Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

The WW I centenary

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The WW I centenary

    I am observing the WW I armistice centenary in Strassbourg, France, right now (France hosts the international WW I centenary celebrations). Donald Trump appears to intend to play the role of the skunk at Macrons dinner party (like by Twitter- attacking him only minutes after landing in Paris). For the cameras the presidents later made nice, but seasoned observers largely agree that the next Tweet to spoil it all might not be far away. And Trump is also the only world leader to skip the "peace summit" the convention of leaders of all countries involved in WW I, friends and foes. Wladimir Putin will be there by the way. Noone is obliged to attend, but the optics of the US staying away--are not exactly good PR here.
    For France the WW I anniversary is a highly sensitive and non-partisan issue ( and far from beeing a victory celebration), which is also why people will react thin-skinned to attempts to hijack it (like for domestic political consumption, who is allegedly unfair to who, who will show whom etc. ). Today Macron and Merkel (as representing the principal enemies and nowadays close allies) have jointly honoured the fallen at Compiegne, close to Paris, where the armistice was signed, a gesture that is hard to overstate. At 11.00 central european time bells will ring across France like they did a century ago when the guns fell silent and people will march towards the military cemeteries and memorials. Ceremonies will be held, accounts be read, exhibitions opened, films be shown. In memory of a war whose victors "didn't know how to win the peace", as John Maynard Keynes put it, and thus set the stage for an even worse conflict

  • #2
    Originally posted by Voland View Post
    I am observing the WW I armistice centenary in Strassbourg, France, right now (France hosts the international WW I centenary celebrations). Donald Trump appears to intend to play the role of the skunk at Macrons dinner party (like by Twitter- attacking him only minutes after landing in Paris). For the cameras the presidents later made nice, but seasoned observers largely agree that the next Tweet to spoil it all might not be far away. And Trump is also the only world leader to skip the "peace summit" the convention of leaders of all countries involved in WW I, friends and foes. Wladimir Putin will be there by the way. Noone is obliged to attend, but the optics of the US staying away--are not exactly good PR here.
    For France the WW I anniversary is a highly sensitive and non-partisan issue ( and far from beeing a victory celebration), which is also why people will react thin-skinned to attempts to hijack it (like for domestic political consumption, who is allegedly unfair to who, who will show whom etc. ). Today Macron and Merkel (as representing the principal enemies and nowadays close allies) have jointly honoured the fallen at Compiegne, close to Paris, where the armistice was signed, a gesture that is hard to overstate. At 11.00 central european time bells will ring across France like they did a century ago when the guns fell silent and people will march towards the military cemeteries and memorials. Ceremonies will be held, accounts be read, exhibitions opened, films be shown. In memory of a war whose victors "didn't know how to win the peace", as John Maynard Keynes put it, and thus set the stage for an even worse conflict
    Too bad the weather was too harsh for president Bone spurs. Wouldn't want to get his hair wet the way he did during the monsoon season in Vietnam, back in 1968.

    ?


    • #3
      Originally posted by redrover View Post

      Too bad the weather was too harsh for president Bone spurs. Wouldn't want to get his hair wet the way he did during the monsoon season in Vietnam, back in 1968.
      I enjoyed the defenders of the prez (in comments after news article), and the response to the defenders. I paraphrase one, as follows:
      Defender: "He couldn't risk a helicopter ride in the drizzle, which could have developed into a typhoon!".
      Lefty Responds: "I understand France is a developed country, with enclosed internal combustion vehicles and roads, even paved roads. Was Trump unable to be driven 50 miles?"
      Defender: "You are such a communist. Why do you hate our president so much?"
      -It's a laugh riot, check out the comments section for this issue.

      On a more serious note, I was hoping the prez would pay his respects to the fallen on both sides, and express his position against US military involvement in WWI at a more appropriate moment. Perhaps my hopes will yet show Trump has some sense of history and the values of our US republic, and he will actually give a speech on that theme. OTOH, history with this prez indicates my hopes belong in an alternate reality, and he skipped the cemetery visit because it would be too boring. Or maybe he just wanted to upset lefties and politicians in Europe, but forgot about offending military staff ('round the world) with this behavior. -Let's go with the less complicated explanation: He didn't go because he thought it was too boring (car ride and/or buncha grave sites). With that, we can look forward to our US leader giving dirty looks to many leaders in attendance, except the group that are generally supporters of Trump.

      ?


