Forum menu
ninfan - MemberCome come Ernie, you said long ago that far from being a Tory, I was a 'right wing anarchist'.
Well I was wrong ninfan, you are not anything. Unlike someone like Jamba there isn't an ounce of passion in anything you post on the political threads.
It is clear that you are only interested in puerile taunting and that you have absolutely no interest whatsoever in convincing anyone that your opinions are worth considering.
Smart-arse point-scoring obviously makes you feel very clever, as does taunting everyone by calling them "lefties", ironically it does of course make you look rather childish and stupid.
Your little act undoubtedly has the benefit of making right-wingers sound idiotic but unfortunately, like Chewwy, it makes the possibility of sensible debate even more remote.
outofbreath - MemberA three paragraph essay aimed at an individual. No mention of the issue under debate at all. Classy.
I almost always ignore ninfan and chewwy, if more people did that, instead of responding to chewwy's gibberish and ninfan's "leftie" taunts, [i]the issue under debate[/i] might possibly be discussed.
Shame to see this one go down the big hitter wordy ****athon route.
Why not just compare facts vs alt facts.
What is it about lefties that whenever they can't win on the points they resort to personal insults? I thought being 'progressive' and standing for social justice and equality meant you were all better than that, and that's why you were all able to maintain the righteous moral high ground? Turns out that it's just a skin deep facade...
Ninfan I insult you because I think you are a vile human being, you could be Corbyns love child and I would still insult you, you are a thin skinned bully who loves to dish out insults but when some one stands up to you you just whinge. You troll people for your own perverse pleasure. So don't flatter yourself that your political stance makes people insult you, people insult you because you are ............... pathetic.
Jeeesus, back off the personal attacks please. It might make you feel better but it doesn't achieve anything and makes any proper debate impossible.
So as long as you're not poor, sick, a woman or the environment then so fat trump's doing a good job. What the hell does he think he's doing to the EPA etc? They can't speak to journalists, they can't update their website, it's almost like he's scared of what they might say.
Get over yourself Graham, when did ninfan indulge in proper debate?
you forgot foreign Akira , that is on today agenda .
I said we ll have to wait next week to have another go at him , but no need , he does it on a daily basis .
i take it all the Trump fans on here support his stance on the Environment ?
"Vile human being"
😆
Just goes to show how bigoted these sad little leftie mouthpieces really are
Imagine if me, Jamba or Chewy were posting stuff like that? Banhammer would be wielded in minutes.
Ha ha ha ha
The gang of three 😆
Imagine if me, Jamba or Chewy
I thought you were all the same person, login is chosen based on level of meds you are on at the time (i.e. chewy comes out when forgot to take meds)
What the hell does he think he's doing to the EPA etc?
Same thing he did to the Whitehouse pages on Climate Change - deleting it!
[img] 
[/img]
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/01/20/trump_wipes_whitehousegov/
He believes that global warming was made up by the Chinese to sabotage US manufacturing.
Apparently the EPA will be refocused onto "protecting our air and water". 😐
Trump is saying that "millions voted illegally" in the election. Well, that completely invalidates the result, then.
Obviously it should be held again. Whaddaya say, Snowflake?
Meanwhile Orwells 1984 is back in the top ten.
Every cloud has a silver lining!!
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/24/us/george-orwell-1984-bestseller-trump-trnd/
In fairness to "The Donald" he is not signing a bill telling women what to do with their bodies. He is signing an executive order which prohibits government money being used to advertise or pay for abortions either in the US or abroad.
Seems Obama released $220m to Palestinians which had been blocked by Congress concerned about miney being diverted to Terrorists and/or used to pay family pensions to "matyrs" and/or those imprisioned for murdering Israelis. Interesting how all of this he did after the election knowing full well it would have been a massive vote loser for Clinton.
An annoucement expected on The Wall today and also on new Visa requirements/suspension from a list of countries deemed to pose a threat
This made my blood run cold:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/30/donald-trump-george-monbiot-misinformation
We might be going about it in a more British way in the UK, but it's happening here too, and you've got to expect a similar desire to erode environmental protection and worker's rights was behind the push to leave the EU
Scroll to "The residents of 55 Tufton Street" if that's all you do.
jambalaya - Member
Seems Obama released $220m to Palestinians which had been blocked by Congress concerned about miney being diverted to Terrorists and/or used to pay family pensions to "matyrs" and/or those imprisioned for murdering Israelis. Interesting how all of this he did after the election knowing full well it would have been a massive vote loser for Clinton.
