Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,288,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

Page 24 of 120 FirstFirst ... 1422232425263474 ... LastLast
Results 1,726 to 1,800 of 8998
  1. #1726
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    While that is completely incomprehensible to me, it is happening. Now multiply the number of guns in a chaotic environment like a classroom, add overworked teachers who are so underfunded that they have to pay for school supplies out of pocket, and the fact that even trained police officers occasionally execute toddlers with toy guns, and you got yourself some dead kids. More dead kids than kids saved from other kids... maybe. Still not a solution that sounds effective to me. Especially not when other approaches are glaringly obvious.
    Explain how it's remotely possible that accidental gun deaths could outnumber purposeful gun deaths. I mean, what the hell man??

    For instance: When a kid is diagnosed by a professional to have a mental disorder/deficiency; who has made terroristic threats in his name on social media; who has been brought to the attention of the authorities - is still able to get his background check passed, buys a semi automatic weapon plus hundreds of rounds of ammunition and then stroll past the armed security officer onto the premise... how do you look at that and go: nothing to worry about here, but we better go and arm teachers because that's the obvious thing to do
    You keep skimming the real target here. Ineptitude. No one wants to admit that because it means that the laws we already have are fine if they are just applied effectively. But if that's the case, we can't "take action" legislatively. That's what the left wants. Legislation against guns and gun owners. Period. That's the game here. It's not about kids. It's not about schools. It's not about mental health. it's not about safety. It's not about body count. Liberals in America HATE HATE HATEY MCHATERSON middle, red, gun owning America. Fin.

    Now the left is using children to further their cause. Their entire philosophy is based on breaking people up into victimized groups, and in this case that victimized group is children. They're being portrayed as disadvantaged and vulnerable. The left is tell you that they have a nearly unanimous opinion on legislative action. And even though very few of them have even begun to understand the complex issue of gun rights, their opinion has been given unquestionable credibility. And to deny their demands, is to oppress them.

    Moral blackmail.

    The right can't just say "let's just do nothing". Even though that is what they want. Deep down in places they can't talk about at fundraisers they all feel that the laws already on the books are adequate. Or if they feel otherwise, it's that the laws are already too restrictive. They know that guns are not the problem. But they're stuck in this precarious state of moral blackmail where they are forced to do *something*.

    What else can they say except "mental health" and "school security"? Mental health is probably the most dangerous of all solutions. I really think psychiatry knows about 2% of what's going on upstairs and the rest is just a guess. The idea that we can use legislation to read a person's thoughts and predict future actions with enough accuracy to satisfy due process and justify denying their rights is probably one of the most oppressive hells I can imagine.

    School security is actually a compelling argument. Controlled points of entry could have saved many lives in Parkland. Some special kind of glass definitely DID save lives at Parkland. Schools could install more secure class room doors. There are lots of things that could be done to make schools safer. The "arming teachers" meme is another construct of the left designed to make you think Republicans are insane.

    Teachers are forced to work in what are effectively soft targets. They are in just as much danger as any kid. It's legal to own and carry a gun in America. Why should the school be allowed to declare "gun free zones" where a gun-owning teacher isn't allowed to exercise his own right to protect himself? No one is talking about drafting teachers, sending them to boot camp, and training them moonlight as soldiers. All anyone is saying is "let teachers have their fucking constitutional rights!!"

    Then if a school has access to an armed teacher, and wants to give that teacher a certain role in its emergency procedures, that's fine! And if that teacher asks for a little more compensation for that service....that's fine too!!
  2. #1727
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,712
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    I feel like I have to spell this out because you guys are easily rustled:

    I don't hate guns, I have no issue with concealed or open carry, I don't even have a problem with people owning AR-15's and other exotic toys.
    Common sense would tell me that incidents like these should be virtually impossible:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zw-jTCNZSmY

    But it happened again this week:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.52bbb42e962f

    People tend to get complacent and negligent to a ridiculous degree.
    Take this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agL5...utu.be&t=3m29s
    or the hours worth of entertainment you can get out of searching "gun fails" on YT.