      • #4
        Originally posted by radcentr View Post
        I enjoyed the defenders of the prez (in comments after news article), and the response to the defenders. I paraphrase one, as follows:
        Defender: "He couldn't risk a helicopter ride in the drizzle, which could have developed into a typhoon!".
        Lefty Responds: "I understand France is a developed country, with enclosed internal combustion vehicles and roads, even paved roads. Was Trump unable to be driven 50 miles?"
        Defender: "You are such a communist. Why do you hate our president so much?"
        -It's a laugh riot, check out the comments section for this issue.

        On a more serious note, I was hoping the prez would pay his respects to the fallen on both sides, and express his position against US military involvement in WWI at a more appropriate moment. Perhaps my hopes will yet show Trump has some sense of history and the values of our US republic, and he will actually give a speech on that theme. OTOH, history with this prez indicates my hopes belong in an alternate reality, and he skipped the cemetery visit because it would be too boring. Or maybe he just wanted to upset lefties and politicians in Europe, but forgot about offending military staff ('round the world) with this behavior. -Let's go with the less complicated explanation: He didn't go because he thought it was too boring (car ride and/or buncha grave sites). With that, we can look forward to our US leader giving dirty looks to many leaders in attendance, except the group that are generally supporters of Trump.
        Well, John Kelly and Joe Dunford could attend the ceremony on the US military cemetery in Belleau, in spite of the weather, and Fotos show them bravely defying November rain and Greater Paris area traffic . Also Merkel and Macron had umbrellas over them, just as Theresa May and Prince William, that were touring cemeteries in Northern France and Belgium. Even Wladimir Putin was somewhere in France, but Russians will be used to bad weather .
        Generally, Trumps "base" will be less entertained by boring WW I ceremonies warning against the perils of nationalism than by the president bossing his colleagues around on Twitter.
        And now I am off to celebrate.

        ?


        • #5
          Trump couldn't go to the cemetery because they were afraid like the bad witch in the Wizard of Oz, if he got wet he would melt.

          ?


          • #6
            Originally posted by redrover View Post
            Trump couldn't go to the cemetery because they were afraid like the bad witch in the Wizard of Oz, if he got wet he would melt.
            Trump couldn't go because the bad witch hunt in the Wizard of Oz needed to have it's flying monkey special investigator fired. There, I covered all the bases.

            ?


            • #7
              Originally posted by Voland View Post

              Well, John Kelly and Joe Dunford could attend the ceremony on the US military cemetery in Belleau, in spite of the weather, and Fotos show them bravely defying November rain and Greater Paris area traffic . Also Merkel and Macron had umbrellas over them, just as Theresa May and Prince William, that were touring cemeteries in Northern France and Belgium. Even Wladimir Putin was somewhere in France, but Russians will be used to bad weather .
              Generally, Trumps "base" will be less entertained by boring WW I ceremonies warning against the perils of nationalism than by the president bossing his colleagues around on Twitter.
              And now I am off to celebrate.
              Trump only went to Europe to conquer with his Tweets. Enjoy the celebrations, Voland.

              ?


              • #8
                Trump appears to have come to Paris by mistake : He is on the record claiming to attend the "parade in Paris" for armistice day, that Washington didn't want to give him, yet : France doesn't do military parades for armistice say. Fact. What he appears to have been referring to was Bastille day. Different matter and different day.
                Then he raised eyebrows by landing in Paris and almost immediately insulting Emmanuel Macon on Twitter. Apparently over something that the French president had (not) said and that was mistranslated in the US press. But the fellow was speaking French after all.
                Than he preferred tweeting in his hotel room to boring WW I ceremonies. The problem was that his bad weather excuse was almost instantly shot down by foto and video footage of Macon, Merkel, May, Trudeau, even Putin and Turkeys Erdogan paying their respects to the fallen-in the pouring rain. To be fair : Before departure his staff found a cemetery including fallen Americans in Suresnes, a Paris suburb, where the president could stop by on his way to the airport. That his improvised address there was the "highlight" of the celebrations though (Sanders) may be up to taste.
                At the dinner the French made sure that Trump was seated away from Putin and between the UN secretary General and the president of the EU Commission. Oh, the horror.
                ​​​​​​When the invited leaders marched together down the Champs Elysees towards the Arc de Triomphe, where Macon held his speech, the only one that skipped the march and insisted on arriving by car was Trump. But yes, it was drizzling.
                The french president paid Trump back for the Tweets, not only with a CNN interview that included one or two stabs, but also by calling "nationalism an insult to patriotism. The difference between nationalists and patriots is that the latter have values that transcend" my nation first and screw the others". Trump was listening stone-faced.
                ​​​​​​​Macrons "peace summit" of 60 WW I nations leaders Trump skipped completely (no time). But he would have had to listen to an opening speech by Merkel. And it was about multilateralism and cooperation.
                ​​​​​​​Am I being totally unfair? Probably not. But it was a great day in France.