That stuff at the end of his term was kinda desperate I thought, far too little too late Obama.
Actually jambalaya it's prohibiting money to any organisation that promotes or mentions abortions. Very different thing. Even if an organisation doesn't carry out abortions but promotes them for health reasons then they won't get money, the money wasn't being spent on abortions thats just phrasing it in a genuinely misleading way.
He is signing an executive order which prohibits government money being used to advertise or pay for abortions either in the US or abroad.
As I understand it (I can't find the actual text of the Mexico City Policy) it goes a little further than that.
I believe it prevents NGO health clinics from even suggesting abortion as a medical option (if they want to keep any Federal funding).
And it doesn't matter what that government money is actually being used for. i.e. it could be funding something else entirely within the same NGO and the restriction still applies.
All in all it's no real surprise. It's a political football that each incoming Democrat president revokes and each incoming Republican president reinstates.
(Edit: akira types faster 🙂 )
Hopped up on caffeine GrahamS but glad the stw fact checking system is working.
That stuff at the end of his term was kinda desperate I thought, far too little too late Obama.
Every President does it. They do it because they no longer have to concern themselves with playing the political game and can sign off on things that have been on their to-do list, but Congressional political bargaining and compromising has previously made difficult.
Comic relief time again:
[quote=akira ]Actually jambalaya it's prohibiting money to any organisation that promotes or mentions abortions. Very different thing. Even if an organisation doesn't carry out abortions but promotes them for health reasons then they won't get money, the money wasn't being spent on abortions thats just phrasing it in a genuinely misleading way.
Alternative Facts, as they're now known, or as we call them #jambafacts
And now the Wall.
Actually jambalaya it's prohibiting money to any organisation that promotes or mentions abortions. Very different thing. Even if an organisation doesn't carry out abortions but promotes them for health reasons then they won't get money, the money wasn't being spent on abortions thats just phrasing it in a genuinely misleading way.
Well, it doesn't matter if women die as a result of Trunp's policies, because it "winds up lefties", and that's the most important thing.
Alternative Facts, as they're now known, or as we call them #jambafacts
Yeah, I think the Trump lackey was going to say "jambafacts" but she realised that the term is (c)STW.
And scientists can only publish in journals. Publishing in mainstream media has been banned, allegedly.
Seriously? On what grounds and how can it be enforced?
Now it's getting surreal 😯
From Twitter:
[img] 
:large[/img]
Clearly a fake. Donald's hands are too big there.
Never mind all this, now he's president is someone going to show him how to tie his tie properly so it stops at his belt instead of reaching his bawbag?
Seriously? On what grounds and how can it be enforced?
Probably can't, but it'll probably take a court case or two to resolve it with a compromise settlement that walks it back a bit, but not all the way.
I'm pretty disheartened by the last couple of days for many many reasons. A major one for me as a professional environmentalist [affect the changes from within] is that it staggers me that so much can be set back in such a short space of time with just a couple of signatures and no votes in congress required.
People who deny climate change that vehemently either have to be consciously doing so because it affects their own sphere of influence (MONEY!!!!) or they have to be ignorant to what science is and what it means (SCIENTISTS ARE LIARS!!!)
gah
And scientists can only publish in journals. Publishing in mainstream media has been banned, allegedly.
Where's the source that's alleging this?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38743842
[i]US President Donald Trump's inauguration was the most watched news event streamed online to date, analysts suggest.
At its peak, a record 8.7Tbps of live video was streamed, according to content delivery network Akamai Technologies.
The previous record of 7.5Tbps was set during US election day coverage on 8 November 2016.
The figures reflect the growing popularity of online streaming.
In the US, 31 million people watched Mr Trump's inauguration on television, compared with 38 million who watched Barack Obama becoming president in 2009.
However, video traffic of Mr Obama's inauguration reached a peak of just 1.1Tbps the same year.
Akamai Technologies also analysed other recent events such as the Euro 2016 football tournament, which recorded a peak of 7.3Tbps, and the 2016 Rio Olympics women's team gymnastics final, which hit 4.5Tbps.[/i]
'Alternative fact' beginning to look very much like 'fact'... 🙂
"Streaming more popular in 2017 than in past" shock 😆 Yeah well done.
😆
also watching does not equal support!
whats the deal with the photo up there ^^^ Am i missing something?
