Europe including those countries not in the EU, need to stand up to Trump. You deal with a bully by standing up to them. Call him out on tariffs. Watch the American public start complaining when prices go up.
So one can easily check when one is vaguely told it's in Wikipedia.
Alternatively it's easy enough to search for 'NATO nuclear sharing' and come up with a number of different sources including Wikipedia, as well as various German news publications commentary on the topic.
It would be if one had the wit to distil the issue down as you have done. I'm not that smart.
So one can easily check when one is vaguely told it's in Wikipedia.
Alternatively it's easy enough to search for 'NATO nuclear sharing' and come up with a number of different sources including Wikipedia, as well as various German news publications commentary on the topic.
It would be if one had the wit to distil the issue down as you have done. I'm not that smart.
I got the same results googling "german nuclear weapons" or something similar. This isn't rocket surgery.
The reasons why I said it might be a stock market crash that will undo the Trump presidency are as follows.
1) Look at who he has nominated for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Paul Atkins, who advocates for unregulated cryptocurrencies.
2) Trump's proposed tariffs will sharply reduce the buying power of the American consumer.
3) The same tariffs will cause foreign investments to go elsewhere (yes, Trump has told foreign companies they should build in America, but the reaction of the foreign manufacturers is telling--they laughed at the idea).
4) The pause of foreign aid and federal grants means the recipients cannot do normal business with and in the United States.
5) His firing of many federal workers sharply reduces their purchasing power.
6) His firing of the workers of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation means that if banks start to fail, no one will be able to pick up the pieces (The last crash under George Bush was because banks started to fail).
7) Historically, most financial panics have started during Republican administrations.
There are other reasons too. From this small investor's viewpoint, the clouds look pretty dark.
So one can easily check when one is vaguely told it's in Wikipedia.
Alternatively it's easy enough to search for 'NATO nuclear sharing' and come up with a number of different sources including Wikipedia, as well as various German news publications commentary on the topic.
It would be if one had the wit to distil the issue down as you have done. I'm not that smart.
I got the same results googling "german nuclear weapons" or something similar. This isn't rocket surgery.
Trump is not going to get in to any war he can't win. And if he can win economically, without a shot being fired, he will. He's just won with Colombia. They are now accepting US military aircraft with deportees.
I know I've brought this up with you before, but can you please stop parroting fascist propaganda? There really is no excuse for spreading falsehoods to justify authoritarianism.
A deportation arrangement with Colombia that the White House presented as a total victory for Donald Trump looks less clear two days later.
The migrants the US tried to deport by US military flights on Sunday started traveling home on Monday on a Colombian air force plane, President Gustavo Petro said in posts on social media.
That’s different than what the White House announced on Sunday night when Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Colombia accepted “all of President Trump’s terms,” including “on US military aircraft, without limitation or delay.” She made no mention of Colombia sending its own planes.
The Big T is doubling down on his demand for Greenland. I look forward to Erik Bloodaxe and his berserk warriors sailing up the Potomac ang sacking the White House.
There are limits to the Orange Toddler's power. He can change names on US maps, but he can't change the words of 'The Battle of New Orleans (from memory)':
'So we raised a cheer,
And the British kept a-running,]
The British kept a-running just as fast as they could go ........
Till they run right back
To the Gulf of Mexico.'
Gulf of America doesn't rhyme or scan.
So one can easily check when one is vaguely told it's in Wikipedia.
Alternatively it's easy enough to search for 'NATO nuclear sharing' and come up with a number of different sources including Wikipedia, as well as various German news publications commentary on the topic.
It would be if one had the wit to distil the issue down as you have done. I'm not that smart.
I got the same results googling "german nuclear weapons" or something similar. This isn't rocket surgery.
In fairness, it’s such a given that Germany wouldn’t have nuclear weapons (in the popular mind) that it wouldn’t occur to many people to Google that in the first place. Hence some of the surprise when people do!
Trump is not going to get in to any war he can't win. And if he can win economically, without a shot being fired, he will. He's just won with Colombia. They are now accepting US military aircraft with deportees.
I know I've brought this up with you before, but can you please stop parroting fascist propaganda? There really is no excuse for spreading falsehoods to justify authoritarianism.
A deportation arrangement with Colombia that the White House presented as a total victory for Donald Trump looks less clear two days later.
The migrants the US tried to deport by US military flights on Sunday started traveling home on Monday on a Colombian air force plane, President Gustavo Petro said in posts on social media.
That’s different than what the White House announced on Sunday night when Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Colombia accepted “all of President Trump’s terms,” including “on US military aircraft, without limitation or delay.” She made no mention of Colombia sending its own planes.
And you are? The BBC doesn't do Fascist propaganda. But you do some really unpleasantly disturbingly poisonous shit, repeatedly, only targeted at me. What happened to you?
