Trump - The NEW, New Thread

[Ben Daswani]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

Ben you are getting silly, your point consisted of two separate sentences. I responded to the the second sentence only. Bye Bye

My second sentence referenced my first sentence. They made up the same point. You can't respond to "half a point."

You're getting beyond weird. Seek help.

[Sid Belzberg]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

Ben Daswani]I simply quoted my full point instead of parsing my words mid-sentence, which is what you did.

Ben you are getting silly, your point consisted of two separate sentences. I responded to the the second sentence only.
Thank you for reminding me that in the past you were so abusive that you drove to that point that I regretted and apologized for.
You are a big hero that you were able to achieve that, you should be proud.
Bye Bye

[Ben Daswani]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

I see you are getting angry again Ben.

Uhh...

You fucking moron crook, if you knew the correct word you would of said "Akin to LIBEL". About the only Racist around here is you. As for your Pro Bono work thats about all it would be worth. Your arguments are idiotic, what the fuck?? Did God shit in your brain and forget to flush??? Oh....maybe not according to you no God, you were just born a shit head.

Yeah, I'm steaming mad.

My response was to your last sentence not to the previous one that you just inserted.

I didn't "insert" anything. I simply quoted my full point instead of parsing my words mid-sentence, which is what you did.

What I said:

You're supporting a party that has men who grab reporters by the neck and throw them to the ground when asked about healthcare. If you're a person who's going to lose healthcare if Obamacare is repealed, who do you see as the fucking fascist?

Your response:

f Obamacare is repealed, who do you see as the fucking fascist?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/04/politi...ing/index.html

I claimed that the politician who bodyslammed the reporter is a fascist. You responded with a link about Bill Clinton. Now you're claiming that the link you posted had nothing to do the the politician who bodyslammed the reporter.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

Like, what the fuck?

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

This is the crux of Paul's argument, and one of the reasons it fails. It is a link that he uses to say Trump would be a Hitler if he could. But the democracy Paul speaks against has prevented anything like this from ever being on the table. Trump can complain all he wants, he must acknowledge that he will need to fight in courts of law, and that is ultimately what he has done - and won with. The supreme court has partially reinstated the travel ban.

I'm not speaking "against" democracy, I'm pointing out that by its very nature (granting freedoms), it can produce very undesirable results that can be used to undermine it. In other words, it can be self-defeating.

The Supreme Court will decide on the travel ban in October, and if the court should rule against it, there is no telling what Trump will do.

Paul does not mention the Reichstag Fire, which - whether conducted by the communist party or the Nazi party - had an aftermath that was a non-democratic action. It was used to remove the communist party from voting. So in effect it was this heinous act that comprised the democratic process. This allowed Hitler to be "elected" which Paul likes to put in bold, but it was not a fair election. It was not democratic.

Further to this, within less than two years Hitler had the "knight of the long knives" conducted to obliterate political opposition and problems. Trump has not and will not do anything akin to this.

Ha ha! Now you want to bring up "fairness" of elections. So is it "fair" that Hillary had 3 million more votes than Trump and yet lost the election, due to an electoral college mechanism that Trump himself railed against during the campaign, and then loved after the election? Oh, and I'm sure you're going to bring up illegal voting and people being bused into areas they didn't live in, etc, etc..... fake news. No single state outcome was decided by illegal votes, and if you believe otherwise the onus is on you to prove it. If there were any illegal votes at all, Hillary's 3 million margin would have been altered by no more than a few hundred.

Is it "fair" that Al Gore lost the 2000 election due to one county in Florida, where ballots had to be counted by hand and many disqualified due to "hanging chads"? No one will ever know if the result that came out of that was "fair" or not.

The point is, democracy and elections only work in THEORY. In practice, they are open to abuse just like any other governing system. By bringing up the Reichstag Fire and any other similar examples, you actually help make my point. Hitler's election stood and became history, just as did Dubya's in 2000 and the Trumpster in 2016. Fair or not, they are all history and came out of a democratic process.

YOU say Trump will not do anything like Hitler's "Night of the Long Knives" (by the way, kudos on making that "Knight" of the Long Knives, maybe you're referring to some chess game Hitler played? :D) ........ Well, maybe you're also going to tell us North Korea will never get the capability to launch an ICBM at the U.S.? Iran will never get a nuclear weapon with which they can threaten Israel? California will never have another earthquake? No asteroid will ever again strike planet Earth?

