subreddit
stringclasses 11
values | text
stringlengths 246
28.5k
|
|---|---|
worldnews
|
>he tariff shit was when I realized that wide swathes of this country are so fucking stupid they not only vote against their interests and fuck themselves, they actively don't even understand that they're getting fucked until it hits their pocket book. And even then most of these rural farmers getting ass fucked on these "deals" support him.
>
>Unreal.
It's a prosperity paradox. After a specific level of comfort is reached people kind of tune out. If there were ever extremely hard times again like the depression people would start to notice how policy affected them. There are a lot of things that only come with a high prosperity. Furries, Bronies, adults collecting tons of toys, adults with a primary focus on video games etc. 100 years ago, teenagers would get married, work all day to support their family and behave in a much more mature way than adults do today.
|
worldnews
|
Wouldn't work. He'd just point to all the hotels with his name on, the golf courses, and say "see. If I couldnt do it on my own, why do I have all this? Daddy has been dead for decades!" And that's all it'd take to convince the majority.
Why do you think he didn't release his taxes? They'd prove it. And they're easy enough to summarise for Dems that he wouldn't be able to deny it.
|
worldnews
|
I read an article which more or less said that if the president suddenly decided to nuke someone the generals would first remind him that that was highly illegal and that he shouldn't do that.
If he persisted it was implied that they would likely override him and call his sanity into question to get him removed from office.
Luckily one person can't just press a button and send out nukes, despite what tv makes it look like. Even though he does have the final say on the decision to nuke or not to nuke, it's very unlikely that anyone in the military would follow the order if we weren't at war or in some other type of crisis situation.
|
worldnews
|
We aren't going to change the Constitution over this. We literally can't. The Founders wrote the operating system of a country in a single summer, when it takes years to write a real operating system which functions at all. Now we've broken the whole thing so thoroughly, gotten so good at manipulating a vague and poorly-concieved document from centuries ago, that the only way to fix it is going to be tearing the whole thing up and starting fresh.
Having the oldest Constitution doesn't make us great. It means our entire government is antiquated and out of date. We've skipped nearly a quarter milennium of political theory and social and technological change without making any significant structural improvements to a document which was written when information traveled at the speed of horse.
I don't know how we get out of this.
|
worldnews
|
It’s almost like they’ve never heard of a bubble. Like the four they’ve already experienced are fake.
It’s doubly frustrating for me because my brother and I manage our family finances. We literally make our living by simply directing the vast fortune we already control. We continually point to past crashes to prepare for this one. We’re actually at the point that lawyers are involved because my mother trusts Trump’s opinion more than her own son and step son. Like she’s convinced we’d steal from her before he’d do this country’s wrong.
This is all despite the fact that for 15 years we’ve sacrificed our own financial prosperity in favor of hers’. Despite the fact we’ve doubled her net worth every 5 years. Despite the fact she’s seen nothing but success at our hands...she still thinks we’re shills for Hillary Clinton. She still thinks we’re trying to ruin the country. She still thinks Donald Trump, a man that has personally insulted her, and actually groped her(my Mother is a .001%er), is still the best option this country has.
It’s so fucking insulting.
|
worldnews
|
I dunno.. I think some people are starting to hope that it's all just an act, particularly people who voted for him, but aren't redcaps, y'know, the people who actually decided the election.
After all, it's difficult to comprehend how he got as far as he has if he truly is that much of an idiot. Did he really get that far on bluff and bluster alone? And if so, what does that say about American society that someone who his closest confidantes believe is an idiot can be one of the most successful men in America?
|
worldnews
|
That is creepy. The original article is from 1991. Here's the most relevant bit:
"Trump's father was required to get licensed here after a highly unusual loan to the Trump Castle Casino Resort that enabled the casino to narrowly avert a default and make a $16 million interest payment to bondholders.
Fred Trump, through his attorney, bought $3.5 million in chips at a high-stakes blackjack table and left without gambling with them.
The move resulted in an investigation and a complaint by the gaming division. Trump officials and the gaming division reached a settlement of the complaint and the gaming hall has agreed to pay a $30,000 fine. That settlement will be reviewed by the casino commission on June 19."
|
worldnews
|
The Clinton commercials in my state were pretty much 100% Donald Trump speeches. They'd show Trump saying something outrageous and mix it in with shots of kids watching TV. Clinton's strategy was literally Mrs. Lovejoy from the Simpsons going "Think of the children! Won't somebody *please* think of the children!"
If I were running against Trump, I'd highlight his long history of business failures. How he was constantly bailed out by his dad, how he's hiding his tax returns. I'd attack the narrative that he's a good businessman and not some spoiled rich kid. The whole "but he's MEAN" angle just fell on deaf ears.
|
worldnews
|
Nah mate, this Reddit user clearly knows more than all the experts at Forbes and Bloomberg. /s
I hate Trump as much, if not more, than the next man, but this is just stupid. It's shit like this that feeds into Trumps 'fake news' shtick. There's loads of shit that people can call Trump out on, instead they love to throw this "he was worse than an index fund" line.
Third time I've posted this here but you may appreciate it. It's a small breakdown of why the Index fund line isn't true.
https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/98z9k1/trump_said_on_monday_he_was_worried_that_any/e4l3rbn/
|
worldnews
|
OK, so looking at the S&P 500 it's averaged 7.63% over the last 44 years.
Given his starting wealth of $40m (this is disputed, but $40m seems to be the most commonly thrown around figure), and his final net worth now of $3.1bn (according to Forbes and Bloomberg), that means he's beat the market by 2.8% every year for the last 44 years. It works out about 10.4% per year. If you can find me an Index fund that can reliably average 10.4% a year for me I'll happily give you 2% for your troubles.
And that's assuming he never spent a penny of his wealth over those 44 years and reinvested it all.
|
worldnews
|
I want to understand your mom's behavior better. What's that called? The diagnosis?
Because if we understand it, maybe we can do something about it.
\--
One bro is an ER nurse. Utterly opposes single payer. Because reasons. But he still hates the insurance companies. I dunno how you square that circle.
Another bro stole a bride from Mexico. Rant and raved about how hard it was to bring her to the USA (legally). Then yells and screams about all the immigrants coming here, how we need to build the wall, deport everyone, etc.
Same bro bitched about cost of rail ticket. Can't understand that nice things cost money. Refuses to support public transit. This might actually might make sense, in a twisted logic sort of way. GOP sabotages government, then whines about how government doesn't work, people don't want to fund something they perceive as broken.
Had a bestie that hates liberals and taxes. Moved from coast to interior. Higher taxes (\~20%), much lower pay, fewer services, no medicare expansion. So now probably won't be able to retire. But cannot connect the dots.
​
|
worldnews
|
Tax breaks are an illusion that spike polls in the short term and hurt in the long term. Especially when government spending just broke the all time record, 2 quarters in a row. These job increases are an illusion that the federal government cannot afford.
Especially with the Trade deficit ballooning to comical levels with no signs of slowing, the economy is about to hit the dirt road. I'm pretty sure, that's going to be a pretty big blow to employment numbers.
He's so early into his term, he's riding the numbers of the previous administration. Come talk in about 2 years, when Trump's insane policies have had a chance to do their cumulative damage.
|
worldnews
|
You have some interesting opinions there.
Looking more at what's actually happening and not falling in to hype and doomsday doom and gloom prophecies..The effects of Trump's presidency are here now. The stock market (which is at an all time high) reacts in real time to everything from Trump's initial win, his administration's current and proposed policies, to his latest Tweet and foreign dealings. It will go down, yes.. that's how the stock market works.. boom and bust cycles. It's strong right now, stronger than ever, and that's a measure of current health of the economy under the current administration.
Employers too higher in real time; job seekers additionally seek employment in real time. And the job market is currently, relatively very strong. This is because both employers and job seekers are feeling good about the current health of the economy under the current administration.
And I know it's tempting to fall in to doomsday predictions (Soviet nuclear war, and communism taking over, and the Mayan calendar, and Y2K, and Heavens gate, etc), but try to take a more realistic look at what's actually happening.
And no, you dont get to blame everything good on previous administrations and everything bad bbn on the current. I mean you can, but it's a silly thing to do.
RemindMe! 2 years
|
worldnews
|
This is so wrong. Not accurate at all. Many Western powers, but mainly the French, tried to destabilize Libya for a whole bunch of reasons, none of which was oil sales. The petro dollar is a major international force no doubt, but Libya is a very bad example of it having an international effect. You could accurately say that Libya’s proximity to nations able to more directly effect the petro dollar increased its significance on the world stage, and increased the will other countries were willing to exert to try to change Libya, for better or worse.
|
worldnews
|
Allegedly.