Trump is not going to get in to any war he can't win. And if he can win economically, without a shot being fired, he will. He's just won with Colombia. They are now accepting US military aircraft with deportees.
I know I've brought this up with you before, but can you please stop parroting fascist propaganda? There really is no excuse for spreading falsehoods to justify authoritarianism.
A deportation arrangement with Colombia that the White House presented as a total victory for Donald Trump looks less clear two days later.
The migrants the US tried to deport by US military flights on Sunday started traveling home on Monday on a Colombian air force plane, President Gustavo Petro said in posts on social media.
That’s different than what the White House announced on Sunday night when Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Colombia accepted “all of President Trump’s terms,” including “on US military aircraft, without limitation or delay.” She made no mention of Colombia sending its own planes.
And you are? The BBC doesn't do Fascist propaganda.
Remember when they broadcast an interview with Marine Le Pen on Remembrance Sunday? That was a kick wasn't it. How about the time they had Diana Mitford on Desert Island Discs?
Your article precedes @Crœsos's one, and what it appears they've agreed to is to continue to accept detainees as they have for much of the last four years (124 in 2024), the wording doesn't mention military planes, which appears to be a Trump addition.
Trump is not going to get in to any war he can't win. And if he can win economically, without a shot being fired, he will. He's just won with Colombia. They are now accepting US military aircraft with deportees.
I know I've brought this up with you before, but can you please stop parroting fascist propaganda? There really is no excuse for spreading falsehoods to justify authoritarianism.
A deportation arrangement with Colombia that the White House presented as a total victory for Donald Trump looks less clear two days later.
The migrants the US tried to deport by US military flights on Sunday started traveling home on Monday on a Colombian air force plane, President Gustavo Petro said in posts on social media.
That’s different than what the White House announced on Sunday night when Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Colombia accepted “all of President Trump’s terms,” including “on US military aircraft, without limitation or delay.” She made no mention of Colombia sending its own planes.
And you are? The BBC doesn't do Fascist propaganda.
Remember when they broadcast an interview with Marine Le Pen on Remembrance Sunday? That was a kick wasn't it. How about the time they had Diana Mitford on Desert Island Discs?
Your article precedes @Crœsos's one, and what it appears they've agreed to is to continue to accept detainees as they have for much of the last four years (124 in 2024), the wording doesn't mention military planes, which appears to be a Trump addition.
The kicker is it costs about $850,000 to fly a C130 to Columbia. More if it is a C17. Yet, it would only cost $100,000 to charter a private commercial jet for the same amount of passengers.
Trump is not going to get in to any war he can't win. And if he can win economically, without a shot being fired, he will. He's just won with Colombia. They are now accepting US military aircraft with deportees.
I know I've brought this up with you before, but can you please stop parroting fascist propaganda? There really is no excuse for spreading falsehoods to justify authoritarianism.
A deportation arrangement with Colombia that the White House presented as a total victory for Donald Trump looks less clear two days later.
The migrants the US tried to deport by US military flights on Sunday started traveling home on Monday on a Colombian air force plane, President Gustavo Petro said in posts on social media.
That’s different than what the White House announced on Sunday night when Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Colombia accepted “all of President Trump’s terms,” including “on US military aircraft, without limitation or delay.” She made no mention of Colombia sending its own planes.
And you are? The BBC doesn't do Fascist propaganda.
Remember when they broadcast an interview with Marine Le Pen on Remembrance Sunday? That was a kick wasn't it. How about the time they had Diana Mitford on Desert Island Discs?
Your article precedes @Crœsos's one, and what it appears they've agreed to is to continue to accept detainees as they have for much of the last four years (124 in 2024), the wording doesn't mention military planes, which appears to be a Trump addition.
Remember that neither of those pieces are reportage. Remember that they were interviews. Le Pen. Mitford BBC. 26 November 1989, must listen. Remember that interviewing fascists is part of the BBC's job. Remember that if that makes the BBC party to fascism, giving party political broadcasts to fascists, giving voice to fascists, then we're in Crœsos' weak hostile territory.
Colombia caved in to Trump, who nonetheless, two days after the show down it 'transpires', had not insisted on US military planes landing in Colombia, but accepted Colombian military planes coming to America.
Colombia caved in to Trump, who nonetheless, two days after the show down it 'transpires', had not insisted on US military planes landing in Colombia
The article you linked says:
"A looming trade war between the US and Colombia appears to have been averted after the Colombian government agreed to allow US military flights carrying deported migrants to land in the Andean country.
Colombia caved in to Trump, who nonetheless, two days after the show down it 'transpires', had not insisted on US military planes landing in Colombia
The article you linked says:
"A looming trade war between the US and Colombia appears to have been averted after the Colombian government agreed to allow US military flights carrying deported migrants to land in the Andean country.