Where's the source that's alleging this?
I'll look into it properly later, when I can. I believe it's resulted from comments from inside the EPA, who have also been silenced.
It may be rubbish, there may be an element of truth in it, I'm not sure at the moment; hence why I said "allegedly".
4K streams use more bandwidth non-shocker.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN15906G
Climate change pages to be removed from EPA website. He may trash the planet but hey, it winds up the lefties.
The rise of high definition video streaming also demands more internet traffic, which may have contributed to the increased bitrates shown in Akamai's figures.
Lots of caveats in that article ninfan. Wonder who these unnamed analysts are, and the techniques they used to derive their (rather curiously, unquantified) conclusion
Russian internet speed must be pretty good.
'Alternative fact' beginning to look very much like 'fact'...
Umm... no.
[i]"the largest audience ever to witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe"[/i]
is an entirely different claim to
[i]"the most watched news event streamed online to date"[/i]
Climate change pages to be removed from EPA website. He may trash the planet but hey, it winds up the lefties.
I think that's pretty much where it stems from. The practicality being that scientists can no longer use public domain government multi-media outlets for publishing [climate change] research and must be limited to journals.
Did you know that nobody watched Abraham Lincoln's inauguration online? Eisenhower- none. Truman- none. Kennedy, Wilson, Madison, Monroe, Grant, Washington- all none. Clearly Trump has the best inauguration.
4K streams use more bandwidth non-shocker.
Indeed.
Just as well bill gates hadn't turned the internet off.
Did you know that nobody watched Abraham Lincoln's inauguration online? Eisenhower- none. Truman- none. Kennedy, Wilson, Madison, Monroe, Grant, Washington- all none. Clearly Trump has the best inauguration.
Not one person tweeted about Bush's inauguration. And no one instagrammed Obama's 😆
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38746608 ]Some stuff about the EPA website "deletions".[/url]
Alternative fact' beginning to look very much like 'fact'...
Clutching desperately at straws there !
I'm sure loads people tuned in to rubberneck at the potential car crash, it was very dull in the end,
what got Donald's goat was that an extra million+ turned up for Obama's innaugarration and the millions of women who marched around the world against the orange one.
That's why he held that rant about cried sizes at the CIA, question. Is how many Trumper's did he buys in there to clap for him? .
Tiny hands, tiny crowd, massive ego = tantrums
Let's not forget his quest to prove that he never lost the vote, by coincidence Hillary's extra 3 million were all fraudulent...
It's hilarious !!
Let's not forget his quest to prove that he never lost the vote,
How odd - only a few weeks ago the Clinton supporters were telling us that Trump only won because of extensive voter fraud
Ninfan, at that point trump said there was no voter fraud and now he's investigating voter fraud. So which is it?
Apparently the Mexicans are now going to "reimburse" the cost of the wall
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38740717?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_breaking&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central ]"In a form"[/url]
History tells us that Hitler didn't just start murdering Jews one morning.
No, there were several years and months of small, incremental policy changes, each seemingly not too extreme or excessive, that inevitably lead to the irreversible acceptance of extreme politics by a disillusioned populous, that ultimately resulted in world war and the deaths of millions of innocent people.
I think it's time we stepped up and stopped Trump by whatever means necessary to prevent History repeating.........
How odd - only a few weeks ago the Clinton supporters were telling us that Trump only won because of extensive voter fraud
Source or is it an alternative fact ?
I think it's time we stepped up and stopped Trump by whatever means necessary to prevent History repeating.........
In that context ...
I think it's time we stepped up and stopped Trump by whatever means necessary to prevent History repeating.........
Can't stop at Trump, his whole team need removing lest one of them take over.
"seemingly not too extreme or excessive,"
...bollocks. Nazi anti-Semitism was excessive from day 1. It's all in Mein Kampf.
He had a million strong uniformed private army long before he was in power.
33pc of people were unemployed.
The other parties were intimidated out of existence.
The USA is nowhere near becoming Nazi Germany.
Apart from anything else why would the USA want to steal neighbour's territory? They're trying to keep Mexicans out not take it over. Canada? Would Canada welcome invasion the way Austria did?
One of the biggest criticisms of Trump is he's too isolationist FFS.
"I think it's time we stepped up and stopped Trump"
Replace "Trump" with "Social Democrats and Bolsheviks" and who do you start to sound like?
And just because I want to post this.