This is from Woodward's mouth. While I can buy it, it's no confirmation.
Damn if everyone's not quick to give up secrets (while not impeaching him) this time around. There are protocols to follow and, if half of this stuff is going on, I hope someone's using them so that something can be done *about* all of it. Instead we seem to be treating it as the latest bit of gossip and someone gets the spotlight for a bit. :/
|
worldnews
|
>[Gaddafi] and his inner circle had tried to punch westward out of the shattered city into open countryside in a column of vehicles.
>But it was a gamble that ultimately would not allow him to escape the fate suffered by so many of his opponents during his 42 years in power.
>**High above Sirte, the heavily armed American MQ1 Predator drones**, which are piloted by satellite link and can provide surveillance or fire missiles in all weather, day and night, had been circling. The aircraft, which can remain "on station" for up to 18 hours, were being remotely flown from Creech air force base in Nevada. **One of the Predator pilots had now received permission to attack the fleeing convoy.**
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8843684/Gaddafis-final-hours-Nato-and-the-SAS-helped-rebels-drive-hunted-leader-into-endgame-in-a-desert-drain.html
|
worldnews
|
Gaddafi was assassinated by his own people. Certainly, Obama did nothing to stop it. Well I am an Obama supporter over a trump supporter I'm not complaining about either forigen leader being killed or attempted. I don't want to create another Iraq or Iran but I don't have a problem with her moving crazy dictator. I just don't want him to be messy and expensive. One of the top comments here is the concern over how eratic Trump is. Obama was cool under pressure. Clearly, Trump is not.
|
worldnews
|
I've never understood this logic. Realistically Hillary's presidency would have just been an extension of Obama's. Trump spent his entire campaign talking about Bengazi and her emails, and people ate that shit up. At the time, people thought Trump was the lesser of two evils because they convinced themselves that his attitude would change once he stepped into the white house. Two years later:
"Sleepy Eyes Chuck Todd of Fake NBC News said it’s time for the Press to stop complaining and to start fighting back. Actually Chuck, they’ve been doing that from the day I announced for President. They’ve gone all out, and I WON, and now they’re going CRAZY!"
|
worldnews
|
> Ever stop to think that all this is planned and maybe he's not as dumb as everybody thinks he is?
The problem is this "argument" would work with literally any idiot in any asylum around the world, and he's taking this "strategy" into every other part of his "leadership", y'know like.. trade and whatnot? The things he literally doesn't understand and has to be spoonfed with airplane noises?
This concept maybe could have been feasible back at the start, but there is no denying he is not just stupid, but he's corrupt as fuck.. I mean, unless you believe that having a half dozen _convictions_ in his cabinet is part of his "unpredictable" super clever strategy?
|
worldnews
|
I see what you're saying but one doesn't amass a 3+ billion dollar fortune, out debate and campaign 14 Republican rivals, out campaign the most corrupt and entrenched political dynasty in America (Clintons) by being an idiot. Sorry, doesn't work that way.
As far as convictions go, I don't put much weight on any of that frankly. I absolutely believe if you put a microscope to ANY politician or business person of his stature, you'd uncover at least this much crap. Problem is, it's never done to anybody else. Remember what Hillary was caught screaming to Donna Brazille? "If this fucker wins we're all going to be in jail!".
He's made some very powerful people, very pissed off and they want him gone at any cost. I really believe that. You can laugh all you want, call me a fool, whatever. I've been on this planet 49 years, I've NEVER seen anything like this before. The incessant negative coverage by the press etc is a whole new level of this ballgame.
Time will tell.
|
worldnews
|
Again not a very big difference when it comes to dictators. It's not like he could actually get acquitted. It's a formality to end his life.
They have to *try* to capture him because they want to display a respect for justice and the law, but let's not pretend it's not a guaranteed death sentence either way. Both groups wanted him dead eventually! And Obama knew that by supporting the rebels. He had no intention of Ghaddafi escaping the situation alive. He was facilitating his death as an inevitable outcome of his actions.
|
worldnews
|
it is not only produced in russian chemical factories, that claim has been debunked a very long time ago; it originates from a statement boris johnson made which turned out to be completely unsubstantiated.
>In recent years, there has been much speculation that a fourth generation of nerve agents, ‘Novichoks’ (newcomer), was developed in Russia, beginning in the 1970s as part of the ‘Foliant’ programme, with the aim of finding agents that would compromise defensive countermeasures. Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published. (Black, 2016)
---
>One should be mindful that the chemical components or precursors of A-232 or its binary version novichok-5 are ordinary organophosphates that can be made at commercial chemical companies that manufacture such products as fertilizers and pesticides.
---
http://www.spectroscopynow.com/details/ezine/1591ca249b2/Iranian-chemists-identify-Russian-chemical-warfare-agents.html?tzcheck=1,1,1,1,1&&tzcheck=1&tzcheck=1&tzcheck=1
---
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/15/uks-claims-questioned-doubts-emerge-about-source-of-salisburys-novichok
---
http://rogerannis.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Other-countries-making-Novichok-poison.pdf
>British Prime Minister Theresa May says that because it was Russia that developed Novichok
agents, it is “highly likely” that Russia either attacked the Skripals itself, or lost control of its
Novichok to someone else who did. But other countries legally created Novichok for testing
purposes after its existence was revealed in 1992
>“Novichoks were only produced in any sizeable quantities in the Soviet Union,” says Zanders.
But after Mirzayanov’s revelations, Western defence labs made small amounts – legal under the
treaty, partly so the agents can be identified in situations like Salisbury. In 2016, Iranian chemists
even published a method for doing so.
this defected russian spy was already imprisoned in russia for years for his defection. explain to me why the russian government would wait for skripal to enter foreign soil before assassinating him when they had all the time in the world to do it and could have swept it under the rug quite easily if they did it on russian soil. additionally, yulia skripal has stated she hopes to return to russia. if russia's culpability were as cut and dry as the UK makes it out to be, is yulia a suicidal imbecile for wanting to go back into the domain of her supposed assassins? or is this case just not what it seems?
so there is no sufficient motive, no sufficient evidence and most definitely no sufficient ground to indict russia on the basis of a state-sanctioned assassination. what remains is that the UK has found two men who entered the UK under russian pseudonyms (so fake identities), who then very quickly left again. that's it. amazing investigation by the UK, totally does not reek of false flagging and propaganda.
|
worldnews
|
I’ll just pick one element from your post..
> this defected russian spy was already imprisoned in russia for years for his defection. explain to me why the russian government would wait for skripal to enter foreign soil before assassinating him when they had all the time in the world to do it and could have swept it under the rug quite easily if they did it on russian soil.
To trade back for Russian spies. Which he was in 2010:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43291394
|
worldnews
|
this is not a matter of belief, either there is evidence or there isn't. and right now there isn't, that is indisputable fact.
in the west a concept called 'in dubio pro reo' has established itself, but it seems that does not apply to people of russian heritage.
the burden of proof falls on the UK to produce evidence that proves russia's culpability to begin with, the onus is not on russia to prove themselves innocent, again, a basic principle western societies are founded on.
why you would believe a government that is partly responsible for a war in which a million was killed because of a campaign of lies is beyond me. neither the russian government nor the british government deserve to be trusted without evidence, period.
|
worldnews
|
Erm Russia did have a motive. Putin had an election and assassinating a former rogue agent the other side of the world in a country with some of the best security and intelligence services is an incredibly bold and powerful move. It shows he can reach traitors no matter where they are and get away with it.
Noone else has any sort of reasonable motive. So by process of elimination even without evidence Russia is highly like to be the culprit.