Colombia caved in to Trump, who nonetheless, two days after the show down it 'transpires', had not insisted on US military planes landing in Colombia
The article you linked says:
"A looming trade war between the US and Colombia appears to have been averted after the Colombian government agreed to allow US military flights carrying deported migrants to land in the Andean country.
Correct. So, is that fascist?
It matches the statement put out by the Trump Whitehouse, but is contradicted by later news coverage (including the article @Crœsos posted).
Which sounds like politicians scoring political points from events without worrying too much about being entirely accurate. Which also seems to fall under "nothing new here".
Colombia caved in to Trump, who nonetheless, two days after the show down it 'transpires', had not insisted on US military planes landing in Colombia
The article you linked says:
"A looming trade war between the US and Colombia appears to have been averted after the Colombian government agreed to allow US military flights carrying deported migrants to land in the Andean country.
Correct. So, is that fascist?
It matches the statement put out by the Trump Whitehouse, but is contradicted by later news coverage (including the article @Crœsos posted).
Colombia caved in to Trump, who nonetheless, two days after the show down it 'transpires', had not insisted on US military planes landing in Colombia
The article you linked says:
"A looming trade war between the US and Colombia appears to have been averted after the Colombian government agreed to allow US military flights carrying deported migrants to land in the Andean country.
Correct. So, is that fascist?
It matches the statement put out by the Trump Whitehouse, but is contradicted by later news coverage (including the article @Crœsos posted).
So, am I Fascist?
How much sex does there need to be in a movie before it's considered porn? And how much of a role do you have to play in the film before you're considered a performer?
I think that might be an apt analogy. There's an old joke in the US that "I don't know how to define pornography, but I know it when I see it!"
I think fascism is a lot like that, which makes it fucking hard to define at the edges.
Colombia caved in to Trump, who nonetheless, two days after the show down it 'transpires', had not insisted on US military planes landing in Colombia
The article you linked says:
"A looming trade war between the US and Colombia appears to have been averted after the Colombian government agreed to allow US military flights carrying deported migrants to land in the Andean country.
Correct. So, is that fascist?
It matches the statement put out by the Trump Whitehouse, but is contradicted by later news coverage (including the article @Crœsos posted).
So, am I Fascist?
There's an old joke in the US that "I don't know how to define pornography, but I know it when I see it!"
Colombia caved in to Trump, who nonetheless, two days after the show down it 'transpires', had not insisted on US military planes landing in Colombia
The article you linked says:
"A looming trade war between the US and Colombia appears to have been averted after the Colombian government agreed to allow US military flights carrying deported migrants to land in the Andean country.
Correct. So, is that fascist?
It matches the statement put out by the Trump Whitehouse, but is contradicted by later news coverage (including the article @Crœsos posted).
So, am I Fascist?
There's an old joke in the US that "I don't know how to define pornography, but I know it when I see it!"
Is it a joke? I thought it was a legal opinion.
In America, these are not mutually exclusive categories.
Colombia caved in to Trump, who nonetheless, two days after the show down it 'transpires', had not insisted on US military planes landing in Colombia
The article you linked says:
"A looming trade war between the US and Colombia appears to have been averted after the Colombian government agreed to allow US military flights carrying deported migrants to land in the Andean country.
Correct. So, is that fascist?
It matches the statement put out by the Trump Whitehouse, but is contradicted by later news coverage (including the article @Crœsos posted).
So, am I Fascist?
How much sex does there need to be in a movie before it's considered porn? And how much of a role do you have to play in the film before you're considered a performer?
I think that might be an apt analogy. There's an old joke in the US that "I don't know how to define pornography, but I know it when I see it!"
I think fascism is a lot like that, which makes it fucking hard to define at the edges.
All the more reason to oppose further constitutional dilution. In my case from across the Atlantic of course but I’m intending to show solidarity with beleaguered US Shipmates. As well as concern about the impact of a USA with diluted constitutional controls on the rest of the world.
I appreciate that. But opposition is futile. Solidarity is all we have. Our turn will come when Musk buys Reform for Yaxley-Lennon. There is only freedom now, the freedom to be fascist. With guns across the Pond.
Not getting at you at all but there is now at least one legal reaction to the suspension of aid payments. Whether it will win or not is anyone’s guess but the principle seems arguable enough.
All the more reason to oppose further constitutional dilution. In my case from across the Atlantic of course but I’m intending to show solidarity with beleaguered US Shipmates. As well as concern about the impact of a USA with diluted constitutional controls on the rest of the world.
I appreciate that. But opposition is futile. Solidarity is all we have. Our turn will come when Musk buys Reform for Yaxley-Lennon. There is only freedom now, the freedom to be fascist. With guns across the Pond.
