President Trump

Vic said:
The giveaway was his "frequent victories in golf events".
Click to expand...

It's a small detail but, given all the speculation about his health, the fact that they'd use this procedure to take the opportunity to do a bit of trolling suggests they believe themselves to be untouchable at this point.
 
Magicpole said:
Trump's Lacky's have published the attached health report on the ****.

Apparently, a morbidly obese, had a few minor strokes, Kankles that look like he's stuffed two tyres into his socks, totally unhinged, pathological liar, megalomaniac, can't walk in a straight line, thinks he's Hitler, eats nothing but McDonalds, is the fittest man alive!

This thread, for those who can be arsed, to post pictures of the ****, looking terrible, all the way to his much welcomed demise. A pictorial record of a scumbag on the road, hopefully a short one, to a coffin the size of a doubld wardrobe. The fat ****.

If this doesn't win the Booker or fiction, the world's gone mad.

www.whitehouse.gov

Memorandum from the White House Physician

www.whitehouse.gov www.whitehouse.gov
Click to expand...
Have his shin splints cleared up?
 
oldius said:
What we are seeing in the US is really an eye-opener.

Around the table sat Donald Trump, Pam Bondi and Kristi Noem. Each spoke of the danger of ANTIFA and about rioting in Portland. Surrounding them were a hand-picked selection of journalists. Events will be posted on the US President's social media channel. There appears to be no video evidence of any rioting in Portland but it will become 'fact' . It will feature on Truth Social (owned by Donald Trump) and on X (owned by Elon Musk) and soon on TikTok (I think Larry Ellison now has that one). There is an old saying that if you control the media, you control the people.

This sits alongside discussions about sending US troops into protect the citizens of various states that have 'real' issues with criminality. The governors of those states generally seem to be political opponents of Trump, and they point to many other states with higher crime rates, but it doesn't matter because the 'need' for intervention in those states is what is reported on those same social media channels and by those same journalists.

Before the US election, the creation of internal enemies was at the forefront of discussion by Kamala Harris. She said that Donald Trump would create them and would use the national guard against them. It was dismissed as fake news, and reported as fake on those same social media channels and by those same journalists. Now it is happening.

In the UK we see two highly influential broadcasters owned by non-doms through complex trust arrangements, and by Dubai-based investment groups. They also create a narrative of internal enemies in the UK, of culture change, and of future danger unless it is controlled now. Their politicians receive disproportionate amounts of air-time and their social-media posting is intense, and said to rely on a large number of funded bots.

I hoped that the internet age would see an end to mainstream media controlling the political landscape, and there has definitely been an upsurge in alternative views and the discovery of truths hidden for generations. It appears that we are now in the midst of a fightback from those wishing to preserve the status quo, and the purchase of social media channels by billionaires seems an obvious indicator of a desire to control the information that people receive.

If I was a billionaire, I would own stuff too, though mainly land for animal rescues and rehabilitation centres I think, so it isn't about what billionaires own, it is about the need for politicians and journalists to tell the truth, not create lies reported as truth reported by journalists they effectively employ. Then to pass those lies as fact on their own social media channels is so very dangerous, especially in a world so divided by their own manipulation.
Click to expand...
I think of the impact of the Internet the same as the impact of the printing press, or radio and television. New information mediums that get exploited, used for misinformation and propaganda.

I have a feeling that when we're all brought closer together by new communication technology we all find we hate each other. Hate each others ideologies, go more extreme on our own beliefs and ideologies, argue bicker, war.

After all that it'll settle down. Haha
 
Silva61 said:
Lucy Connolly likes this post.
Click to expand...
Well that is an unexpected response given that she doesn't own any social media channels, nor is a billionaire, nor a politician. She is, as far as I know, just someone who tweeted this and was rightfully punished for incitement.

"Mass deportation now, set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards for all I care… if that makes me racist so be it.”

Imagine thinking it was okay to burn down buildings with people in them...sheesh.
 
oldius said:
Well that is an unexpected response given that she doesn't own any social media channels, nor is a billionaire, nor a politician. She is, as far as I know, just someone who tweeted this and was rightfully punished for incitement.

"Mass deportation now, set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards for all I care… if that makes me racist so be it.”

Imagine thinking it was okay to burn down buildings with people in them...sheesh.
Click to expand...
And imagine asking "if that makes me racist so be it."

Err yes it does.
 
Big Joe Corrigan said:
He could have “done good” a lot earlier.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
I really can't make my mind up about Donald. ...some good things from the man.....but he is a hypocrite. He said not long after taking power that Russia wasn't the problem .it was china.
He'd conventianly forgotten that " trump towers" was built on Chinese imported steel.
I cannot trust the man,esp when he did that interview with his daughter and said to the reporter
" Do you like her breasts" or words to that effect.
Why would anyone put their trust in a man who utters shit like that....?
I don't know enough about politics across the pond to really judge DT......but yeah,your point of view is definitely correct.,imo....using free speech which apparently DT is in favour of......