This new evidence just reinforces it.
|
worldnews
|
so this is a sensible scenario for you? russia swaps 4 of their prisoners in exchange for 10 russian spies arrested by the FBI. one of these prisoners, skripal, is exchanged only to be murdered years and years after his pardon on foreign soil.
what does russia gain from this gambit? they could have just swapped another prisoner that wasn't skripal, i am sure they have plenty to draw from, and they would have henceforth completely avoided (supposedly) killing skripal with the whole world watching. instead you propose that skripal was pardoned and swapped only so russia could make a gambit and kill him later on.. again, for what? clearly skripal wasn't an **active** danger given that they let him leave for GB and didn't kill him while he was still imprisoned. they obviously would not have pardoned him if they weren't sure of that. so what feasible motive could russia have for making such a risky move? either you can give a motive or this is just lunacy.
this whole line of thought depends on the skripal assassination being a ploy that was literally orchestrated more than a decade ago by the way, which does not seem realistic given how amateurish the actual 'assassination' was. you'd think they would want to make clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that skripal and yulia would die in such an orchestration. it's classical conspiracy thinking by the way to simply enlarge the conspiracy when opposing facts come into play. this is now not only a state-sanctioned assassination, it is an assassination that was planned more than 10 years in advance but botched horribly. at least that's how it has to be if this argument is led to its conclusion.
seems legit.
|
worldnews
|
that is not a sufficient motive. what does putin gain from this demonstration of power? you say this proves how far russia's influence reaches, correct. and showing this the world benefits russia.. how exactly? being sanctioned heavily by the west benefited russia in which ways exactly?
the advantage (assuming there even is an advantage for russia sanctioning this hit) of proving to the world that crossing russia means death does not come up for the financial losses the sanctions have caused. it's not like putin needed to prove that anyways given that litvinenko's murder is still fresh in everyone's heads.
but let's assume that it was a demonstration of power. that does not conform with reality as the actual assassination was amateurish and neither of the targets were successfully killed. this argument does not hold up under scrutiny.
>Noone else has any sort of reasonable motive.
a false flag operation to weaken russia's standing on the world stage is very much a reasonable motive.
|
worldnews
|
The motive is simple, revenge and a warning. Not sure why that’s so difficult to comprehend.
“this whole line of thought depends on the skripal assassination being a ploy that was literally orchestrated more than a decade ago by the way, which does not seem realistic given how amateurish the actual 'assassination' was. you'd think they would want to make clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that skripal and yulia would die in such an orchestration. it's classical conspiracy thinking by the way to simply enlarge the conspiracy when opposing facts come into play. this is now not only a state-sanctioned assassination, it is an assassination that was planned more than 10 years in advance but botched horribly. at least that's how it has to be if this argument is led to its conclusion.”
No it doesn’t. In the slightest. The physical ‘plan’ to do it might have been planned the night before these two left Russia but Skripal could have have been on a list for years. What’s so hard to believe there?
|
worldnews
|
His motive would be to deter traitors and political opponents. If you have heard about the Kremlin news reporting on this. They are treating it with arrogance and hubris. Which is very suggestive of their international political agenda. The reality of the situation is sanctions mean very little and so it has succeeded to certain degree in proving that they can do whatever they want.
Yes they botched the job but that was always going to be an uncertainty. Using a nerve agent instead of shooting or some other method also fits with the whole bold power play theory.
As for your theory of alternative motive. There's not much substance to that. There is no way the UK would be behind such a reckless attack on its own soil as we are not the sort of people to call for war over such thing. So there is no real political gain.
Which means it would have to be a third party. In which case why has Russia been so difficult and uncooperative? Why have they not tried to prove it was someone else? If it was genuinely manufactured to weaken them then surely they have good reason to investigate themselves? I don't know about you but I would be pretty pissed off at a false accusation like this. Yet they have been pretty casual about be it.
|
worldnews
|
litvinenko was killed not long ago, there is absolutely no need whatsoever for russia to flex power on foreign soil again. it's not that your argument is difficult to comprehend, it's that it is nonsense. especially when taking into account the financial damage this case has caused for russia it is more than doubtful that a simple exercise of power would come up for these losses.
>No it doesn’t. In the slightest. The physical ‘plan’ to do it might have been planned the night before these two left Russia but Skripal could have have been on a list for years. What’s so hard to believe there?
if skripal were on a list for years, then he would have been a very high priority target. it clearly makes sense for russia to give up on this target and needlessly handicap themselves by assassinating him on foreign soil, when they could have just, again, done it in the comfort of their own walls.
if skripal was on a list for years, russia would not give him up without being 100% sure they could dispose of him later on. the amateurish poisoning does not conform with this no matter how you try to spin it.
|
worldnews
|
Litvinenko isn’t Skripal, I don’t see why Russia couldn’t kill a traitor when they’ve already got previous for doing the same thing. If anything that just provides ‘bad character’ evidence. They didn’t do it ‘from the comfort of their own walls’ because they wanted to trade him for more spies.. which they did. A dead spy isn’t going to be worth anything to trade with. Try to spin it? The suspects are Russian government agents? What’s the alternative theory here then?
|
worldnews
|
My "method" is not a method. It is discretion to not publicly discuss sources of information or methods used to protect the public. Discussing methods used to protect the public like this article hints at, undermines their effectiveness and makes the task of protecting the public that much more difficult.
I shall provide a simple example to illustrate further. Imagine you are in a public square. And you notice and count ten cameras. But wait! You only actually see camera housings and do not know if they all contain cameras or are merely the housing for the cameras. Do you want the ones that do contain cameras to be painted orange and the rest to remain white? Of course not because to do so would be to undermine their effectiveness by publicizing which ones are cameras and which ones are the dummies.
Revealing sources and methods undermines effectiveness.
Your well intentioned quote is being misunderstood and misapplied. No one is giving up liberty by valuing and protecting intelligent law enforcement methods. Quite the contrary actually. Fertile soil is being prepared for liberty to sprout. The liberty you so rightly cherish cannot exist in a lawless environment.
|
worldnews
|
What you're talking about is [security through obscurity](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity) and is generally considered bad security practice.
Take your security camera example. Let's say that the security designer thinks that, since all the cameras are white, no criminals know which ones have cameras. Until some crook looks in the windows in the front on a bright day and sees the camera in some, and an empty housing in others (or bought a guard a beer, or captured a snapshot of the control room, or. . .). Now he knows the security scheme, and since you believe that people don't know it, you are at a disadvantage. If you assume that all criminals know where the security cameras are, then what's the point of the extra housings?
It's also worth noting that theure literally just saying "don't act suspicious when you're about to commit a crime." If someone doesn't known that, well, then theyyre probably not picking through news articles before committing a crime.
|
worldnews
|
"Simple conversation"?
What seems like gibberish to me could be a simple conversation to a rocket scientist or public safety expert.
Many of our safeguards are based on simple ideas that anyone could subvert if they "just knew about it". Keeping them secret is essential for proper operation.
For example, imagine what would happen if every elevator advertised the fact that you can skip stopping at floors if you press a certain button combination. Nationally, wait times for elevators would go up by several minutes on average. I know, it's a silly example, with little relevance to public safety, but it works.
Knowledge is power. In the end all our safeguards can be overcome, it is due to the public's ignorance that any of them are left standing at all.
Say the state told everyone exactly which power distribution hubs to hit to cause a nationwide blackout. Trolls from the country itself would probably hit that spot before any terrorist even could.
|
worldnews
|
I agree. For the most part. However you are lumping "terrorists" into an all inclusive category. Some are as sophisticated as you suggest. Most are not. Like this attacker. He was what is called a lone wolf. Which is the most difficult category to thwart. And a common type seen all too often lately. I don't see why we should make the task of some terrorists easier than it need be. The primary goal after all is to protect innocent lives.
|
worldnews
|
First rule of security: Don't talk about your security capabilities or methods.
This applies from junior school where the teacher doesn't mention leaving a laptop recording when stepping out of the room, and the administration doesn't reveal the resolution of the security cameras.
In computer security the strength requirements of the password have to be revealed to users when they set one up but it is preferably not revealed to outsiders. Everything about the security systems is secret unless there is a reason to reveal it. Then tripwires can be set up to catch intruders before they get too far in.
|
worldnews
|
If this is real (I'm sure "The Marijuana Herald" is a totally legit, non-biased news source), he must have known the risk he was taking so it is hard to feel sorry for him. I've spent a significant amount of time in Malaysia; there are big signs upon entering the country informing that there is a mandatory death penalty for drug offenses. Taking such a risk in a country like Malaysia, the guy must have had a death wish.
|
worldnews
|
Differences between clearly defined laws (with their penalties) and the risk of being a victim to a crime aside. If that dangerous neighbourhood had hard to miss signage - and it was common knowledge - that being seen within WILL result in being mugged and/or raped, would it be a massive leap to say you should have seen it coming?
I don't agree with that law in Malaysia, however I do understand the point that you need to live with the laws of the land you reside, or accept the consequences. I personally disagree with many speed limits, but accept if I get caught speeding, I will need to pay the fine.
|
worldnews
|
I don't think I've seen anyone here argue that they are for or against cannabis oil in medicine. The main point being made is that all actions have consequences.
In this case breaking that particular law in Malaysia results in the death penalty. I can't imagine many people on here believe it is a fitting punishment, but it is the one clearly written into law in that country.