Not getting at you at all but there is now at least one legal reaction to the suspension of aid payments. Whether it will win or not is anyone’s guess but the principle seems arguable enough.
I know I've brought this up with you before, but can you please stop parroting fascist propaganda?
But you do some really unpleasantly disturbingly poisonous shit, repeatedly, only targeted at me. What happened to you?
This is a thread in Hell, so I don't fell restrained from calling out fanboys of dictatorship on their toxic rhetoric or when they swoon about how awesome various strongmen are. Don't want to get called out? Then don't unquestioningly repeat the self-serving talking points of known (and adjudicated!) liars like Donald Trump as if they were an infallible divine revelation.
I know I've brought this up with you before, but can you please stop parroting fascist propaganda?
But you do some really unpleasantly disturbingly poisonous shit, repeatedly, only targeted at me. What happened to you?
This is a thread in Hell, so I don't fell restrained from calling out fanboys of dictatorship on their toxic rhetoric or when they swoon about how awesome various strongmen are. Don't want to get called out? Then don't unquestioningly repeat the self-serving talking points of known (and adjudicated!) liars like Donald Trump as if they were an infallible divine revelation.
don't unquestioningly repeat the self-serving talking points of known (and adjudicated!) liars like Donald Trump as if they were an infallible divine revelation.
As I interpret @Martin54, he is not a fanboy of Trump, but rather an opponent of Trump's who is pessimistic about any chances of opposing him.
Of course, an optimistic fanboy and a pessimistic opponent might both repeat the same talking-points, but
with a different emotional context.
OPTIMISTIC FANBOY: Woo-hoo! The great god Trump has vanquished the Colombians, and is now unstoppable! Hallelujah!
PESSIMISTIC OPPONENT: Oh no! The evil villain Trump has vanquished the Colombians, and is now unstoppable! Dystopia is here!
Personally, I find @Martin54's doomerism a little unconvincing, as he often seems to predict the worst-case outcomes regardless of the presented evidence, and such a posture can seriously drag down morale in the fight. But I don't think that's the same thing as consciously being a fanboy.
I guess Martin that you’re paying the price for lack of clarity. I read you like Stetson does but it’s possible to read your words as Croesus does and find them worthy of personal rebuke.
“But you know I don’t think like that”.
Well, as someone who’s dialogued with you a lot over the years, I would be very surprised if you DID think like that! But we all take personal responsibility for the words we use here and the possibility that they may be misunderstood as to intention.
I guess Martin that you’re paying the price for lack of clarity. I read you like Stetson does but it’s possible to read your words as Croesus does and find them worthy of personal rebuke.
“But you know I don’t think like that”.
Well, as someone who’s dialogued with you a lot over the years, I would be very surprised if you DID think like that! But we all take personal responsibility for the words we use here and the possibility that they may be misunderstood as to intention.
No it's not. Not without witless malice. God is fair suppose.
I guess Martin that you’re paying the price for lack of clarity. I read you like Stetson does but it’s possible to read your words as Croesus does and find them worthy of personal rebuke.
Even beyond that, a lot of Trump's strategy depends on "flood[ing] the zone with shit" to quote Steve Bannon, or "catapult[ing] the propaganda" to quote another horrible president. Uncritically passing along Trump's shit, propaganda, lies, or whatever you want to call them at face value is deciding to do Trump's work for him. My patience for eager collaborators is quite thin these days. My patience for eager collaborators who pretend they're doing something else is even thinner.
I guess Martin that you’re paying the price for lack of clarity. I read you like Stetson does but it’s possible to read your words as Croesus does and find them worthy of personal rebuke.
Even beyond that, a lot of Trump's strategy depends on "flood[ing] the zone with shit" to quote Steve Bannon, or "catapult[ing] the propaganda" to quote another horrible president. Uncritically passing along Trump's shit, propaganda, lies, or whatever you want to call them at face value is deciding to do Trump's work for him. My patience for eager collaborators is quite thin these days. My patience for eager collaborators who pretend they're doing something else is even thinner.
I don't think @Martin54 is an eager collaborator with MAGA, except in the sense that he needs its imagined invincibility in order to push his poetic-manichean worldview on the forum. I'm pretty sure that if a button existed to peacefully reverse history and eliminate MAGA forever, he would crawl through broken glass to do it.
That being said...
There can be a fine line between that sorta thing and the reactionary ideology known as accelerationism(popular in tech-bro culture), and can end you up in sort of a reverse sorelism, ie. a left-winger glorifying a recognized tyrant on the right, because the tyrant seems to be operating as a ruthless and invincible "man of action" who will dramatically push history forward(*).
Thank you, by the way, @Croeses, for bringing a welcome note of non-panic to the analysis of Trump's EO spree. There have been a few other setbacks for old DJT that have also gone somewhat under-reported by the media and underexploited by the left(**).