                ?


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Voland View Post
                  Trump appears to have come to Paris by mistake : He is on the record claiming to attend the "parade in Paris" for armistice day, that Washington didn't want to give him, yet : France doesn't do military parades for armistice say. Fact. What he appears to have been referring to was Bastille day. Different matter and different day.
                  Then he raised eyebrows by landing in Paris and almost immediately insulting Emmanuel Macon on Twitter. Apparently over something that the French president had (not) said and that was mistranslated in the US press. But the fellow was speaking French after all.
                  Than he preferred tweeting in his hotel room to boring WW I ceremonies. The problem was that his bad weather excuse was almost instantly shot down by foto and video footage of Macon, Merkel, May, Trudeau, even Putin and Turkeys Erdogan paying their respects to the fallen-in the pouring rain. To be fair : Before departure his staff found a cemetery including fallen Americans in Suresnes, a Paris suburb, where the president could stop by on his way to the airport. That his improvised address there was the "highlight" of the celebrations though (Sanders) may be up to taste.
                  At the dinner the French made sure that Trump was seated away from Putin and between the UN secretary General and the president of the EU Commission. Oh, the horror.
                  ​​​​​​When the invited leaders marched together down the Champs Elysees towards the Arc de Triomphe, where Macon held his speech, the only one that skipped the march and insisted on arriving by car was Trump. But yes, it was drizzling.
                  The french president paid Trump back for the Tweets, not only with a CNN interview that included one or two stabs, but also by calling "nationalism an insult to patriotism. The difference between nationalists and patriots is that the latter have values that transcend" my nation first and screw the others". Trump was listening stone-faced.
                  ​​​​​​​Macrons "peace summit" of 60 WW I nations leaders Trump skipped completely (no time). But he would have had to listen to an opening speech by Merkel. And it was about multilateralism and cooperation.
                  ​​​​​​​Am I being totally unfair? Probably not. But it was a great day in France.
                  He doesn't like to share the stage especially when speaking to crowds that won't pick up his lock her up chant.

                  ?


                  • #10
                    It's fun to say bad stuff about the president isn't it ?

                    Yes, it is.

                    Thank Heavens we're able to, given that we're in a free country where we can freely speak.

                    For awhile yet at least...

                    Let's turn our attention to another group that's become easy to say bad things about.

                    They be those Democrats.

                    ------------------------------------------------------

                    ...todays Democratic Party is almost entirely irrational and destructive.

                    There are no rational, sane arguments for insisting there are 67 different genders, or for forcing women to allow men to use their locker rooms, bathrooms and showers and to compete in (and win) their athletic competitions.

                    There are no sane arguments for importing as many immigrants as possible from unassimilable cultures and terrorist hotbeds into the U.S., or for eliminating Americas borders and dismantling her border law enforcement agencies, or for creating irresistible economic incentives for poor people the world over to flood into the U.S. at wildly unsustainable levels.


                    [ Yet, these things Democrats tell us we need to do !! ]

                    There are no sane arguments for eliminating voter registration requirements, as Democrats now advocate.

                    There are no sane arguments for upending the worlds most hallowed, 250-year-old legal system whose central tenet is innocent until proven guilty.

                    There are no sane arguments for attacking people just for being white or just for being men.


                    [ Yet, these things Democrats DO, would have us do !! ]

                    These and other current Democrat policies and obsessions are purely destructive. In the microcosm, the analogy would be to an individual whose life is composed entirely of one delusional, self-destructive event after the other, amounting to eventual suicide.

                    But dont bother asking leftists about their descent into madness; theyll insist youre the crazy one. Democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, just elected to the House of Representatives, recently demonstrated the lefts reflexive tactic of projection when she told Vanity Fair that Democrats couldnt compromise with the insane people on the right who are holding the country hostage.

                    Before the November midterm elections, observed Whistleblower Editor David Kupelian, Hillary Clinton and other top Democrats warned us that only when they regained power could civility return to America.