We can all relax and let Mavros Whissell decide for us what will and will not happen in our future. Whew!

You can complain about his terrible rhetoric all you like. Trump is not a killer. However it would be great if he could tone down the inflammatory rhetoric.

Trump has a criminal mind and mentality. He could become a killer if it suited his purposes. And just as he said, he could gun somebody down in Times Square and all his voters would still support him. His pathetic wife Melania making all that noise about anti-bullying, shedding crocodile tears for kids being bullied.... and she SUPPORTS all of her husband's bullying tweets.

Sickening. The most sickening part of it all is how people like even Mr. Whissell can tolerate a criminal in the White House.

And it is duly noted that Sid Belzberg isn't defending my charge against him. I'll repeat it again: if he were American, he would be a one-issue voter (Israel) and he used the horrors of Auschwitz to try and make it seem like he has ideals against hatred, when he has no such thing. Kudos to Ben Daswani for expertly exposing this side of Belzberg.

[Sid Belzberg]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

Like, what the fuck?

Can you read?

I see you are getting angry again Ben. My response was to your last sentence not to the previous one that you just inserted. You might want to ask yourself the same question and work on it. Much more productive use of your energy.

I'm not expressing support or tolerance for what Hillary Clinton did. I'm merely pointing out that while it's bad--and believe me, it's bad

Voters who's judgement is different then yours about which is worst should be subjected to the abuse and ridicule that you have served up to me and others in this thread? The video's Tom put out here depicted the actions of tens of thousands of democrats, not just a "few bad actors". Parts of The Berkley campus were destroyed. I don't see your behavior as any different except that instead of physical abuse it is a feeble attempt at psychological abuse. Why all the abuse?...because voters did not want to elect a person who favors summary execution and by Ben's standards these are all ignorant,evil, stupid people who are in love with Trump. You are a "smart" guy, I don't need to point out the incongruity of your approach, I am sure you get my point.

[Ben Daswani]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

Nope, the link was in response to what you posted above. Nothing at all to do with a reporter being body slammed.

Let's look at what I posted above.

You're supporting a party that has men who grab reporters by the neck and throw them to the ground when asked about healthcare. If you're a person who's going to lose healthcare if Obamacare is repealed, who do you see as the fucking fascist?

"Nothing at all to do with a reporter being body slammed."

Like, what the fuck?

Can you read?

I said that it was a fascist act to bodyslam the reporter. You responded to my claim of fascism by linking to an article about Bill Clinton calling Obamacare crazy. Now you say that the point you were trying to make had "[n]othing at all to do with a reporter being body slammed"?

Actually, promoting a summary execution for a fugitive. You know....just like the Nazis use to do.

I'm not expressing support or tolerance for what Hillary Clinton did. I'm merely pointing out that while it's bad--and believe me, it's bad--it's not as bad as calling for violence against your opponent in the upcoming Presidential election at a massive public rally. One is way more fascist than the other. If you didn't have a blind hatred for all things Clinton, you'd recognize that.

[Sid Belzberg]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

You compare calling Obamacare crazy to bodyslamming a reporter who asked about healthcare. 10/10 idiotic

If you're a person who's going to lose healthcare if Obamacare is repealed, who do you see as the fucking fascist?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/04/politi...ing/index.html
Nope, the link was in response to what you posted above. Nothing at all to do with a reporter being body slammed. Are you really as smart as you say you are?

promoting violence against a fugitive from justice during a private meeting.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wi...rticle/2603430
Actually, promoting a summary execution for a fugitive. You know....just like the Nazis use to do. By the way Julian Assange was never charged with a crime so what exactly was he a fugitive from??? Not justice that is for sure.

[Ben Daswani]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wi...rticle/2603430

You compare promoting violence against one's rival for the Presidency at a public rally to promoting violence against a fugitive from justice during a private meeting.

6/10 idiotic

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/04/politi...ing/index.html

You compare calling Obamacare crazy to bodyslamming a reporter who asked about healthcare.

10/10 idiotic

[Sid Belzberg]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

you're supporting a man who promotes violence against his political opponents

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wi...rticle/2603430

f Obamacare is repealed, who do you see as the fucking fascist?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/04/politi...ing/index.html

[Mavros Whissell]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

if he could, Trump would pass his OWN "Enabling Act" which would reduce the judicial branch to nothing.