(*) As the proto-fascist Sorel regarded Lenin.
(**) The idiotic move to pull the Tuskegee Airmen film, for example. If a Democrat said something like: "Captain Bonespurs, the man now banning our soldiers from learning the stories of The Greatest Generation", I didn't hear about it. Instead, we got some GOP stepford-rep politely warning Hegseth that his little purge was starting to irritate some of the people you don't want to irritating, and Hegseth joined the skit by tweeting "This shall not stand", and reinstated the film.
Colombia caved in to Trump, who nonetheless, two days after the show down it 'transpires', had not insisted on US military planes landing in Colombia
The article you linked says:
"A looming trade war between the US and Colombia appears to have been averted after the Colombian government agreed to allow US military flights carrying deported migrants to land in the Andean country.
Correct. So, is that fascist?
It matches the statement put out by the Trump Whitehouse, but is contradicted by later news coverage (including the article @Crœsos posted).
So, am I Fascist?
There's an old joke in the US that "I don't know how to define pornography, but I know it when I see it!"
Is it a joke? I thought it was a legal opinion.
In America, these are not mutually exclusive categories.
It was Justice Potter Stewart in Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184 (1964)(Stewart, J., concurring):
I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description [“hard-core pornography”], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that.
It’s often short-handed/misquoted as “I can’t define obscenity, but I know it when I see it.” But the antecedent for “that shorthand description “ was “hard-core obscenity,” which Stewart described as the only obscenity not entitled to First Amendment protection.
Conservatives who accuse Roe v. Wade of enshrining non-existent legal principles should properly also raise the same objection in regards to the obscenity exception to the First Amendment. From a strictly textualist perspective, it's gotta be the most psychedelic reading of the constitution imaginable.
My apologies. I’ve just discovered how to type œ on an iPhone and it’s very easy. For someone as precise as yourself my prior use of “oe” may have been irritating. You learn something new every day. (For others not in the know, press and hold o on the keyboard and you get an option list. Then with the o depressed slide your finger to the œ option. Simples)
I understand your short fuse. I contend simply that Martin54 is very far from being a Trump sycophant. It’s miles away from the character he displays here. Though a penchant for obscurity isn’t and has got him into a lot of hot water.
I don’t think he’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and think it unlikely that I’m wrong.
I agree entirely that giving airtime to Trumpist savagery is a fault but I think more associated with the broadcast media (I’ve criticised the BBC balance policy for this reason). You’ll have seen enough of my harsh overt criticism to know where I stand personally.
Of course you’re very entitled to have your own view, but that’s mine.
If I’m being too personal even for Hell, no doubt a Host will put me straight. My intentions are obvious.
Martin has got what he wants. This thread is now about him.
Let's get back on track!
Mandelson and Trump, anybody? The Daily Star today got it right!
No he hasn't. I'd rather it wasn't. But I'm now stained with @Crœsos' twisted projection. In which he hates qualitatively far more than Putin and Trump. Throwing mud works, as the latter knows right well.
Most of us have a less than flattering opinion of Mandelson. Held prior to any Trump opinion. Mind you. I think that most of Trump’s opinions about people tell us more about Trump than the people concerned.
My apologies. I’ve just discovered how to type œ on an iPhone and it’s very easy. For someone as precise as yourself my prior use of “oe” may have been irritating. You learn something new every day. (For others not in the know, press and hold o on the keyboard and you get an option list. Then with the o depressed slide your finger to the œ option. Simples)
I understand your short fuse. I contend simply that Martin54 is very far from being a Trump sycophant. It’s miles away from the character he displays here. Though a penchant for obscurity isn’t and has got him into a lot of hot water.
I don’t think he’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and think it unlikely that I’m wrong.
I agree entirely that giving airtime to Trumpist savagery is a fault but I think more associated with the broadcast media (I’ve criticised the BBC balance policy for this reason). You’ll have seen enough of my harsh overt criticism to know where I stand personally.
Of course you’re very entitled to have your own view, but that’s mine.
If I’m being too personal even for Hell, no doubt a Host will put me straight. My intentions are obvious.
Where is the BBC being imbalanced? With regard to Trump?
My apologies. I’ve just discovered how to type œ on an iPhone and it’s very easy. For someone as precise as yourself my prior use of “oe” may have been irritating. You learn something new every day. (For others not in the know, press and hold o on the keyboard and you get an option list. Then with the o depressed slide your finger to the œ option. Simples)
I understand your short fuse. I contend simply that Martin54 is very far from being a Trump sycophant. It’s miles away from the character he displays here. Though a penchant for obscurity isn’t and has got him into a lot of hot water.
I don’t think he’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and think it unlikely that I’m wrong.