The Pope, David Beckham, Donald Trump and a ten year old boy are flying in an airplane. The plane loses power and is quickly falling from the sky. they are going to crash. There are only three parachutes and a discussion begins about who should have them
David Beckham rambles on
"I'm the King of football, I inspire thousands of people, my fans need me"
He takes one of the parachutes and jumps
Donald Trump shouts
"I am President of the United States! My people need me to make America great again, I am the smartest man in the US"
He takes one of the bags and jumps
The Pope says to the young boy
"I have lived a long and fulfilling life, you should take the last parachute and I will go down with the plane"
"It's ok, there are still two parachutes left" says the little boy
"How come?" asked the Pope
The boy replies
"Because the smartest man in America took my backpack"
😆
I hate to leave this where only the big hitters will see it, but it's lolling funny and Trump related so probably ought to go here
[img] 
?oh=8b7dfb378b702dbce8d1a7e2c63551b0&oe=59132755[/img]
😆maxtorque - Member
History tells us that Hitler didn't just start murdering Jews one morning.No, there were several years and months of small, incremental policy changes, each seemingly not too extreme or excessive, that inevitably lead to the irreversible acceptance of extreme politics by a disillusioned populous, that ultimately resulted in world war and the deaths of millions of innocent people.
I think it's time we stepped up and stopped Trump by whatever means necessary to prevent History repeating.........
@Stoner deja vu (Graham on prior page 😉 )
@Northwind on streaming 🙂 it may not be a shocker but It's hard to argue that its not true. Did any UK news agency show the whole inauguration before ? Sky broadcast the whole lot live. It's the only one I have ever watched including when I actually lived there.
The Mexicans will pay for the wall for example via higher tariffs (NAFTA renegotiation) or a tax on money transfers from US to Mexico (eg Western Union). Trump will find a way.
Alternative Facts. I get all the jokes but what she meant IMO is one broadcaster used facts like the photos whilst the Trump term used alternative facts like streaming/tv coverage data
Any comments on climate change Jambalaya?
Not really Chris. The Americans have been against that sort of legislation for years. Look at the huge cars / trucks they drive and the low cost of fuel there. Obama was different. Trump is just reverting to type. Chinese are pumping out sh.t into the air all day every day. When I first went to HK in 1987 the view across the harbour was stunning, now the smog from Guangzoh and Schenzen (excuse spelling) is choking. We (eg UK and France) complain about a new runway whilst the Chinese build 30 new airports and air traffic is growing exponentially. Ditto India. We f--ked really as most of the world doesn't care.
Regarding streaming - it's no surprise to hear it was "the most streamed news event" - but actual viewing figures for streaming are [i]very[/i] difficult to calculate.
Doing it in bandwidth is basically useless as one 4K stream ends up generating the same as half a dozen standard definition streams.
Doing it by "sessions" is equally fraught.
For example, in the course of our discussions here I've watched and linked to several different videos of the inauguration to make specific points. So I've probably generated at least a dozen viewer sessions despite the fact I've only actually watched a few snippets here and there while scrubbing through it.
Alternative Facts. I get all the jokes but what she meant IMO is one broadcaster used facts like the photos whilst the Trump term used alternative facts like streaming/tv coverage data
This is your best yet, are you deliberately trolling now?
We f--ked really as most of the world doesn't care.
Oh, well, we might as well give up then. That's it, shut everything off, put the cat out, cancel the milk, redirect the post. Last one out, lock the door.
Conversely, a lot of people aren't quite as ready to throw in the towel as you.
This is your best yet, are you deliberately trolling now?
It's hard to know, isn't it! Could a person really be that dumb?
Jamba - have your wife translate for you!
[img] 
?oh=deb3739f99c4ba74334608c660942970&oe=590786E0[/img]
I gave up when they started talking about conceiving by ejaculating inside horses. This is what happens when you leave the women in charge.
"Oh, well, we might as well give up then."
Straw man.
Straw man.
No it's his real hair.
Straw man.
No, it was direct representation of the argument being put forward, which was "we're f*****, so why not let trump get on with his anti-environment policies", which was fairly clear so see. There's no point me sitting here and listing out all the things wrong with that attitude as it has no bearing in fact, it's just an emotional response by someone who doesn't have a valid argument themselves.
"the argument being put forward, which was "we're f*****, so why not let trump get on with his anti-environment policies","
Straw man.
and the chances of this thread becoming the biggest one ever are?