This is the crux of Paul's argument, and one of the reasons it fails. It is a link that he uses to say Trump would be a Hitler if he could. But the democracy Paul speaks against has prevented anything like this from ever being on the table. Trump can complain all he wants, he must acknowledge that he will need to fight in courts of law, and that is ultimately what he has done - and won with. The supreme court has partially reinstated the travel ban.

Hitler tried something much different in his rise to power:

Paul does not mention the Reichstag Fire, which - whether conducted by the communist party or the Nazi party - had an aftermath that was a non-democratic action. It was used to remove the communist party from voting. So in effect it was this heinous act that comprised the democratic process. This allowed Hitler to be "elected" which Paul likes to put in bold, but it was not a fair election. It was not democratic.

Further to this, within less than two years Hitler had the "night of the long knives" conducted to obliterate political opposition and problems. Trump has not and will not do anything akin to this.

You can complain about his terrible rhetoric all you like. Trump is not a killer. However it would be great if he could tone down the inflammatory rhetoric.

[Ben Daswani]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

Go march with your young fellow co thugs depicted in Tom O'Donnell's reference articles and beat up anyone that has different political ideas.

You speak just like your hero.

Donald Trump Calls Protesters Thugs

There are bad actors among both liberals and conservatives. The difference is that those who behave like fascists among liberals are always supporters, not the politicians themselves. Of course there are fascists of the left. But they don't rise to the Presidency. Donald Trump suggested that "Second Amendment people" deal with Hillary Clinton. That's promoting violence. That's your Presidential candidate promoting violence against his competitor. That's fascist. Here's your precious Fox News reporting on a Republican politician bodyslamming a reporter. That's actual fascism.

So what if some liberal protester punches someone else in the face, or pepper sprays them, or whatever. I'm not supporting them. We just happen to support the same political party. That's not the same as what you're doing; you're supporting a man who promotes violence against his political opponents. You're supporting a party that has men who grab reporters by the neck and throw them to the ground when asked about healthcare. If you're a person who's going to lose healthcare if Obamacare is repealed, who do you see as the fucking fascist?

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

The LGBT expels Jews from their March, BLM declares Israel a apartheid genocidal state, Clinton's campaign discussed using Sanders Jewish heritage as way to portray a unfavorable view(read all about in Wikileaks). You worry about others rights well guess what, I am going worry about my rights for a change. I have more then one relative still alive today that survived this nice place called Auschwitz, one of whom lives in Sweden, the liberals in Malmo have allowed Islamic radicals to overrun the place and terrorize jews. He consider's the Islamic apologist attitude of the democrats both in Sweden and America and their anti Israel stance as fascist and definitely not mere hyperbole. He certainly would not call the characterization of the liberal Democrats as fascist or hyperbole as disrespectful to the suffering he endured in the past.
The lack of tolerance you have displayed as well as the numerous examples that Tom Odonnell has shown of other democrats clearly demonstrates the approach of the Fascists. I have forgotten more about what Fascism is then you know. It is your approach my friend and that of millions of democrats that is disrespectful to the memories of those that paid the ultimate price to be free to chose any religion or political party that they want and have the freedom to express their views. Put that in your huka and smoke it.

World War II was NOT fought for democracy and being free to choose any religion or political party that one wants, nor for being free to express views. In fact, those were the very things that allowed the rise to power of Hitler... from Wikipedia:

"After his release in 1924, Hitler gained popular support by attacking the Treaty of Versailles and promoting Pan-Germanism, anti-semitism, and anti-communism with charismatic oratory and Nazi propaganda. Hitler frequently denounced international capitalism and communism as being part of a Jewish conspiracy.

By 1933, the Nazi Party was the largest elected party in the German Reichstag, which led to Hitler's appointment as Chancellor on 30 January 1933. Following fresh elections won by his coalition, the Reichstag passed the Enabling Act, which began the process of transforming the Weimar Republic into Nazi Germany, a one-party dictatorship based on the totalitarian and autocratic ideology of National Socialism. Hitler aimed to eliminate Jews from Germany and establish a New Order to counter what he saw as the injustice of the post-World War I international order dominated by Britain and France."

Democracy can and often will give rise to Hitlers. It is easy in times of hardship to spread a message of hate against a visible group and for that message to percolate and rise to the top. It is human nature to want an identifiable target for one's problems.