                    This, of course, is the classic totalitarian position of both communists and Islamic supremacists. Each literally defines peace as the condition that will naturally result when the entire world is communist or Islamic: When we control everything, there will be peace.'

                    Unfortunately, adds Kupelian, when Clinton urges incivility, and former Attorney General Eric Holder instructs Democrats to kick Republicans, when Nancy Pelosi tells a New York gathering to expect collateral damage to those Americans who dont agree with her partys radical agenda, and Minnesota Democratic Party official William Davis threatens Republicans with guillotines, the lefts message is clear: Violence is not only OK, its how we win.'


                    https://www.wnd.com/2018/11/descent-into-madness/


                    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    The left is tolerant, open minded and willing to discuss & debate even !

                    .. as long as you don't think differently than they do.

                    Then they call you names ( mental imbecile. ) and want you recalled.

                    Sounds familiar doesn't it. We call the president lots of names.

                    ... and want to impeach him.

                    ... when we can dream something up to impeach him for.

                    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------



                    A student senator at UC Berkeley abstained from a vote supporting transgender rights last week, then took a moment to explain her thinking. Now, more than 1,000 people have signed a petition demanding that she resign from student government or face a recall.

                    Hundreds packed a Senate meeting Wednesday night to insist that she go. On social media, students labeled her a horrible person and a mental imbecile. Her campus political party severed ties with her. And the Daily Californian, UC Berkeleys storied student newspaper, ran an editorial critical of her statements and refused to publish her written defense.

                    The uproar began Oct. 31, when the Queer Alliance Resource Center asked the student Senate to pass a bill condemning the Trump administration for considering a legal definition of gender that would require it to match a persons sex at birth. The proposal would change the federal Title IX civil rights law and potentially remove its protections from 1.4 million transgender people, according to a New York Times story last month, based on a leaked memo. At UC Berkeley, the students resolution also urged the university to step up support of transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming students and the campus groups that help them.

                    Isabella Chow, 20, abstained.

                    Reading a five-paragraph statement explaining her decision, Chow told her 18 fellow senators, who all voted for the bill (another was absent), that discrimination is never, ever OK. She condemned bullies and bigots. She said she abhorred stereotypes. And she called the LGBT community valid and loved.

                    That said, Chow continued, voting for the bill would compromise her values and force her to promote groups and identities she disagrees with.

                    As a Christian, I personally do believe that certain acts and lifestyles conflict with what is good, right and true, she said. I believe that God created male and female at the beginning of time, and designed sex for marriage between one man and one woman. For me, to love another person does not mean that I silently concur when, at the bottom of my heart, I do not believe that your choices are right or the best for you as an individual.

                    Chows politely worded explanation has set in motion something different from the ideological debate over free speech that engulfed UC Berkeley last year, as left and right battled over whose speech was more worthy of protection.

                    This is more personal, raising questions of whether judging ones gender identity is the same as judging someones race or ethnicity. And there is no more likely epicenter for that sort of debate than UC Berkeley, where student action on civil rights from free speech to sexual assault and harassment is part of the campus culture.

                    Now, the debate centers on the Associated Students of the University of California an autonomous, 131-year-old governing board that manages a $1.5 million budget and meets weekly to set student policies. The 20 senators each represent a large swath of the student body. Chow, who has a staff of 28, was elected with support from Christian students and the publications and media community involved with journals, magazines and CalTV.

                    She could have merely abstained, said Regan Putnam, president of the Queer Alliance Resource Center. But she took it upon herself to go into this long dialogue, talking about marriage between a man and a woman, and shrouding hate in love. Nobody asked her to explain her vote. Nobody who voted yes had to explain their vote.

                    Within hours, Chows political party, Student Action, cut ties with her. So did CalTV and her publications constituents. A Daily Cal editorial called her statements offensive and declared: UC Berkeley students cannot allow and accept leaders like Chow to make decisions on their behalf.

                    The paper also rebuffed Chows attempt to further explain her views in its pages. In her rejection letter, opinion editor Shayann Hendricks said the paper wouldnt run Chows comments because her submission reflected her earlier statements, which utilized rhetoric that is homophobic and transphobic by the Daily Cals standards.

                    Chow, a junior majoring in business administration and music, said she feels frustrated and sad that Berkeley students are forced to live in a bubble, and we have to protect ourselves from anything that a vocal population deems to be offensive.