I agree entirely that giving airtime to Trumpist savagery is a fault but I think more associated with the broadcast media (I’ve criticised the BBC balance policy for this reason). You’ll have seen enough of my harsh overt criticism to know where I stand personally.
Of course you’re very entitled to have your own view, but that’s mine.
If I’m being too personal even for Hell, no doubt a Host will put me straight. My intentions are obvious.
Where is the BBC being imbalanced? With regard to Trump?
Today? Dancing around the "concentration camp" elephant in the room.
My apologies. I’ve just discovered how to type œ on an iPhone and it’s very easy. For someone as precise as yourself my prior use of “oe” may have been irritating. You learn something new every day. (For others not in the know, press and hold o on the keyboard and you get an option list. Then with the o depressed slide your finger to the œ option. Simples)
I understand your short fuse. I contend simply that Martin54 is very far from being a Trump sycophant. It’s miles away from the character he displays here. Though a penchant for obscurity isn’t and has got him into a lot of hot water.
I don’t think he’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and think it unlikely that I’m wrong.
I agree entirely that giving airtime to Trumpist savagery is a fault but I think more associated with the broadcast media (I’ve criticised the BBC balance policy for this reason). You’ll have seen enough of my harsh overt criticism to know where I stand personally.
Of course you’re very entitled to have your own view, but that’s mine.
If I’m being too personal even for Hell, no doubt a Host will put me straight. My intentions are obvious.
Where is the BBC being imbalanced? With regard to Trump?
Today? Dancing around the "concentration camp" elephant in the room.
I'm sorry? You mean border and immigration control? How far are they from Vernichtungslager, extermination camps, Todeslager, death camps, Tötungszentren, killing centres? How many steps in an open society?
And I'm accused of awfulization above.
Where, how, when is the BBC remiss, unbalanced in (not?) reporting this? On the Today program? Or just currently?
My apologies. I’ve just discovered how to type œ on an iPhone and it’s very easy. For someone as precise as yourself my prior use of “oe” may have been irritating. You learn something new every day. (For others not in the know, press and hold o on the keyboard and you get an option list. Then with the o depressed slide your finger to the œ option. Simples)
I understand your short fuse. I contend simply that Martin54 is very far from being a Trump sycophant. It’s miles away from the character he displays here. Though a penchant for obscurity isn’t and has got him into a lot of hot water.
I don’t think he’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and think it unlikely that I’m wrong.
I agree entirely that giving airtime to Trumpist savagery is a fault but I think more associated with the broadcast media (I’ve criticised the BBC balance policy for this reason). You’ll have seen enough of my harsh overt criticism to know where I stand personally.
Of course you’re very entitled to have your own view, but that’s mine.
If I’m being too personal even for Hell, no doubt a Host will put me straight. My intentions are obvious.
Where is the BBC being imbalanced? With regard to Trump?
Today? Dancing around the "concentration camp" elephant in the room.
I'm sorry? You mean border and immigration control? How far are they from Vernichtungslager, extermination camps, Todeslager, death camps, Tötungszentren, killing centres? How many steps in an open society?
And I'm accused of awfulization above.
Where, how, when is the BBC remiss, unbalanced in (not?) reporting this? On the Today program? Or just currently?
Concentration camp is the appropriate terminology for what is being proposed at Guantanamo. Not all concentration camps are extermination camps.
My apologies. I’ve just discovered how to type œ on an iPhone and it’s very easy. For someone as precise as yourself my prior use of “oe” may have been irritating. You learn something new every day. (For others not in the know, press and hold o on the keyboard and you get an option list. Then with the o depressed slide your finger to the œ option. Simples)
I understand your short fuse. I contend simply that Martin54 is very far from being a Trump sycophant. It’s miles away from the character he displays here. Though a penchant for obscurity isn’t and has got him into a lot of hot water.
I don’t think he’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and think it unlikely that I’m wrong.
I agree entirely that giving airtime to Trumpist savagery is a fault but I think more associated with the broadcast media (I’ve criticised the BBC balance policy for this reason). You’ll have seen enough of my harsh overt criticism to know where I stand personally.
Of course you’re very entitled to have your own view, but that’s mine.
If I’m being too personal even for Hell, no doubt a Host will put me straight. My intentions are obvious.
Where is the BBC being imbalanced? With regard to Trump?
Today? Dancing around the "concentration camp" elephant in the room.
I'm sorry? You mean border and immigration control? How far are they from Vernichtungslager, extermination camps, Todeslager, death camps, Tötungszentren, killing centres? How many steps in an open society?
And I'm accused of awfulization above.
Where, how, when is the BBC remiss, unbalanced in (not?) reporting this? On the Today program? Or just currently?
Concentration camp is the appropriate terminology for what is being proposed at Guantanamo. Not all concentration camps are extermination camps.