Trump mastered this during the campaign with his rhetoric against Muslims, against Mexicans, against China. And now even in his Presidency, Trump continues to exhibit Hitler-like tendencies: he fights against "so-called judges" who thwart his policies of hate, and if he could, Trump would pass his OWN "Enabling Act" which would reduce the judicial branch to nothing.

Sid, if you really want us to believe you are inspired in your voting preference mainly by a few of your Auschwitz-surviving relatives, you would be much more believable if you couldn't support Trump because of his Hitler-like behavior. But instead, you cast your supposed idealism aside and claim you would have supported Trump because he seems to you better for Israel. Therefore, your idealism is shattered, as you only consider it vis-a-vis Israel and totally disregard other groups that can also be targets of genocidal-type hatred.

Don't try and hide behind anti-hate idealism when you don't actually have a trace amount of that in your blood. You're just pro-Israel, and nothing else. And if all the U.S. voters who voted just as you would have, on what was best for Israel, were to have their votes removed from the last election, the effect would have been negligible. There aren't many Americans percentage-wise who care more about Israel than anything else, and most of the ones that do live in NY, which is overwhelmingly Democrat. And again, this story of yours about Hillary selling stakes in uranium to Russia to gain Foundation donations, it's just not believable and no prosecutor would even venture into that. It smacks of desperado, just someone looking for anything against Clinton. I do believe you have some personal grudge against her from your business past (which itself is very very secretive) that clouds your judgment.

I think after all that has been written that this is the basic difference between you and Ben Daswani, and Ben very expertly laid it bare. Ben actually seems to have some idealism, against any form of hatred and prejudice. You do not.

For you to convince me that you really are motivated by the horrors of Auschwitz, you would need to totally repudiate Trump. It's more than just Israel, it's more than just Jews. It's HATRED against any specific group that should have no place, no quarter, in civilized societies.

[Sid Belzberg]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

From your own source:



It's like you're having a competition with yourself to see who can say the stupidest shit. And you're trouncing the opposition.

http://jewishjournal.com/rosnersdoma...upports-trump/

"You might say: well, there are far more Jews opposing Trump than those supporting him. And this is true, but it is not the whole truth. When one counts all Jews – then yes, many more of them oppose Trump. But the fact that Jews from the groups who support Trump tend to be more active in the Jewish community, and more intensely engaged with Judaism (look at Pew’s numbers and see for yourself), complicates the picture. In Jewish organizations, among voters with strong Jewish consciousness, the pro-Trump and anti-Trump camps become more balanced."

Yes you are correct, it should have been "Jews who tend to be more active in the community" not by religion. In any event your idea was no Israel conspiracy because majority of Jews are democratic leaning. That is simply wrong.

And--OH MAN--you think Obama single-handedly orchestrated the date of the vote of a UN Security Council measure to fall after the election to what, trick Jews? You're a paranoid, self-important, deluded conspiracy theorist.

If you did even any research you would have noticed this and the other articles I previously posted.Of course you would like to forget about that.
http://www.thewrap.com/alan-dershowitz/
Or is Alan Dershowitz and even Bejamin Netanyahu himself also in the same category of "cospiracy theorists"?

i agree with Ken J Macdonald's approach enough back and forth... "bye bye". as he said, you are indeed "so easy " Go march with your young fellow co thugs depicted in Tom O'Donnell's reference articles and beat up anyone that has different political ideas. You can mindlessly march around chanting meaningless slogans and regurgitating whatever propaganda is stuffed into your empty little head. You don't even need a brain for this, a spinal chord is more then sufficient. Right up your alley!

[Lucas Davies]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

Remind me again, where was your 'christian' outrage for any of the following:

Snoop Dogg: Trump point blank assassination?

Kathy Griifin: Trump bloody severed head mask?

Johnny Depp: Trump death threat?

Personally, I'm more concerned about the actions of the president of the United States than those of celebrities. I'm also not quite sure what any of those people have to do with anything pertaining to Christianity.

[Ben Daswani]

Re: Trump - The NEW, New Thread

However, Jews by religion are more likely to lean towards the Republican party lines

From your own source:

Jews by religion are more than twice as likely as members of most other religious traditions to describe themselves as politically liberal. And black Protestants are the only religious group with a larger share than Jews by religion that identifies with or leans toward the Democratic Party.

It's like you're having a competition with yourself to see who can say the stupidest shit. And you're trouncing the opposition.