I genuinely hope this guy can manage an appeal, as his heart was clearly in the right place. Let's be real here though, this was obviously going to end badly for him.
|
worldnews
|
I only ever start with dried beans anymore. It's cheaper, more nutritious, and sooo much better.
I recently discovered honey garlic baked beans. I start with 5 types of prepped beans, some chopped onions, mushrooms, a bit of diced pork and the sauce/spices. Throw it in the oven, zero real effort. Goes very well with rice, as most bean dishes do.
It'll be a cold day in Canada before I have any sympathy for cops.
|
worldnews
|
If that is the case, I would suggest you are probably a bigoted american (or a canadian who might as well be an american) who is trying to export YOUR bigotry. Most nations are NOT right wing hell holes without any Left wing presence like the US. The cops are well trained, do not murder citizens and non-citizens and expect to get away with it. FFS kiwi cops do not even carry guns usually. DO NOT extrapolate American (and AMerican lite) police style executions to the rest of the world.
|
worldnews
|
Considering you can't even get your country names straight, I have to think you're a complete and utter moron, so I'm unconcerned with what you have to say. I mean my nationality is plainly written in the comment to which you took such offense.
So why is the police apologist so thin skinned? Why do you think my comment bothers you so much? All I said was I have no sympathy for people who choose to become police. I didn't say kill them, or anything hyperbolic. I said I didn't like them, and you're throwing a tantrum.
Are you just a kid? You sound like one, one with shitty parents.
|
worldnews
|
Lol you were the one who started comparing Germany to its past, not me. They weren't "consumed" by Roman culture there were loads of different tribes with their own cultures, look up the Visigoths, the Alamanni, Franks, Burgundians, Ostrogoths, Suebi, Greuthingi, Saxons, Vandals all Germanic speaking tribes that had similar(ish) cultures, although not a lot is known about these to make much in the way of definitive answers. They had a distinct culture that actually THEY imposed on the Romans in the western Roman Empire: See- Ostrogothic invasion of Italy, where Theoderic invaded Northern Italy after killing ANOTHER Germanic war lord called Odoacer who was in control of much of Italy at the time. Theoderic appeased Roman culture to keep the inhabitants happy but also made it very clear he was a Goth (Germanic).
|
worldnews
|
I just outlined why, in fact, the Germans weren't conquered and can actually be seen as the conquerors... Where are these tribes now? All around us. The culture is still seen in our laws, literature, languages. We are speaking a Germanic language now which comes from a tribe called the Saxons who invaded the little-known Roman province of Britannia. A lot of 'white' people are of Germanic descent from Germany, The Netherlands, England and to a lesser extent the rest of the British Isles, France was conquered by a Germanic tribe called the Franks, Spain the Visigoths, that on top of the amount of pillaging from Scandinavia making Scandinavian genes prevalent in a lot of Northern European peoples. These countries went on to essentially shape how the world is today so yeah not much...
The Germanic tribes aren't comparable to Native American tribes because, well, the Native Americans had their land stolen and with it a lot of hope and prospects of wealth because they were forced away from their lands. The Germanic decedents were the ones taking it.
|
worldnews
|
Rome conquered Britannia as well, which was where the Angles, another Germanic tribe, had settled as well. If not for the Roman conquest, these backwards fucks would have still been worshipping their druids and mother earth, fucking their cousins and cattle, and fighting with sharpened stones.
Britannia became the vanguard of cultural exportation of Rome’s legacy for the next several centuries. With declining influence in the current era due to secession of the majority of its colonies (tokens of western conquest), this role has now effectively been passed to the United States, one of the many legacies of the conquests of Britannia/Rome. As the dictators of the European monarchistic structure enjoyed their conquests of the colonial age, the more authentic Roman model was re-established in early America.
Through two centuries of conquest and no use of the brakes, America has became Rome-incarnate.
Where else do they speak German besides the immediate vicinity of Germany? German culture was consumed by England. And now, they are being force-fed (literally-look at McDonald’s in Germany) American culture. They watch our movies, eat our food, listen to our music, and learn our language. They are one of many lesser tribes to have been conquered by the legacy of Rome. Germany has that honor many times throughout history, in fact.
|
worldnews
|
Jesus Christ dude English is a *Germanic* language that came to England from *Germanic* tribes. The same *Germanic* that **Germany** is. English actually turned up in force **after** the Romans had left (in 407 AD), being invited in by the Romano-British inhabitants who were being attacked by Picts. The Celtic peoples of Britain actually lived in kinda urban environments as well as rural ones. They also knew how to farm and fight and there are even pre-Roman coins from Britain so they had some form of an economy. There is evidence of trade, also with continental Europe. So, hardly savages. I study this at University, seriously.
You have an incredibly weird view of history, have you just made this shit up or do you follow a certain pseudo-intellectual? Because there are some massive citations needed here. I don't know what has lead you to believe that America rules any countries in the same way that Rome did because it really doesn't. There isn't any US conquest, and if you think MacDonalds is a US conquest I have no idea what to say to you. MacDonalds works independently from the US, its a business. It isn't Caesar massacring vast swathes of the population of Gaul to annex big areas of land, the US doesn't actually *own* places like the Roman's did. America doesn't run on a system of government where you have two leaders replaced every year. The US had slavery for a bit so I guess that's similar but it wasn't much like Roman slavery. Also, how the fuck was German culture ever taken over by English culture? I'm preeeettttyy certain German culture still exists.
I'm British. It's not your language really is it? (assuming you're from the US). Germany is very much like here (the UK) where we watch our own movies, eat our own food, and listen to our own music and speak in our own language. No one here really knows about US history nor do we give a fuck, I don't know why you think the US somehow owns the world when it demonstrably doesn't. Also, there was never a single "German tribe", Germany was a mix of loads of different tribes like I said. Jesus fucking Christ I don't know why I bother there is so much wrong with what you've said I think I'm going to implode.
The world does not work on weird views of masculinity nor is it some popularity competition where the country with the most people speaking its language some how... wins? Its incredibly complex and intricate made up of *autonomous* countries that aren't owned by the US (apart from maybe the US but even that's debatable nowadays)
|
worldnews
|
Lol its funny you think that you know what people outside the US consume despite being from the US and trying to lecture someone about it from the UK. I'm in the UK and nearly all the culture I consume is British and the same with the news (Brexit is kind of a big deal atm). One trip to Germany doesn't make you an expert.
Rome was a powerful force for loads of debatable reasons. A good one that is overlooked is that it allowed anyone to become citizens and wealthy with rights that other neighbouring territories didn't grant subjugates- allowing Rome's population to grow fast, also it was a great trading hub which allowed Rome to become incredibly rich. It wasn't an ideal location because it was essentially built upon a swamp and also had no real good escape route because the Romans kinda saw Rome as infallible but this changed when the capital of the empire was moved to Constantinople and before then the capital had been in Ravenna and Milan places in which there were much better escape routes and were easier to defend. Rome was under constant threat from its neighbours all the time and it was that problem that caused it's downfall.
Rome took hundreds of years to expand it's empires borders through military and diplomatic conquest in which the end goal was that *Romans* governed the provinces that they had actually conquered. They didn't theoretically expand it through fast-food chains, asinine politics, and dubious foreign relations in which they kind of had a say in another countries politics in a backhand kind of way. Rome fully took over provinces and made them *Roman* something that the US doesn't do. You can see that in the fact that no one in these places that you claim are conquered by the US would call themselves US citizens, whereas in the Roman empire they could do that. So you could claim that there is US TV on all the time, or US music on all the time but do any of the people in Germany, Latin America, Korea or whatever consider themselves American? No.
|
worldnews
|
No, they don’t consider themselves American because we allow them to keep their separate identity after we conquer them. We then strip their military and rebuild it in our image. We then use those cohorts to supplement our main effort in other campaigns (Germany deployed Bundeswehr units to Afghanistan in GWOT, ROK continues to train with our Marine Corps and army for the invasion of China, etc.)
Furthermore, we bring in all of our commercial interests to dominate their market, making us incredibly rich and able to further commit to R&D and stay ahead of everyone else technologically.
You said that it took hundreds of years for Rome to expand its borders.
The US has gradually been expanding outwardly for over 200 years, and now its sphere of influence pushes up to China in the west and Russia on the east.
You said that Rome went in and made them Roman, something the US doesn’t do.
How much more “American” can Europe get than to already be eating McDonald’s, drinking Coke, listening to our music, watching our movies, buying arms, goods, vehicles, etc.?
And yet look how content you all are under this illusion that you are a sovereign people, happy and free.