                    She said shes been surprised by the onslaught. I go to classes, and people are looking at me. Ive been painted in such a negative light. Everybodys talking about it. No matter how much I tried to say, I can love you and still disagree with you, people still interpret my disagreement with being a bigot and a hater.

                    At Wednesday nights jam-packed Senate meeting, where all non-Chow business was set aside, students made clear that disagreeing with a persons essence is the definition of bigotry. And for three hours, until shortly before midnight, they took the microphone one by one to tell her so, as Chow sat stony-faced beneath a huge banner reading Senator Chow Resign Now.

                    Some, like Romario Conrado, who wore a rainbow headband, read off the names of transgender people murdered by others who disagreed with who they were. Some told personal stories.

                    My grandmother is my best friend. Shes a sympathetic and patient listener, began a student in a white sweatshirt. And when I came out to her this summer, the loving grandmother I came to rely on wasnt there much like you, Senator Chow, because of her religion. The student began to cry. I want to explain to her my milestones, and I want to hear how proud she is. But the warmth has been revoked.

                    Several students, including Christians and a Muslim, said religion doesnt require adherents to disapprove of people any more than it requires stoning, a punishment advocated in portions of religious texts. And many turned Chows words back on her.

                    I am Christian. I am queer. And I am good, right and true, a student named Miranda said. And I demand Senator Chow to resign!

                    Three students spoke up for Chow, including Matt Ronnau, who said the mob that has descended upon Senator Chow ... is a disgrace to UC, which should be a place of debate.


                    https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/artic...p?t=bd81bb94a4

                    ================================================== ================

                    Liberals.

                    Fun people.

                    Juvenile and ridiculous, but you're always gonna have a lot of fun with them.

                    If you can keep them from destroying things. Don't try to talk or debate with them, that's when they get hateful & dangerous.

                    ?


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Voland View Post
                      Trump appears to have come to Paris by mistake : He is on the record claiming to attend the "parade in Paris" for armistice day, that Washington didn't want to give him, yet : France doesn't do military parades for armistice say. Fact. What he appears to have been referring to was Bastille day. Different matter and different day.
                      Then he raised eyebrows by landing in Paris and almost immediately insulting Emmanuel Macon on Twitter. Apparently over something that the French president had (not) said and that was mistranslated in the US press. But the fellow was speaking French after all.
                      Than he preferred tweeting in his hotel room to boring WW I ceremonies. The problem was that his bad weather excuse was almost instantly shot down by foto and video footage of Macon, Merkel, May, Trudeau, even Putin and Turkeys Erdogan paying their respects to the fallen-in the pouring rain. To be fair : Before departure his staff found a cemetery including fallen Americans in Suresnes, a Paris suburb, where the president could stop by on his way to the airport. That his improvised address there was the "highlight" of the celebrations though (Sanders) may be up to taste.
                      ...Am I being totally unfair? Probably not. But it was a great day in France.
                      You are being fair, Voland. The US prez, upon arrival home, was just in time to miss Veterans' Day ceremonies near our capital. Link:
                      President Trump is spending Monday at the White House and had no plans to visit Arlington National Cemetery in northern Virginia as America observes the Veterans Day holiday.
                      https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tru...ngton-cemetery

                      ?


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Voland View Post
                        I am observing the WW I armistice centenary in Strassbourg, France, right now (France hosts the international WW I centenary celebrations). Donald Trump appears to intend to play the role of the skunk at Macrons dinner party (like by Twitter- attacking him only minutes after landing in Paris). For the cameras the presidents later made nice, but seasoned observers largely agree that the next Tweet to spoil it all might not be far away. And Trump is also the only world leader to skip the "peace summit" the convention of leaders of all countries involved in WW I, friends and foes. Wladimir Putin will be there by the way. Noone is obliged to attend, but the optics of the US staying away--are not exactly good PR here.
                        For France the WW I anniversary is a highly sensitive and non-partisan issue ( and far from beeing a victory celebration), which is also why people will react thin-skinned to attempts to hijack it (like for domestic political consumption, who is allegedly unfair to who, who will show whom etc. ). Today Macron and Merkel (as representing the principal enemies and nowadays close allies) have jointly honoured the fallen at Compiegne, close to Paris, where the armistice was signed, a gesture that is hard to overstate. At 11.00 central european time bells will ring across France like they did a century ago when the guns fell silent and people will march towards the military cemeteries and memorials. Ceremonies will be held, accounts be read, exhibitions opened, films be shown. In memory of a war whose victors "didn't know how to win the peace", as John Maynard Keynes put it, and thus set the stage for an even worse conflict
                        To be candid, I dont give a rats ass how it looks to Europeans. The decision to attend a different celebration the following day was not Trumps. The secret service and other agencies made that call, but Europeans (and my friends in Australia) wont let that mitigate their hatred of our president.