The man, genuinely,....confuses me.
 
dennishasdoneit said:
I don't know enough about politics across the pond to really judge DT..
Click to expand...
Seriously?

Can you tell me which channels you watch then, please - because on mainstream BBC News 24 we can barely go 10 minutes without his f*cking orange patch face invading our living room.
 
oldius said:
Well that is an unexpected response given that she doesn't own any social media channels, nor is a billionaire, nor a politician. She is, as far as I know, just someone who tweeted this and was rightfully punished for incitement.

"Mass deportation now, set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards for all I care… if that makes me racist so be it.”

Imagine thinking it was okay to burn down buildings with people in them...sheesh.
Click to expand...
I agree her post incited violence however the punishment was excessive and inconsistent from a politically judiciary.
I think we can all agree we do not want to be censoring free speech.
 
oldius said:
I hoped that the internet age would see an end to mainstream media controlling the political landscape, and there has definitely been an upsurge in alternative views and the discovery of truths hidden for generations. It appears that we are now in the midst of a fightback from those wishing to preserve the status quo, and the purchase of social media channels by billionaires seems an obvious indicator of a desire to control the information that people receive.
Click to expand...
I would say education is the key.

Using an AI analogy, it seems there is a significant discrepancy between the transfer function in people's minds and the real world. To put it simply, when people observe things in the real world, the "computational model" they use to interpret these things appears to be fundamentally flawed.

For example, if I see a surveillance camera on the street, I perceive it as a system similar to VAR in football—a tool for reviewing footage in case of criminal activity. However, when I discuss this with some Americans, they immediately fall down the rabbit hole of grand ideological narratives. This leads me to believe there might be something fundamentally problematic with American education—it has produced a generation skilled in ideological discourse but lacking a grounded sense of reality.
 
oldius said:
What we are seeing in the US is really an eye-opener.

Around the table sat Donald Trump, Pam Bondi and Kristi Noem. Each spoke of the danger of ANTIFA and about rioting in Portland. Surrounding them were a hand-picked selection of journalists. Events will be posted on the US President's social media channel. There appears to be no video evidence of any rioting in Portland but it will become 'fact' . It will feature on Truth Social (owned by Donald Trump) and on X (owned by Elon Musk) and soon on TikTok (I think Larry Ellison now has that one). There is an old saying that if you control the media, you control the people.

This sits alongside discussions about sending US troops into protect the citizens of various states that have 'real' issues with criminality. The governors of those states generally seem to be political opponents of Trump, and they point to many other states with higher crime rates, but it doesn't matter because the 'need' for intervention in those states is what is reported on those same social media channels and by those same journalists.

Before the US election, the creation of internal enemies was at the forefront of discussion by Kamala Harris. She said that Donald Trump would create them and would use the national guard against them. It was dismissed as fake news, and reported as fake on those same social media channels and by those same journalists. Now it is happening.

In the UK we see two highly influential broadcasters owned by non-doms through complex trust arrangements, and by Dubai-based investment groups. They also create a narrative of internal enemies in the UK, of culture change, and of future danger unless it is controlled now. Their politicians receive disproportionate amounts of air-time and their social-media posting is intense, and said to rely on a large number of funded bots.

I hoped that the internet age would see an end to mainstream media controlling the political landscape, and there has definitely been an upsurge in alternative views and the discovery of truths hidden for generations. It appears that we are now in the midst of a fightback from those wishing to preserve the status quo, and the purchase of social media channels by billionaires seems an obvious indicator of a desire to control the information that people receive.

If I was a billionaire, I would own stuff too, though mainly land for animal rescues and rehabilitation centres I think, so it isn't about what billionaires own, it is about the need for politicians and journalists to tell the truth, not create lies reported as truth reported by journalists they effectively employ. Then to pass those lies as fact on their own social media channels is so very dangerous, especially in a world so divided by their own manipulation.
Click to expand...
Excellent post
 
moomba said:
Why would we all agree that someone calling for people to be burned to death shouldn't be punished for it?
Click to expand...
The problem with people who believe you can say whatever you want usually take issue when it’s aimed against them. The likes of Trump and Musk are two of the worst for it.

‘Say what you want, just don’t say it about me.’
 
Silva61 said:
I agree her post incited violence however the punishment was excessive and inconsistent from a politically judiciary.
I think we can all agree we do not want to be censoring free speech.
Click to expand...
fuck me you're worse than Dax, the whole fucking set up in america is about censoring free speech you fuckwit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top