But we can see what happens when our subjects act out of line. We all saw before our very eyes how the EU Finance Minister caved to Trump’s tariff threats, bent down and took Trump’s dick in his asshole right on the world stage.
Also, you are trying to misleadingly allude to my singular foreign exchange student experience as my only international travel in an attempt to discredit me. Let me be clear, I have traveled extensively throughout Europe and other regions. I’ve been to the UK, Netherlands, France, Germany, Cyprus, Italy, Kuwait, Qatar, and Iraq. Some were for leisure, some for business, and some as a participant in armed conflict.I do speak Spanish, German, and Russian, and I’m in the process of adding Korean and Japanese to that list. So it was worth a shot, but a swing and a miss.
|
worldnews
|
Me: Then can I get a job?
Gunning: No, you need to get experience first.
Me: But how can I get experience if I can't get a job?
Gunning: Not my problem.
Also people like Gunning: Fucking millennials are lazy and unmotivated; they need to work!
I am very, very fortunate with my career prospects post Uni in a few weeks but I know so many people who have are struggling to get anywhere in life because they're denied jobs they're clearly qualified for. So tired of people who have everything they want and need in life acting as if it's easy. They bought their homes in an age where prices were cheap and it was easy to obtain a mortgage. These same people are the reason why people struggle to obtain their own home, even fucking pay rent.
|
worldnews
|
I graduated college back in 2010 and used to kind of feel that way. It's pretty LOL now though.
​
You simply need to start at the bottom and work your way up. The problem is that you're applying to jobs that require experience. EG -- finance majors apply to financial analyst positions and think the system is rigged against their generation.
​
No. Unless you went to an ivy league school or had a 3.5-4.0 GPA, you're probably going to need to work a few years in a non-analyst position that you think you're too good for and then get promoted to that position.
​
"BUT in my parent's generation every finance major was instantly an analyst!" In your parent's generation, only the equivalent of those 4.0 GPA students or ivy leaguers went to college in the first place. 70% of 16-24 year olds are enrolled in college right now. 70% of the population can't be analysts. 70% of the population isn't smart enough to even be an analyst.
​
It's not that things are "harder" for you. You're over-valuing your own ability because you think that being a 2018 college grad makes you as qualified as a 1970 college grad. It does not. A 2018 college grad's aptitude and ability is on par with a 1970 high school grads.
​
You're actually gifted with much more opportunity. In 1970, someone at the 50th %ile would have been relegated to being a mechanic or something forever. No hope of anything better. In 2018, that 50th %ile can still be a mechanic right out of high school. But he also has the chance to go to college and do something more.
|
worldnews
|
> Me: But how can I get experience if I can't get a job?
Unpaid internship, while you're funded by your parents.
AKA aristocracy and classism
Very common in fashion, culture, the arts, but also education - to the detriment of society and the economy as a whole, as talent is wasted as people end up working shit jobs when they would have been far more productive working in another sector.
|
worldnews
|
I'm speaking from personal experience. I graduated in finance right after the real estate bubble and the banking crisis -- the worst time ever. I was like "OMG I'm applying to jobs all over the country (banking, financial analyst, brokerage, etc etc etc -- everything) and I'm not hearing back wtf!! It must be the era that I live in!!"
It wasn't. It was simply the fact that 2/3 of the population goes to college and I was looking at my degree like it signified that I was in the top 10% of mental ability, like it did in the 1970s. Truth -- you can be "smart" enough to get a "college degree" in 2018 but be too dumb to join the army as a grunt, being disqualified by the ASVAB. The only thing comparable to a 1960s college degree is an ivy league degree or a 3.5-4.0 GPA at a decent school with networking. I was being arrogant and overvaluing myself.
Work a few years in something as simple as doing book keeping at a local business or just an administrative office job at some random company. Get a job as a lowly bank teller and work your way up to management in the retail bank and apply horizontally in the same bank to the jobs that you really want. Just start working -- any job, anything. Nothing is below you. You're not better than anyone. All the sudden doors start to open up. You start networking, making connections, building real skills, piling on certifications (eg -- CFA), and you move along.
You're going to laugh at this post bemoaning how you can't get anywhere because the cards are stacked against your generation in a few years.
|
worldnews
|
I laugh at your post because of how incredibly Ill-informed it is, not because I don’t get your totally awesome nonsense anecdote.
Are you even aware of the difference in education standards from almost 50 years ago and today? As someone with a bachelor of education hearing you make that comparison is quite literally the dumbest thing I’ve heard this week.
Job hunting is harder for this generation because of the simple fact that more population + more graduates + more automation means there are less jobs.
I suggest you actually educate yourself before mouthing off with bullshit about people aiming too high. 1970 and 2018 are not comparable in a single way, and if you had any decent education you would be aware of that simple fact
|
worldnews
|
I went to a college that averaged a 3.7 GPA for the incoming freshman class and many of the students required remedial math classes and had trouble with basic ideas. Standards, whatever, that's all BS. I know what my real life experience says: 70% of the population is taking college classes, and people aren't any smarter than they were 50 years ago. All these kids expected to become analysts and stuff and most of them wouldn't be any better at it than the guy changing my tires if put into the same "entry level" job. The 50th %ile is the 50th%ile and a piece of paper doesn't change that. The 50%ile in 1970 just knew they were dumb and the 50th%ile in 2018 has a "college degree" (in sarcastic quotations for a reason) and thinks they're entitled to professional level work.
|
worldnews
|
Unpaid internships are illegal in Australia, I believe.
They were never offered when I was at uni, they simply didn’t exist, so unless that has changed in the last few years?
(I know some engineering degrees have a requirement of something like 6 months in a relevant job, similar to an internship. Work based training type of thing?)
But you’re left with overqualified retail workers because,
Need a degree for a job.
Graduate position applied for - *minimum requirement 3 years experience*
No internships - how do I get experience?
Also, why do I need experience for a *graduate position*?
Therefore, have a degree, and a government debt, but can’t get a job because I need experience.
|
worldnews
|
>It is the same entity.
Only in name. Different political parties, different people, different laws, different constitution; Canada wasn't even fully independent of the British Crown until 1982.
> The vast majority of people want institutions to take responsibility for their actions regardless of the time span, especially for ingenious acts.
Proof? The past cannot be changed by an apology, and the time for a meaningful apology is well past (since everyone who made the decision is long dead).
|
worldnews
|
There is a concept called "collective guilt". We bear responsibility *and/or shame* for the actions of the group we belong to, including the sinful actions of our ancestors. The amount of responsibility and/or shame depends on certain factors, such as the extend of the ability of the people in the group to do and/or speak out for the "right thing".
By acknowledging a sin of the past, the shame of that sin can be absolved. Absolving sin is necessary to travel the path of the righteous. That is why Germany, today, is a righteous country; they admit the sins of the Nazi period, thus seek nobility. This is why the USA is righteous country, *despite all the bad things we still do;* we seek truth and acknowledge our sins.
|
worldnews
|
I'm saying that if you gain German citizenship, you are responsible for the *shame* of the sins committed by Germany.
I'm American. I'm responsible for the *shame* of the sins committed by America. I'm partially *guilty* for the sins committed by America today, because I benefit from being an American and I have some ability to influence what my country is.
What you seem to be saying is that you think you have no responsibility except for what you yourself did, even though you claim Canadian identity for yourself. That's morally immature. You want to claim this identity (or citizenship), but you don't accept the stains that come with it.
|
worldnews
|
> Neo-nazism is on the rise across the world and there are right wing parties rising in Canada and Europe who deny that the Holocaust ever happened.
It really isn't. What is on the rise though are extremist fascist left-wing SJW's accusing anyone and everyone who does not agree with them 100% of being a Nazi and/or "alt-right".
>This is very important, will impact a lot of people, and is long overdue.
It is not important, will not impact anyone, and is so far overdue that it is completely pointless.
|
worldnews
|
>because I benefit from being an American and I have some ability to influence what my country is.
Unless you are extremely wealthy and/or heavily connected, you have absolutely no influence in what your country is.
>What you seem to be saying is that you think you have no responsibility except for what you yourself did, even though you claim Canadian identity for yourself. That's morally immature. You want to claim this identity (or citizenship), but you don't accept the stains that come with it.
I don't "claim" any identity for myself. I am Canadian only because I was born so. I did not choose in the matter, and I have no choice one way or the other. I do not accept responsibility or "shame" for any actions in which I did not participate or have any influence over, and neither should you or anyone else.
|
worldnews
|
Found a neo-nazi!
Top clues: you don't think that Holocaust denial is on the rise, you don't think that turning a boat full of refugees away to die in concentration camps is an atrocity, and you think that SJWs are worse than nazis.