No, but that's the semiotics isn't it? Especially in Auschwitz week.
Comments
It would be if one had the wit to distil the issue down as you have done. I'm not that smart.
I got the same results googling "german nuclear weapons" or something similar. This isn't rocket surgery.
1) Look at who he has nominated for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Paul Atkins, who advocates for unregulated cryptocurrencies.
2) Trump's proposed tariffs will sharply reduce the buying power of the American consumer.
3) The same tariffs will cause foreign investments to go elsewhere (yes, Trump has told foreign companies they should build in America, but the reaction of the foreign manufacturers is telling--they laughed at the idea).
4) The pause of foreign aid and federal grants means the recipients cannot do normal business with and in the United States.
5) His firing of many federal workers sharply reduces their purchasing power.
6) His firing of the workers of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation means that if banks start to fail, no one will be able to pick up the pieces (The last crash under George Bush was because banks started to fail).
7) Historically, most financial panics have started during Republican administrations.
There are other reasons too. From this small investor's viewpoint, the clouds look pretty dark.
Which is basically what I've done.
Look at what is happening to the stock of Tech companies. Talk about deep dive.
I know I've brought this up with you before, but can you please stop parroting fascist propaganda? There really is no excuse for spreading falsehoods to justify authoritarianism.
There are limits to the Orange Toddler's power. He can change names on US maps, but he can't change the words of 'The Battle of New Orleans (from memory)':
'So we raised a cheer,
And the British kept a-running,]
The British kept a-running just as fast as they could go ........
Till they run right back
To the Gulf of Mexico.'
Gulf of America doesn't rhyme or scan.
In fairness, it’s such a given that Germany wouldn’t have nuclear weapons (in the popular mind) that it wouldn’t occur to many people to Google that in the first place. Hence some of the surprise when people do!
And you are? The BBC doesn't do Fascist propaganda. But you do some really unpleasantly disturbingly poisonous shit, repeatedly, only targeted at me. What happened to you?
Remember when they broadcast an interview with Marine Le Pen on Remembrance Sunday? That was a kick wasn't it. How about the time they had Diana Mitford on Desert Island Discs?
Your article precedes @Crœsos's one, and what it appears they've agreed to is to continue to accept detainees as they have for much of the last four years (124 in 2024), the wording doesn't mention military planes, which appears to be a Trump addition.
The kicker is it costs about $850,000 to fly a C130 to Columbia. More if it is a C17. Yet, it would only cost $100,000 to charter a private commercial jet for the same amount of passengers.
Remember that neither of those pieces are reportage. Remember that they were interviews. Le Pen. Mitford BBC. 26 November 1989, must listen. Remember that interviewing fascists is part of the BBC's job. Remember that if that makes the BBC party to fascism, giving party political broadcasts to fascists, giving voice to fascists, then we're in Crœsos' weak hostile territory.
Colombia caved in to Trump, who nonetheless, two days after the show down it 'transpires', had not insisted on US military planes landing in Colombia, but accepted Colombian military planes coming to America.
The article you linked says:
"A looming trade war between the US and Colombia appears to have been averted after the Colombian government agreed to allow US military flights carrying deported migrants to land in the Andean country.
Correct. So, is that fascist?
It matches the statement put out by the Trump Whitehouse, but is contradicted by later news coverage (including the article @Crœsos posted).
So, am I Fascist?
How much sex does there need to be in a movie before it's considered porn? And how much of a role do you have to play in the film before you're considered a performer?
I think that might be an apt analogy. There's an old joke in the US that "I don't know how to define pornography, but I know it when I see it!"
I think fascism is a lot like that, which makes it fucking hard to define at the edges.
Why make this so personal?
Is it a joke? I thought it was a legal opinion.
In America, these are not mutually exclusive categories.
@Crœsos did.
@Crœsos generally has pretty good political sense, in my experience. That's a fair reason to take it personally.
Not getting at you at all but there is now at least one legal reaction to the suspension of aid payments. Whether it will win or not is anyone’s guess but the principle seems arguable enough.
The story so far.
That's not why I take it personally. And are you saying that if he smells smoke, I'm on fire?
I couldn't agree more. That great contribution to democracy, the filibuster, might come in handy for four years.
This is a thread in Hell, so I don't fell restrained from calling out fanboys of dictatorship on their toxic rhetoric or when they swoon about how awesome various strongmen are. Don't want to get called out? Then don't unquestioningly repeat the self-serving talking points of known (and adjudicated!) liars like Donald Trump as if they were an infallible divine revelation.
You got any friends?
As I interpret @Martin54, he is not a fanboy of Trump, but rather an opponent of Trump's who is pessimistic about any chances of opposing him.
Of course, an optimistic fanboy and a pessimistic opponent might both repeat the same talking-points, but
with a different emotional context.