    Whenever there's a gun around there's a potential risk. This risk needs to be justified. I see no justification in arming teachers because: as the most recent school shooting has shown: there's no guarantee that the person carrying will even be fit to intervene.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  3. #1728
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Explain how it's remotely possible that accidental gun deaths could outnumber purposeful gun deaths.
    Reductio ad bananum.



    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    ...
    Number of people who will read that wall of text - I'm guessing zero.
  4. #1729
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,712
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Teachers are forced to work in what are effectively soft targets. They are in just as much danger as any kid. It's legal to own and carry a gun in America. Why should the school be allowed to declare "gun free zones" where a gun-owning teacher isn't allowed to exercise his own right to protect himself? No one is talking about drafting teachers, sending them to boot camp, and training them moonlight as soldiers. All anyone is saying is "let teachers have their fucking constitutional rights!!"
    Concealed carry on someone else's property is not a constitutional right. Same as free speech on someone else's forum is not a constitutional right.
    If gun free zones are soft targets, why are school shootings almost exclusively happening in the US? Those are soft targets in other countries as well. And even countries with comparable gun related deaths don't have their schools targeted.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  5. #1730
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    I feel like I have to spell this out because you guys are easily rustled:

    I don't hate guns, I have no issue with concealed or open carry, I don't even have a problem with people owning AR-15's and other exotic toys.
    Common sense would tell me that incidents like these should be virtually impossible:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zw-jTCNZSmY

    But it happened again this week:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.52bbb42e962f

    People tend to get complacent and negligent to a ridiculous degree.
    Take this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agL5...utu.be&t=3m29s
    or the hours worth of entertainment you can get out of searching "gun fails" on YT.

    Whenever there's a gun around there's a potential risk. This risk needs to be justified. I see no justification in arming teachers because: as the most recent school shooting has shown: there's no guarantee that the person carrying will even be fit to intervene.

    This pretty well articulates my thoughts on the matter as well - you'll have more bad shit happen by arming teachers than bad shit averted. And, what bad shit does get averted won't get averted so much as diverted - LV shooter situations will become more common and school shooter situations less common - maybe you're all happy with that, but maybe it's better to try to keep guns out of the hands of crazies' as the first priority.

    Also, why does anybody think they need to give a lesson on guns using a loaded gun in a school ffs?
  6. #1731
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    If gun free zones are soft targets, why are school shootings almost exclusively happening in the US?
    It's a multi-varied function. But some of the key elements are

    -American families are more fractured
    -American kids are not properly socialized (related to above)
    -The widespread use of psychotropic drugs among children
  7. #1732
    So it turns out that the poisoned spy was feeding secrets to Mi6 at the time a certain M16 officer was working in Moscow...

    None other than Christopher Steele.

    Also, you don't see many news reports pointing out that the nerve agent attack happened 8 miles away from the largest stockpile of nerve agents in Western Europe.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  8. #1733
    More of what you're not reading on the BBC...

    To summarise:
    1) Porton Down has acknowledged in publications it has never seen any Russian “novichoks”. The UK government has absolutely no “fingerprint” information such as impurities that can safely attribute this substance to Russia.
    2) Until now, neither Porton Down nor the world’s experts at the Organisation for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) were convinced “Novichoks” even exist.
    3) The UK is refusing to provide a sample to the OPCW (despite treaty obligations).
    4) “Novichoks” were specifically designed to be able to be manufactured from common ingredients on any scientific bench. The Americans dismantled and studied the facility that allegedly developed them. It is completely untrue only the Russians could make them, if anybody can.
    5) The “Novichok” programme was in Uzbekistan not in Russia. Its legacy was inherited by the Americans during their alliance with Karimov, not by the Russians.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  9. #1734
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Liberals in America HATE HATE HATEY MCHATERSON middle, red, gun owning America. Fin.
    As an ex card carrying member of the left, I can vouch for this. The right-wing disgusted me. I thought conservatives were all stupid and selfish. And I believed this along with every other card carrying member of the left. And when you're inside that echo chamber, it's the hardest damn thing to realize that you're inside an echo chamber.
  10. #1735
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    So it turns out that the poisoned spy was feeding secrets to Mi6 at the time a certain M16 officer was working in Moscow...