This false equivalence between SJWs (a term made up by the alt-right) and neo-nazis is one of the favourite ways for paid foreign trolls to undermine democracy and encourage faciscm in America. You should look up the reports by the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI about foreign interference in the 2016 eleection on social media -- you're writing directly in line with the thousands of comments captured that were written by foreign trolls.
You are almost quoting them verbatim.
|
worldnews
|
> you have absolutely no influence in what your country is.
Well if you believe that, why don't you go live in China? That's were I lived a third of my life. Go see what it's like to live in a nation where there is not even a pretense of democracy.
>I don't "claim" any identity for myself. I am Canadian
Semantics. You are saying you belong to this group called "Canada / Canadian". You are saying that is part of your identity... as in "I AM CANADIAN".
>I did not choose in the matter, and I have no choice one way or the other.
You have no choice about what womb you come out of. Of course, you have a choice about what country you maintain your citizenship in.
>I do not accept responsibility or "shame" for any actions in which I did not participate or have any influence over, and neither should you or anyone else.
So again, you are saying that you just have responsibility for yourself, which is morally immature. In Biblical-ish language, you are saying "You are not your brother's keeper." You pay your taxes to support the system. You get great education and social benefits from the system. You grew up in a land not ruled by a tyrant because of the sacrifices of people who came before yo. All this you have. But the dirt that came with it somehow cannot stick to you.
|
worldnews
|
Fun fact, lobbying came about as a manner in which experts in a given field could advise lawmakers to help them make informed policy (e.g. a physicist could be a lobbyist for science related laws, etc). This was actually a good thing way back when!
Problem is that nowadays the “advice” is typically money, and the “informed decision” has become a quid pro quo with corporations and the rich. Incredibly scummy.
|
worldnews
|
That's the lie people were sold long ago, that capitalism was the right way and that every vote counts. You know at least one of those statements is wrong. I think people are starting to get it that capitalism, though a fine and honorable concept, is just as corrupt and evil as communism was in its day. The common denominator there is that people are somewhat psychopathic and really only care for themselves. That's what fell afoul of success of both systems.
|
worldnews
|
> Sure there are out right deniers but they're incredibly few.
I’m not convinced of that at all. There are plenty of outright deniers, and a large chunk of the rest of the “skeptics” generally give weak qualifying “well, I’m not a *denier*, I just think nothing is going to happen and we should burn more coal...” in an effort to seem more acceptable.
In practice they are evidently just as convinced that climate change is some “leftist conspiracy” as the others.
|
worldnews
|
I have no doubt that some republicans "deny" climate change to some extent but not all of them. And I don't even think it's a flat out denial like its not happening at all. It's more of a "how much are we responsible for it and what should we do" which is a lot different than denying it all together. Just like the dems the republican party is made up of a bunch of different opinions of varying degrees. It's like saying every democrat wants to ban all guns. It's just not true. I just find it more useful to point out the specific individual on what they believe or said and how are they wrong. I would say I lean more right on a lot of issues and if there was a republican that flat out denied that our records show the earth is warming I would have to disagree with them. It's the same shit you see on reddit every day where people group every individual of a certain party to the most extreme example. I'm just a regular guy with a college education, a house, a family and a solid career. The dems and republicans are made up of a majority of people just like me who probably agree on more things than we think. I just wish that if republicans hated republican officials as much as they hate the democrats and if democrats hated the democrats in office as much as they hate the republicans, we would probably get a lot further. It doesn't seem like anybody is really happy with either party but disagree so much with the others so much they will deal with the stupid shit their party does just so the other guy won't win. Blanket statements about an entire group just don't really seem to help anyone except for the people who already agree with you.
|
worldnews
|
"It's the flipside of anti immigration nationalism"
none white migration effects you can see in places such as France or Germany with countless terror for allah rapes murders for mohammad and or welfare. Every 5th migrant in Germany is on state assistance.
Just to let you know, COUNTLESS none white countries are welcoming or giving asylums to white SA if they only chose to come. White are welcomed everywhere due to a fact that they will make any nation strive grow unlike the you know who...
|
worldnews
|
>There’s no correlation though... A gun is a weapon
What is a bomb used for other that a weapon? A knife is a weapon. Knives can also be designed to kill, was the knifing spree in Paris a knife problem?
> Give someone a truck and they will most likely drive it law abidingly.
30% of Americans own a gun, and by far, the vast majority will use them law abidingly.
Edit: added a bit to my first paragraph
|
worldnews
|
>I didn't want to even attempt your bomb analogy given that Pakistan is a third world Muslim country, do I need to say more?
Absolutely you need to say more. If you are going to blame the tools that an insane person uses to hurt someone innocent, why would the people of Pakistan be an exception? The fact that it’s a “third world country” is utterly irrelevant.
>Knives are used to prepare foods, guns are used to shoot things.
Knives are also used to kill people. I own a rifle, it is only used for shooting food, why is that different from a knife that you claim are used exclusively for preparing food? My gun is used exclusively for shooting deer or elk, that is part of my food preparation.
>I don't see this argument going anywhere, bye.
I generally find this statement to be common when I question anyone who is against guns. There truly is no logic to their arguments, so rather than discuss their opinion they just shut it down.
|
worldnews
|
Did you even read your first article? The first key point clearly states that per capita ownership has fallen.
If people were the issue then wouldn't Australia see regular mass shootings like the U.S.A?
It's not necessarily the availability of guns in America that results in your ridiculous levels of gun crime, it's the gun culture that comes as a result of it. People aren't buying guns and using them because they are mentally ill, it's because guns are seen as a fundamental part of your society.
As I said before, you're not going to budge from your viewpoint and I'm not going to change mine. We both think the other is wrong, this isn't going anywhere.
|
worldnews
|
I don't even get the conspiracy theory the people on this site are trying to promote with the whole "same bank as Justice Kennedy's son... the same justice that just retired!"
Like. What is even the implication. Trump would get a dirty loan and owe a bank that Justice Kennedy's son works at, but then he would also have the power to strong-arm Kennedy into leaving? Or does it implicate Kennedy somehow? I don't even see anything there?
Or would it be more likely that a right leaning justice appointed by a Republican president would want to retire at 82 years old while a Republican holds office? No... that can't be it. Trump has to be doing something evil!!!
|
worldnews
|
The son works in the real estate division and reportedly loaned'Trump up to a billion dollars in real estate money. However the bank itself has been found guilty multiple times for money laundering.
One of the plausible money laundering schemes is Trump selling property to Russian oligarchs for far more then they are worth to clean the money. And legitimize assets for Russians.
So let's say Russians want control of the USA Supreme Court for a few decades. They would blackmail Kennedy to retire as they have leverage over his son. He is old so he wouldn't last through the next president term most likely. Then they get their Trump aides to push for Kavanaugh.
Then proceed to (in Russian Accent) *Destroy Precious American Freedoms.*
I think it's overall a stretch, but with as much bullshittery has occurred surrounding Trump I do not want to outright say it is entirely ridiculous. The speed of Kennedy's retirement was also atypical. But Putin pulls the strings. Trump is just a narcissist, where every moment revolves around him.
Wouldn't be surprised if the Maginsky Act is tested in the Supreme Court after Kavanaugh's made a SCJ.
|
worldnews
|
I just find it insane that people on this site think that is a more likely scenario than an 82 year old saying "hey. I'm 82. I'll be 84 after this first term and if Trump doesn't win, I may be 92, or even older by the time we have a next Republican president. I better retire now."
I dont think anyone actually believes the conspiracy right? They just want it to be true? Similar to the right with Seth Rich and the Pizza Gate conspiracies?
|
worldnews
|
It is possible that Kennedy was threatened or Blackmailed into retiring. But he was absolutely pressured by the White House.
The White House was blunt, warning the 81-year-old justice that time was of the essence. There was no telling, they said, what would happen if Democrats gained control of the Senate after the November elections and had the power to block the president’s choice as his successor.
After the whole Merrick Garland thing, leaving the Supreme Court with 8 Justices is bad for SC decsisions.
Perhaps, Narcissistic Trump underhandedly threatened his son some how... To get what he wants. Perhaps it is closer to reddit conspiracy.
But the Republicans absolutely want to stack the court with Republican before they lose seats. Which is why Trump impeachment is not a question for Republicans, they are not finished with him yet. Republicans are acting in bad faith, and have been since they became the 'party of no'.
|
worldnews
|
Oh fun! Now replace the whole article:
>President Donald Trump exploded at his former lawyer, John Dowd, after reading news reports that said the special counsel Robert Mueller had subpoenaed records from Deutsche Bank, journalist Bob Woodward reported in his upcoming book, "Fear: Trump in the White House," which Business Insider obtained and reviewed.
