people to communicate with each other. If he clearly doesn't understand what you mean, then you can EASILY EXPLAIN in like two sentences instead of going on a mutli-post tirade, where you claim you will never talk to him but then talk to him anyway
On October 15 2016 13:28 LegalLord wrote: So on the previous page Wikileaks twitted a weird poll about Obama doing foreign policy stuff for the benefit of Hillary's election campaign, in which they mentioned that the US announced a cyber war against Russia today. Here's what that's all about.
The Obama administration is contemplating an unprecedented cyber covert action against Russia in retaliation for alleged Russian interference in the American presidential election, U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News.
Current and former officials with direct knowledge of the situation say the CIA has been asked to deliver options to the White House for a wide-ranging "clandestine" cyber operation designed to harass and "embarrass" the Kremlin leadership.
The sources did not elaborate on the exact measures the CIA was considering, but said the agency had already begun opening cyber doors, selecting targets and making other preparations for an operation. Former intelligence officers told NBC News that the agency had gathered reams of documents that could expose unsavory tactics by Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Vice President Joe Biden told "Meet the Press" moderator Chuck Todd on Friday that "we're sending a message" to Putin and that "it will be at the time of our choosing, and under the circumstances that will have the greatest impact."
When asked if the American public will know a message was sent, the vice president replied, "Hope not."
The article later mentions that the problem with all this is that it will probably have a painful tit-for-tat response if they hit anything of consequence. Mess with the dealings of Russian banks, and Russia will mess with the dealings of American banks, and so on. Also kind of stupid to announce anything like this if it actually is a plan of action and not just rhetoric.
So much for "covert action" and "clandestine" if it's being reported in national media.
Wikileaks have gone off the deep end, how do any of those 'ensure a Clinton win'? Not to mention that she was 7 points ahead before this supposed spooky conspiracy
Questioning why the US is now bombing Yemen and supporting Saudi who are committing atrocities in Yemen is fair game, don't agree with the poll options there though,
Even TIME magazine, one of the most left-wing pro establishment rags out there says US support for the war in Yemen is "indefensible".
Last Saturday, as hundreds of Yemeni mourners waited to pay their respects to a beloved elder, warplanes obliterated the funeral hall they were gathered in killing more than 140 people and wounding more than 525. This is not an isolated incident but rather the latest tragedy in Saudi Arabia’s military intervention—facilitated by U.S. intelligence sharing and aerial refueling.
These are your tax dollars at work.
The humanitarian impact of the bombing campaign is staggering—no civilian is left unaffected. Yemen, the poorest country in the Middle East before the start of this conflict, is now on the brink of starvation. The numbers do not sufficiently represent the desperation that this conflict has wrought, but they’re a start. More than 19 million people do not have access to clean water, 14 million people are suffering from hunger and malnutrition, and more than 3 million Yemenis have been driven from their homes.
Assange is against US imperialism, Clinton represents a continuation of Obamas policy aka more imperialism.Yemen appears to be the latest casualty.
Obama has invaded, is controlling, and ruling a foreign country while enslaving its people in the name of mother america? Since when?
One of the biggest disasters of our Middle Eastern conflicts, and of declaring Islamic terrorism to be the world's great boogeyman, is we have ignored the catastrophic disaster and deterioration of Russian democracy under the propagandist and murderer, KGB-spook Putin.
Over the past 12 years, Russia has invaded Georgia, staged a proxy-invasion of Ukraine, annexed Crimea, and has essentially carpet-bombed civilian cities in Syria, often targeting hospitals and supply convoys in Aleppo -- that city which Gary Johnson has never heard of.
Doing all this, Putin has energized the state and "private" Russian media groups to pump out insane amounts of anti-Western nationalism. Russian pundits openly relish thoughts of nuclear war with America on Russia's major TV-networks. Russian diplomats actually threatened to nuke Denmark when Denmark sought to engage in perfectly legal naval tests.