OPTIMISTIC FANBOY: Woo-hoo! The great god Trump has vanquished the Colombians, and is now unstoppable! Hallelujah!
PESSIMISTIC OPPONENT: Oh no! The evil villain Trump has vanquished the Colombians, and is now unstoppable! Dystopia is here!
Personally, I find @Martin54's doomerism a little unconvincing, as he often seems to predict the worst-case outcomes regardless of the presented evidence, and such a posture can seriously drag down morale in the fight. But I don't think that's the same thing as consciously being a fanboy.
“But you know I don’t think like that”.
Well, as someone who’s dialogued with you a lot over the years, I would be very surprised if you DID think like that! But we all take personal responsibility for the words we use here and the possibility that they may be misunderstood as to intention.
No it's not. Not without witless malice. God is fair suppose.
Even beyond that, a lot of Trump's strategy depends on "flood[ing] the zone with shit" to quote Steve Bannon, or "catapult[ing] the propaganda" to quote another horrible president. Uncritically passing along Trump's shit, propaganda, lies, or whatever you want to call them at face value is deciding to do Trump's work for him. My patience for eager collaborators is quite thin these days. My patience for eager collaborators who pretend they're doing something else is even thinner.
I don't think @Martin54 is an eager collaborator with MAGA, except in the sense that he needs its imagined invincibility in order to push his poetic-manichean worldview on the forum. I'm pretty sure that if a button existed to peacefully reverse history and eliminate MAGA forever, he would crawl through broken glass to do it.
That being said...
There can be a fine line between that sorta thing and the reactionary ideology known as accelerationism(popular in tech-bro culture), and can end you up in sort of a reverse sorelism, ie. a left-winger glorifying a recognized tyrant on the right, because the tyrant seems to be operating as a ruthless and invincible "man of action" who will dramatically push history forward(*).
Thank you, by the way, @Croeses, for bringing a welcome note of non-panic to the analysis of Trump's EO spree. There have been a few other setbacks for old DJT that have also gone somewhat under-reported by the media and underexploited by the left(**).
(*) As the proto-fascist Sorel regarded Lenin.
(**) The idiotic move to pull the Tuskegee Airmen film, for example. If a Democrat said something like: "Captain Bonespurs, the man now banning our soldiers from learning the stories of The Greatest Generation", I didn't hear about it. Instead, we got some GOP stepford-rep politely warning Hegseth that his little purge was starting to irritate some of the people you don't want to irritating, and Hegseth joined the skit by tweeting "This shall not stand", and reinstated the film.
It was Justice Potter Stewart in Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184 (1964)(Stewart, J., concurring):
It’s often short-handed/misquoted as “I can’t define obscenity, but I know it when I see it.” But the antecedent for “that shorthand description “ was “hard-core obscenity,” which Stewart described as the only obscenity not entitled to First Amendment protection.
More at Wikipedia here.
/tangent
My apologies. I’ve just discovered how to type œ on an iPhone and it’s very easy. For someone as precise as yourself my prior use of “oe” may have been irritating. You learn something new every day. (For others not in the know, press and hold o on the keyboard and you get an option list. Then with the o depressed slide your finger to the œ option. Simples)
I understand your short fuse. I contend simply that Martin54 is very far from being a Trump sycophant. It’s miles away from the character he displays here. Though a penchant for obscurity isn’t and has got him into a lot of hot water.
I don’t think he’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and think it unlikely that I’m wrong.
I agree entirely that giving airtime to Trumpist savagery is a fault but I think more associated with the broadcast media (I’ve criticised the BBC balance policy for this reason). You’ll have seen enough of my harsh overt criticism to know where I stand personally.
Of course you’re very entitled to have your own view, but that’s mine.
If I’m being too personal even for Hell, no doubt a Host will put me straight. My intentions are obvious.
Let's get back on track!
Mandelson and Trump, anybody? The Daily Star today got it right!
Most of us have a less than flattering opinion of Mandelson. Held prior to any Trump opinion. Mind you. I think that most of Trump’s opinions about people tell us more about Trump than the people concerned.
Dafyd Hell Host
Where is the BBC being imbalanced? With regard to Trump?
Today? Dancing around the "concentration camp" elephant in the room.
I'm sorry? You mean border and immigration control? How far are they from Vernichtungslager, extermination camps, Todeslager, death camps, Tötungszentren, killing centres? How many steps in an open society?
And I'm accused of awfulization above.
Where, how, when is the BBC remiss, unbalanced in (not?) reporting this? On the Today program? Or just currently?
Concentration camp is the appropriate terminology for what is being proposed at Guantanamo. Not all concentration camps are extermination camps.
No, but that's the semiotics isn't it? Especially in Auschwitz week.