>After learning of the news regarding Mueller and Deutsche Bank, a primary lender to the president, Woodward wrote that a furious Trump phoned Dowd at 7 a.m.
>"I know my relationships with Deutsche Bank," Trump told Dowd, with Woodward writing that the president said the bank loved him and was always paid for its loans. "I know what I borrowed, when I borrowed, when I paid it back. I know every godd--- one."
>Trump added that "this is bulls---!"
>Dowd then spoke with Jim Quarles, a member of Mueller's team who was also an assistant special prosecutor on the Watergate probe. Dowd repeated Trump's assertion that "this is bulls---."
>During a conference call, Quarles said that Mueller's team had subpoenas issued to Deutsche Bank "way back in the summertime, but it doesn't involve the president or his finances."
>The New York Times reported earlier this year that those reports led to Trump seeking to fire Mueller in December. But Trump backed down once the initial news reports, which said the subpoenas were aimed at Trump's and his family's dealings with the bank, were inaccurate. Instead, The Times reported that federal prosecutors in a separate inquiry issued a subpoena for entities that were connected to White House senior adviser and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner.
>Times columnist David Leonhardt wrote this weekend about the possible nexus between Trump's business and Russian money laundering involving Deutsche Bank, which has been tied to such illicit money.
>The relationship between Trump and the German bank dates back two decades, a time when major Wall Street firms would no longer loan Trump money following a series of disastrous ventures such as the Trump Shuttle and Trump's Atlantic City casinos.
>Prior to Trump's election as president, his financial disclosures showed he held roughly $360 million in debt to the bank, with about $125 million in two mortgages for one of the president's major Florida golf courses, Trump National Doral, The Washington Post reported.
>Deutsche Bank was under investigation by the Justice Department for both its role in a "mirror trading" scheme with Russian oligarchs that allowed them to launder cash out of Russia in the face of US sanctions, and for its mortgage practices amid the financial crisis, which regulators sought a $14 billion fine for. Deutsche Bank ended up settling with the government on the mortgage front for $7.2 billion just days before Trump took office last January.
>Last July, The Times reported that US banking regulators were reviewing the hundreds of millions of dollars in loans Deutsche Bank made to Trump over the past two decades. It was in the same story that The Times reported that the bank was in contact with federal investigators related to the special counsel's probe. Sources said the bank was expecting it would have to turn over information on Trump's accounts to Mueller.
|
worldnews
|
Trump getting angry at something isn't news.
The man (if he should even be called that) once flew into a rage at the sight of a drinking fountain whose location he didn't agree with on his new perfectly manicured clay tennis court and proceeded to grab it and rip it from the ground sending water spraying from the loose plumbing, destroying that area of the professional grade court.
Mueller is looking into everything. When he has something, that will be news.
This is not news.
|
worldnews
|
No, that's exactly what al-Qaeda and other similar terrorist organizations want you to think. It's basically reverse psychology, they say "attack us silly westerners you'll bankrupt yourselves hahaha!" to try and reduce public support for action against them, but they would actually prefer it if you left them to their own devices.
It's not like they're going to stop invading other countries or stop making terrorist attacks if America sits back and does nothing. The stated goal is to establish a global caliphate.
|
worldnews
|
It’s the opposite of what Al awards wanted, they wanted the US out of the Middle East and thought that the attack would show the American public that the policies were not effective and would only result in more suffering. Instead they got occupation of many countries.
This isn’t lik when the Soviets fought back in Afghanistan and we’re struggling economically to keep up with their war efforts. The US has spent a lot of money, but the US can afford to spend a lot of money.
|
worldnews
|
10 years later and in his old age and after accomplishing all and more than what he set out to accomplish.
He played us like fools and we stupidly brag about ending his life.
Our inability to show any respect for the talents of our enemies (the number of times I've been called a liberal, Islamic sympathiser for talking about this...) Will get us into more disastrous engagements in the future.
|
worldnews
|
Now look at what the sacrifices we'd have to take to transfer to universal health care. Due to the nature of the US being very dependent on a strong court system, this means hospital expenses are heavily poured into doctors protection from being sued. It'd also be nice if the burden of R&D wasn't heavily taxed onto US citizens because europeans get a discounted cost on our drugs. Without the incentive for profit, investors wouldn't bother funding R&D. Not only that, do you really believe medical professionals will take a 25% paycut just to have more work? That's what universal health care would mean, doctors are barely able to break even on obama care covered patients, what do you think that would mean if everyone was covered the same way? Not only will hospitals receive less funding for equipment, it'd mean a cut in staff and less people pursuing medicine.
Don't get me wrong, I think everyone should be covered but, there isn't a viable solution right now without a sever shift in the industry. Just preaching "universal health care is the future!" isn't going to fix things.
Funding education is a lost cause, the US is possibly one of the largest funders for education per capita but, the result just goes to show why asian countries still pull ahead in scores. Students already have the resources available to them to succeed the only thing holding them back is unhealthy upbringings and family culture. California is a good example of similar income neighborhoods separated by ethnicity that heavily indicates family upbringing and culture plays a heavier part in education than school funding.
Free college is unnecessary, community college for 2 years transfer to a state school is essentially less than 14k in debt out of college on average. The only people preaching for free college are the ones who expect a college experience.
|
worldnews
|
Italy is not racist in the way where they treat someone with a different skin pigment as someone less
Italy is considered racist because it doesn't want more migrants straining an already weak economy and a struggling social system. It has nothing to do with race and only with common sense.
Please stay in America. If there's anything we dislike it's people like you. Your ideas will find no validation in this country
|
worldnews
|
The UN should enforce a system where illegal immigration doesn't happen.
It's trying to fix a symptom of the cause and not the actual cause.
It's the equivalent of helping drug addicts out while not properly prosecuting, arresting and stopping drug trafficking.
The ideal solution would be to setup refugee camps within Libya and legally select immigrants who are eligible. Is the UN doing this? No. They're not fixing the true cause.
I'm happy to take in people escaping conflict from war torn countries. I'm also happy to take in people being persecuted for religious beliefs or sexual preference.
However, I have no interest in taking in economical refugees. There's a very long list of people spread around the entire world that want to immigrate to Europe. Forcing entry by stubbornly inflating a rubber boat and waiting in the middle of the ocean is cheating the system.
Let me be crystal clear. This is not racism. This is following the rules by the law book and using common sense.
|
worldnews
|
> The UN should enforce a system where illegal immigration doesn't happen.
The UN is not a government for the world, it is a communicating tool, although member states have come to agreements in the past to enforce common human rights and few other regulations this does not make the UN an all-round governing body. To "enforce" any kind of system involving many separate countries all with their own laws, motivations and cultures needs a lot of consensus, the only role the UN can play in these matters is to offer a negotiation platform for those countries involved and offer idea's to them.
They do investigate things, and write reports, because that's how you get things in the open and discussed about.
|
worldnews
|
In the 3 months since the current government have taken power there have been 14 shootings, two murders and 56 physical assaults against not only immigrants but just those who aren't Italian. One of these attacks involved a 13 month old Roma child being shot in the head with an airgun. There was also a shooting at a market where 5 Black vendors where shot by a neo-Fascist and 2 of them died.
Good to see done your research /s.
|
worldnews
|
Salvini has made his anti-Roma position pretty clear, so you can't really disregard attacks against Roma being connected to the recent election. Also the data is much higher than it was, in the same period last year there were no shootings and no deaths. Now you have people attacking people based on the colour of their skin, An Italian athlete who happens to be Black had her eye injured after people threw stuff at her in Turin. The Turin D.A tried to look into the rise of hate crimes but was hounded by Salvini's supporters, who are seemingly the only people denying that this is going on. Just because you deny it, it doesn't mean it isn't happening.
|
worldnews
|
Roma have always been hated and frowned upon in Italy. Italian Gipsies are a complete different reality than Northern European Gipsies. They act as crime syndicates, ignore integration and overall provide little to no benefit to society. Racism towards Roma has always been there and will never fade away until they start integrating properly. Salvini supporters are highlighting something that has always been there.
> Now you have people attacking people based on the colour of their skin
A few incidents don't personify an entire country. School shootings in America happen once a month but you don't see people assuming that all white kids are mentally deranged.
Just because Salvini is Right-Winged, doesn't mean he is racist.
