Trump At The March For Life

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 39

--> @ethang5
As you did not respond to my question of instigation I will assume that you got my point.

Of course the media is biased. Which is directly relative to the previous point. Power corrupts etc...….

Intolerance is not just antisemitism. Like racism is not just black and white.

And I used the word Zionist appropriately and in accordance with it's proper definition.
--> @zedvictor4
As you did not respond to my question of instigation...
I did.

I will assume that you got my point.
That evil Jews are behind everything evil?

And I used the word Zionist appropriately and in accordance with it's proper definition.
But why would the word come up at all? Anti-semite much?
--> @ethang5
The recent Trump Netanyahu accord was overtly and undeniably Zionist. Correct terminology and far from Anti-Semitic.
In fact anti-Semitic  is a typical slur that would be used to both instigate violence and also to discredit an opponent.

The term evil Jews was never mentioned and certainly not in relation to the issue that was being discussed. Which was who instigates violence rather than who applies violence.

And so I continue to assume that you got my point and will therefore ignore your deception.
--> @zedvictor4
The recent Trump Netanyahu accord was overtly and undeniably Zionist. 
The accord had nothing to do with our subject. You injected Zionism into a conversation about the first American President attending a pro-life march.

Now you've introduced Netanyahu. Why?

Correct terminology and far from Anti-Semitic. 
The terminology is fine, your inappropriate introduction of it out of the blue into a convo about Trump attending a pro-life march  smacks of anti-semitism.

In fact anti-Semitic  is a typical slur that would be used to both instigate violence and also to discredit an opponent.
You mean "can be used". Anti-semites exist. And you aren't my opponent.

The term evil Jews was never mentioned and certainly not in relation to the issue that was being discussed. 
You blurted, "And the obsequious arrogance of the Orange Man and the Zionist should tell you what the Right has to offer."

What did Zionists have to do with the topic? You equated them with Trump, whom you obviously dislike, and called them arrogant. Zionists are Jews. Be an anti-semite if you want, but the seedy denial is what I don't like.


And so I continue to assume that you got my point and will therefore ignore your deception.
Your point was that you dislike Trump and Zionists (?) and think they are arrogant. The point I got that you obviously did not intend to send was that by injecting Zionism out of the blue into an innocuous convo about the first president to  attend a pro-life march, you are an anti-semite.

I know you don't think you are, but your slip here is similar to Biden's slip of "there are smart kids and there are black kids". It tells us what you really think.

So you can ignore anything you want, your posts and it's inexplicable Zionism dig will remain up. Readers will decide on whether there was any deception.
--> @ethang5
Trump was already a part of the thread and Trump and Netanyahu evolved quite appropriately from the same.

Netanyahu is undeniably a Zionist and his recent collusion with Trump therefore inevitably renders Trump as the same.

The overt arrogance displayed during their recently televised Trump Netanyahu meeting was obvious, unless you watched with your eyes closed.

And simply because I state the obvious does not make me an anti-Semite.

And furthermore if you check through many of my other posts you will find that my views are very varied. I am often just as scathing of new liberalism as I am of overly arrogant conservatism. I have also occasionally extolled some of Trumps better qualities and have many times spoken out against anti-Semitism.

In short; I say what I think is relevant and have very few steadfastly pre-conditioned ideas.

Q. And so why is calling a Zionist a Zionist anti-Semitic? 

A. It's not of course, but nonetheless can easily be cynically manipulated to discredit an opponent and/or stir up trouble. Which is directly relative to the thread.
--> @zedvictor4
Trump was already a part of the thread and Trump and Netanyahu evolved quite appropriately from the same.
Lol. How did Netanyahu evolve from the topic? There was nothing about Jews, nothing about Israel, there was nothing about any subject outside of America.

In short; I say what I think is relevant and have very few steadfastly pre-conditioned ideas.
You thought Zionism was relevant because you are an anti-semite and thus are overly sensitive to it. You see it everywhere, and take the slightest opportunity to castigate Jews.

Q. And so why is calling a Zionist a Zionist anti-Semitic? 
Suddenly ranting about Zionists in a conversation about the first American president to attend a pro-life march exposes your latent antisemitism buddy. How do you even connect the two?

A. It's not of course, but nonetheless can easily be cynically manipulated to discredit an opponent and/or stir up trouble. Which is directly relative to the thread.
I would have thought the same thing if you had suddenly started blurting about Sandinistas, or Bolsheviks, or Maoists.

I believe you don't know you have these latent biases, but you really need to do a soul search Zed.
When people say babies have a "right to life" is the right to life a positive right or a negative right?

If it's a positive right, then I do not support the concept of a right to life.

If it's a negative right, then I support the concept of a right to life.

--> @Christen
Interesting concept.

If a mother knows a man is trying to kill her 6 moth old baby, and does nothing to thwart the man, and the baby is killed, has she violated the babies right to be protected from known threats to its life?

Does the baby have a positive rights case against the mother? Does not the baby's life have a right to be protected by the mother?


--> @ethang5
LOL.

If your last reply is not a rant then I don't know what is.


Nonetheless:

Trump is the protagonist and Netanyahu the Zionist is his friend and they recently met inside of America.

And so the thread unravelled itself.

And I never mentioned Sandinistas, Bolsheviks or Maoists.

Whereas you, unwittingly or not have just introduced them to the thread.

See how these things unravel?

And all the above created during a period quiet reflection at the start of my day.

No ranting was or is ever needed.



--> @zedvictor4
your last reply is not a rant then I don't know what is.

The charge of ranting can easily be cynically manipulated to discredit an opponent and/or stir up trouble

Trump is the protagonist and Netanyahu the Zionist is his friend and they recently met inside of America.
Lol! O.k Adolph.

And so the thread unravelled itself.
And then you woke up. The thread isn't unravelled. You just came out of the blue with an attack on Zionists betraying your latent antisemitism. You aren't alone, antisemitism seems to be in vogue right now.

See how these things unravel?
I see how you hope they do.

No ranting was or is ever needed.
Too bad the same isn't true for your antisemitism.
--> @ethang5
HaHa.

Nuff said.
--> @zedvictor4
Till you true disposition slips out again.
--> @ethang5
A sentient blob of organic matter is a sentient blob of organic matter. 

And peripheral labelling is something that passes the time of day.

Now that's nuff said.