Putin can sit back while any of his political opponents, like Boris Nemstov, get assassinated by his rabid, brainwashed "patriots". His approval numbers says it all. No democratically-elected person, in a free society, with a free media, has 85% approval. It isn't an accomplishment -- it's a glaring indictment. And Donald Trump PRAISED IT. He praised the destruction of democracy in a country that has sacrificed millions of people trying to obtain it.
In defense of Trump's appeals of "peace" with Russia in its newfound fascism, what do Trump's defenders do? They attack America. Using the exact rhetoric that you would hear from the Russian demagogues. They point at Iraq, which somehow is entirely Obama's fault, and to them America's mistakes excuses Russia's deplorable actions against its neighbors. I'm not sure how it excuses the destruction of Russia's democracy, but I guess the comparison is ridiculous and confusing enough, that it simply destroys all discourse. Which is often the aim of Russia's conspiracy-theory-reveling media -- to simply confuse people into malaise.
America used to stand for democratic ideals and freedom. And now some of this country's so called patriots are relishing in Russian-fascism. How amazingly disturbing. This country will never be the same. If things get any worse, if Trump even manages to win, the Western world, that which fostered modern democracy, will be extremely endangered. America will become perhaps the worst thing to ever happen to Western democracy, if as its leader, we allow ourselves to become so easily overtaken by conspiracy-theories.
Donald Trump already is the worst thing to happen to American democracy. Nevermind the fact that he's a raging scumbag, and a reality-TV clown, made entertaining by his obnoxious behavior. Whether he means to be or not, Trump IS a Russian-plant, doing what a Russian-plant would do. This, coming from the party of Ronald Reagan.
The corporatist, oligarch nature of the GOP was always made charming by its appeals to traditional family-values and protection of democracy, domestic or foreign. Now what do they stand for, at all, besides demagoguery?
On October 15 2016 09:12 Nevuk wrote: Oh... boy. So another apprentice candidate (Jennifer Murphy) said that he kissed her randomly, but that in her case, she was totally OK with it, he was a good man, and she was voting for him (she said it to Erin Burnett a bit ago).
Unless those 11 have concrete evidence on their hand, those are only allegations.
Their word against Trump's. Easy to see that a lot of voters don't believe Trump.
And a lot of voters believe in the institution of due process.
Which is irrelevant in a debate about a candidate's character.
In which Hillary is worse.
In sure your one vote will turn the tide for Trump.
Hopefully we will have some surprises before the election is over, i'm black and i would vote for Trump if i was american, the disgust i have for hillary is enough for me to side with the alt-right on this one.
Wikileaks have gone off the deep end, how do any of those 'ensure a Clinton win'? Not to mention that she was 7 points ahead before this supposed spooky conspiracy
Questioning why the US is now bombing Yemen and supporting Saudi who are committing atrocities in Yemen is fair game, don't agree with the poll options there though,
Even TIME magazine, one of the most left-wing pro establishment rags out there says US support for the war in Yemen is "indefensible".
Last Saturday, as hundreds of Yemeni mourners waited to pay their respects to a beloved elder, warplanes obliterated the funeral hall they were gathered in killing more than 140 people and wounding more than 525. This is not an isolated incident but rather the latest tragedy in Saudi Arabia’s military intervention—facilitated by U.S. intelligence sharing and aerial refueling.
These are your tax dollars at work.
The humanitarian impact of the bombing campaign is staggering—no civilian is left unaffected. Yemen, the poorest country in the Middle East before the start of this conflict, is now on the brink of starvation. The numbers do not sufficiently represent the desperation that this conflict has wrought, but they’re a start. More than 19 million people do not have access to clean water, 14 million people are suffering from hunger and malnutrition, and more than 3 million Yemenis have been driven from their homes.
Assange is against US imperialism, Clinton represents a continuation of Obamas policy aka more imperialism.Yemen appears to be the latest casualty.