American moralist ideology unfortunately has no validation in Italy because it's a complete different reality. America has a lot of educated African Americans that are as good if not better than it's white counter-part in a lot of skilled jobs. In Italy the vast majority of northern African minorities have no education, don't integrate properly and come from cultures that assimilate with Italian values.
This subbreddit is uber SJW alt-left and I'm not surprised by the downvotes. Take this argument to the average Italian and he will agree for good reasons.
|
worldnews
|
No one is saying that these incidents represent the Italians at all. I’m just giving you evidence that the UN is justified in their actions. You are the one denying that it’s happening at all, implying that it’s the Roma’s fault for the discrimination (I doubt that 13 month old was part of a crime syndicate). Also just because the “average Italian” would agree with you (which I highly doubt) doesn’t mean that these attacks are justified.
Also Salvini vowed to expel all of the Roma from Italy during his election, how can you support that? What’s the difference between you and a Roma child born in Italy, they have just as much of a right to live there as you. This isn’t about the sub being “SJW alt-left” this is about you denying fact, and treating people as less important than yourself because they aren’t Italian.
|
worldnews
|
You obviously have never had the experience of being an immigrant. See about 100 years ago Italy was so fucked up that people left for America in mass.
Now if you’re a decedent of one of these immigrants, you heard stories of how badly they were treated when they came here. Italian immigrants were considered uneducated and criminal. Americans began to blame them for their economic problems. Sound familiar? Ever hear of the word Dego, or Wop? My Grandfather was seen as a hero in Italy for doing the more difficult task of migration, ever hear the term White Widow?
So it especially angers me when I see fucktwat neofascist buttboys for Putin take ahold of Italian politics. It’s embarrassing and you should be embarrassed.
|
worldnews
|
I’m not denying anything. Im just stating that this UN investigation is a joke because it’s focusing on the wrong things. A handful of racist incidents are prone to happen in any country where such a huge influx of immigrants has been present. The issue is that these migration flows should be halted indefinitely until a better legal way is found. The right type of Immigration helps the economy and Italy really needs a boost.
And for the love of god stop interpreting the things I say under your own agenda. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, none of these acts are justified, there’s nothing racist in my arguments!
And Jesus Christ it’s so obvious you’ve never been to Italy. You’re basing your ideas on simplistic moral values that hold absolutely no truth in the real world. A Roma kid is the same as an Italian kid, sure. It’s what the Roma kid becomes at a later age that differs a lot from the average Italian. Roma culture is not oppressed it’s low key oppressing other Italians though acts of violence, criminality or overall leeching of social systems. Most Roma live in secluded trailer parks, don’t work, don’t educate themselves, have a high tendency to not follow the law. It’s just a lifestyle that was allowed to grow and become a reality.
Why the fuck should tax payers money go to people that don’t work and overall don’t contribute to society if not damage it?
|
worldnews
|
Do you have a source for that? If so that means that 1 of my examples (also the tamest one) has context that I never knew about before. So what about the shootings and immigrants being beaten to death? Also I jumped straight to a racism conclusion on that story considering that it was featured in an article about the rise of crimes against immigrants in Italy. Also you are missing the point about the Roma. Yes them being looked down upon is not exclusive to Italy, however the government of Italy has made the Roma a target and scapegoat with Salvini’s vow to expel them.
|
worldnews
|
>You’re thinking of the less developed form of respect like parent to child relationship,
What are you talking about? Familial relationships are 'servitude'?
Yeah, we don't want you here. Speaking the way you're writing here you'd get punched in the face. Not that you'd have the balls.
> We have the same problems here,
Ffs, stop assuming that every society is like the US'. And your media sucks at reporting affairs of other anglophone countries, let alone other ones, so I hope you don't consider yourself informed.
|
worldnews
|
I can get even worse. Part of the problem Italy has is the same as you find in Greece. When the church has a bigger influence on the country than any other institution that means you’re easy prey for active measures. You guys were about to go communist after ww2 until the US and U.K. secret services paid off the pope and sabotaged your elections. The residue of fascism still permeates, and while you blame immigrants, you have a government more corrupt than any American institution. Your King Emmanuel did a nice number on the county too, good thing my Grandfather did leave and denounce him.
|
worldnews
|
>The UN is doing its job by trying to make sure people are alright.
So why does it only care when some white people attack minorities in small numbers, but migrants can rape and murder children, and the UN gives zero care. If going by every other country is the example, interracial crime is committed in much lower numbers by the white people, than vice versa. Whites are pretty much always universally the minority of interracial crime committers.
|
worldnews
|
I mean this isn't passed yet and still needs to be approved by the council of Europe who's very likely to kill it because of the backlash or going to make it less harsh. Brexit may have been a good thing because Britain valued complete autonomy over anything else the problem is the British government has no plan in place for brexit meaning the end outcome will be a kneecapped British economy, shit trade deals decided at the last minute, no real control over there boarders because that's a stipulation in those trade deals, and essentially staying in the EU except now they really have no say of how EU laws effect them
|
worldnews
|
Wow a random post on a random site. So trustworthy, such proof. Seriously, you choose to believe this random post? Don't you think Israelis would cover this more? For all we know this could be written by a sad Arab troll.
But yeah, if Israel has something like a internet forces, so what? Palestinians have Pallywood and their propaganda machine, Arabs have Al Jazeera, the Democrats and Republicans have paid internet trolls/shills, the Kremlin and China have whole divisions of internet trolls. So what? That's the world we live in
|
worldnews
|
Identify, call out, tag em, and move on.
Zionists and not good faith actors or speakers, there is no point in engaging with them.
These are people who justify child murder by saying they'll grow up to hate us anyway. These are the people who claim Palestine has autonomy while they snap up it's land, kill their people and blockade their waters. These are people who mimick and paraphrase Adolf Hitler without shame.
|
worldnews
|
Moroccan here. This headline is confusing. The laws that passed today are for violence against women and sexual harassement in general (harassement in public, sexual assault and cybercrimes etc..). It's not like sexual violence or violence against women was legal (or went unpunished) before, it's just that this law gave women more protection against things that weren't given as much attention before, and it upgraded the punishments. (I.E public harassement etc..) I don't understand why they used those terms in the headline because they imply something very different.
As for forced marriage there was this controversial law that was passed in 2012 by some retarded politicians that made it possible for rapists to marry their victims but it was repealed two years later, after a lot of people protested. So it is completely irrelevant to the laws that passed today. I'm disappointed in BBC.
Forced marriage is one of those things that ultimately depends on what kind of family you have, since even that controversial rape law that existed didn't make it automatically possible for the rapists to marry their victim, they still faced a sentence. It was up to the family to decide if they wanted to do that. So forced marriage was never really explicitly legal, they just made a retarded assumption that somehow this won't be abused and the victim would somehow voluntarily want to marry her rapist and not be forced to do it (*facepalm* as you can probably tell that law had a religious dimension to it. The Islamist idiots are the ones that passed the law.). If the woman has a fucked up family then the government can't really do much about it if the woman is pressured into marrying someone. The only solution is for the woman to get away from her family and that is unfortunately not always possible and sometimes they don't always want to cut ties with their families, like some form of Stockholm syndrome. This is actually one of the things that are being discussed and what a lot of activists want for the future, stuff like shelter for victims. Right now NGOs are the only ones doing this kind of work.
|
worldnews
|
I think it has to do with activists claiming the law does not protect against forced/arranged marriage because it fails to explicitly mention or define it and the vague reference to "ill treatment of women" gives too much lee way
http://news.trust.org//item/20180912173630-lh7iq/
> Suad Abu-Dayyeh, a Middle East expert with the global advocacy group Equality Now, welcomed the law as a "positive step" to protect women, but said implementation was key.
> "We want to see the implementation of this law - forced and child marriages are very much happening in Morocco."
|
worldnews
|
> In a recent notice sent to Congress, the administration said it intended to take $20 million in foreign assistance funds and use it to help Mexico pay plane and bus fare to deport as many as 17,000 people who are in that country illegally.
Yes, so sensationalized.
Writing that they’re planning on spending aid money to Mexico and then reporting that they’re planning on sending aid money to Mexico.
The nerve.
|
worldnews
|
He lied? His still in office with 2 years to go. You can only call him a liar after his term ends.
Now I don't think he'll build an actually wall, he'll probably just reinforce the fences that are already in place and the cost will be divided 50/50 between the US and Mexico, like most things of this sort. If that does happen then you can't call him a liar because he technically did what he said he would.
Are you sure you read the article? He isn't paying Mexico to keep the immigrants out...
Btw you are just mentioning one part of my comment. Not once did you mention my criticism of the second part of the title of this thread, which is my biggest gripe with it.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.