                        Donald Trump could single-handedly rescue orphans and puppies from a burning building in the morning and cure cancer in the afternoon, and these haters would find a way to deepen their disparagement of him because of it.

                        Im finding once a haters Mind is made up to hate, nothing will dissuade them.

                        ?


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
                          To be candid, I dont give a rats ass how it looks to Europeans. The decision to attend a different celebration the following day was not Trumps. The secret service and other agencies made that call, but Europeans (and my friends in Australia) wont let that mitigate their hatred of our president.

                          Donald Trump could single-handedly rescue orphans and puppies from a burning building in the morning and cure cancer in the afternoon, and these haters would find a way to deepen their disparagement of him because of it.

                          Im finding once a haters Mind is made up to hate, nothing will dissuade them.
                          It's true.

                          Even in this modern age, this new millennium, we have people who still hate black people.

                          Who hate Indians. Who hate ... whatever.

                          Some hate presidents, some hate relatives, some hate actors or bands.

                          One thing all have in common is investing too much energy into an emotion that's only toxic to themselves.

                          Maintaining and feeding it over long periods of time.

                          This is foolishness.

                          ?


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by DavidSF View Post

                            To be candid, I dont give a rats ass how it looks to Europeans. The decision to attend a different celebration the following day was not Trumps. The secret service and other agencies made that call, but Europeans (and my friends in Australia) wont let that mitigate their hatred of our president.

                            Donald Trump could single-handedly rescue orphans and puppies from a burning building in the morning and cure cancer in the afternoon, and these haters would find a way to deepen their disparagement of him because of it.

                            Im finding once a haters Mind is made up to hate, nothing will dissuade them.
                            First it was too much rain to fly. Then it was too much disruption of traffic, to drive. Now, it's the secret service protecting him from haters and/or rilly bad weather. He could claim he rescued puppies and cured cancer, and some people will react to that with hatred. That's wrong.

                            -IMHO, the proper reaction is mockery, then an attempt to find a way to deal as little as possible with someone who makes too many baseless claims. I believe many leaders in the EU are doing just that, perhaps starting with an EU defense force to augment NATO. They would need to integrate the cost of that force into their contribution to NATO, thereby satisfying other players in US foreign policy (such as members of the Senate, Depts. of State & Defense). With that and other exercises to side-step the prez, business between governments can continue, without wasting time on hatred. Or dudes making baseless claims.

                            ?


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by radcentr View Post


                              I believe many leaders in the EU are doing just that, perhaps starting with an EU defense force to augment NATO. They would need to integrate the cost of that force into their contribution to NATO, thereby satisfying other players in US foreign policy (such as members of the Senate, Depts. of State &amp; Defense).

                              Trumps Twitter ire at the European Army issue (EU defence force) that both Macron and Merkel have announced, going as far as to bash Frances military record and its pooling forces with Germany (at the WW I centenary ! ) is misplaced in the sense that he should actually welcome it - if his goal was mainly Europe hiking military spending. Yet his real game is Europe hiking military spending by
                              ​​investing fortunes in american military hardware, right ? Money, orders and jobs that he intended to pocket and present to his crowd as demonstrable successes of "America first". Germany alone would be a bonanza for US defence contractors, not to mention the entire EU bloc. Yet Macron ( check out his CNN interview) and Merkel have spotted that game-and shot it down. Europe will seek greater strategic independence and improve its defence capacities by a range of measures, spending more, but also spending smarter. Such as by linking chains of command (already happening), national defence industries and their capacities, weapon systems and orders (militaries ordering together and exercising together offers loads of possibilities to increase efficiency while even saving money). And yes, that means orders largely going to domestic manufacturers (reducing dependence on the US should not come as a surprise for a US president that is on the record calling Europe a "foe" ? )
                              The policy platform for that (PESCO) already exists, and the EU now also has its own defence fund to support common military missions/projects.
                              Trump will get a european army, just not in the ways that he may have imagined. That is what his Twitter rage suggests.
                              Few Europeans would see these plans as contradictory to NATO. Rather as balancing it.
                              Last edited by Voland; 1 day ago.

                              ?

                              Working...
                              X