Most americans here don't touch foreign policy questions, its even harder to defend because those are not sexual allegations but facts and people are dying in troves because of their politics. hillary will perpetuate this conflicts and engage in more wars and destruction but the media talks about nuclear war if Trump is elected haha.
Hillary openly wants to support Alqaeda, receives donations from Saudi Arabia that support isis... amazing foreign policy.
Disgusting person, i would be ashamed if i had to vote for her.
On October 15 2016 15:13 Leporello wrote: One of the biggest disasters of our Middle Eastern conflicts, and of declaring Islamic terrorism to be the world's great boogeyman, is we have ignored the catastrophic disaster and deterioration of Russian democracy under the propagandist and murderer, KGB-spook Putin.
Over the past 12 years, Russia has invaded Georgia, staged a proxy-invasion of Ukraine, annexed Crimea, and has essentially carpet-bombed civilian cities in Syria, often targeting hospitals and supply convoys in Aleppo -- that city which Gary Johnson has never heard of.
Doing all this, Putin has energized the state and "private" Russian media groups to pump out insane amounts of anti-Western nationalism. Russian pundits openly relish thoughts of nuclear war with America on Russia's major TV-networks. Russian diplomats actually threatened to nuke Denmark when Denmark sought to engage in perfectly legal naval tests.
Putin can sit back while any of his political opponents, like Boris Nemstov, get assassinated by his rabid, brainwashed "patriots". His approval numbers says it all. No democratically-elected person, in a free society, with a free media, has 85% approval. It isn't an accomplishment -- it's a glaring indictment. And Donald Trump PRAISED IT. He praised the destruction of democracy in a country that has sacrificed millions of people trying to obtain it.
In defense of Trump's appeals of "peace" with Russia in its newfound fascism, what do Trump's defenders do? They attack America. Using the exact rhetoric that you would hear from the Russian demagogues. They point at Iraq, which somehow is entirely Obama's fault, and to them America's mistakes excuses Russia's deplorable actions against its neighbors. I'm not sure how it excuses the destruction of Russia's democracy, but I guess the comparison is ridiculous and confusing enough, that it simply destroys all discourse. Which is often the aim of Russia's conspiracy-theory-reveling media -- to simply confuse people into malaise.
America used to stand for democratic ideals and freedom. And now some of this country's so called patriots are relishing in Russian-fascism. How amazingly disturbing. This country will never be the same. If things get any worse, if Trump even manages to win, the Western world, that which fostered modern democracy, will be extremely endangered. America will become perhaps the worst thing to ever happen to Western democracy, if as its leader, we allow ourselves to become so easily overtaken by conspiracy-theories.
Donald Trump already is the worst thing to happen to American democracy. Nevermind the fact that he's a raging scumbag, and a reality-TV clown, made entertaining by his obnoxious behavior. Whether he means to be or not, Trump IS a Russian-plant, doing what a Russian-plant would do. This, coming from the party of Ronald Reagan.
The corporatist, oligarch nature of the GOP was always made charming by its appeals to traditional family-values and protection of democracy, domestic or foreign. Now what do they stand for, at all, besides demagoguery?
You can't stand for freedom and democracy and receive donations from Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other countries that are against all the freedoms and ideal you so much praise. You are hypocrites, i always despised the russian propaganda and attempts to change reality but this election has shown that you guys are not much better. Keep on spreading your democracy in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya... Assad is winning he is getting closer to Iran and Russia, the Houthis are giving trouble to the Saudis with the help of the Iranians, Libya is a failed state governed by Alqaeda, Isis and other militias, Crimea is in Putin's hands, the Ukrainians are still divided and influenced by russia.
The guys that advocate here that the us military directly intervenes in Syria against the regime, what will you say when the first american planes are shot down and you guys are involved in broader conflict again? If you really wanted to destroy isis you would coordinate with russia and be done with it. Obama had very good opportunities to help the rebels and end the war faster he didn't take them, so now the americans have to understand that they policies are a failure.
EPT