    None other than Christopher Steele.
    So how are we meant to connect the dots here? Was the only MI6 guy in Moscow or something?


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Also, you don't see many news reports pointing out that the nerve agent attack happened 8 miles away from the largest stockpile of nerve agents in Western Europe.
    Possibly because it's highly likely to be irrelevant.
  11. #1736
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Mental health is probably the most dangerous of all solutions. I really think psychiatry knows about 2% of what's going on upstairs and the rest is just a guess.
    Any psychologists who engage in science (instead of scientism) would probably agree. But then they'd be like Jordan Peterson, using Nassim Taleb's "Grandma's wisdom", trying to fix mental health problems with Lindy in mind: bringing back morality and responsibility to a culture that has been shedding them for decades.
  12. #1737
    Dunno. There are some fairly big effects of CBT.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3263389/

    Doesn't mean therapy is going to stop everyone who potentially could become a mass killer from becoming one, but seems like it has a better chance of prevention than doing nothing.
  13. #1738
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post

    Whenever there's a gun around there's a potential risk. This risk needs to be justified. I see no justification in arming teachers because: as the most recent school shooting has shown: there's no guarantee that the person carrying will even be fit to intervene.
    Do you believe that children are less safe when they are around police?
  14. #1739
    The morre I dig...

    Ok so soon we'll hand over a sample to the OPCW, and they will confirm it's "of a type developed by Russia".

    Key word - developed. Not manufactured, or made... developed. When that happens, we'll resume this conversation.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  15. #1740
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    bringing back morality and responsibility to a culture that has been shedding them for decades.
    Seems like an unrelated issue to psychopathy. If someone gets to the point where they feel so alienated they reject societal values and norms, it doesn't seem like it would matter how widespread and high-quality those values and norms are.
  16. #1741
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    The morre I dig...

    Ok so soon we'll hand over a sample to the OPCW, and they will confirm it's "of a type developed by Russia".

    Key word - developed. Not manufactured, or made... developed. When that happens, we'll resume this conversation.
    Some cliffs would help.

    Who is Porton Down. What is a novichok? What is OPCW?

    We're not all following this case with the same level of interest as you.

    Maybe not every coincidence has meaning either.
  17. #1742
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,712
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Do you believe that children are less safe when they are around police?
    Please attempt to answer that for yourself. I've already addressed this and I'm not going to repeat myself. It's not a yes or no question.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  18. #1743
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    Please attempt to answer that for yourself. I've already addressed this and I'm not going to repeat myself. It's not a yes or no question.
    Yeah I think this is a bit of a baited question. I mean no-one is going to say 'no' without sounding stupid. But it doesn't follow from that that having armed teachers (even highly trained or ex-military or w/e) in school is a good idea, since we've already seen accidents can happen.
  19. #1744
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    Please attempt to answer that for yourself. I've already addressed this and I'm not going to repeat myself. It's not a yes or no question.
    Where did you address it?
  20. #1745
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Yeah I think this is a bit of a baited question. I mean no-one is going to say 'no' without sounding stupid. But it doesn't follow from that that having armed teachers (even highly trained or ex-military or w/e) in school is a good idea, since we've already seen accidents can happen.
    When the indication is made that kids are less safe when around guns, I ask if kids are less safe around guns in a way that triggers cognitive dissonance.
  21. #1746
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    If gun free zones are soft targets, why are school shootings almost exclusively happening in the US?
    Schools are a soft target in the United States. Other countries have many more soft targets all over their domain. This is because of like what we've discussed in the past, that in America wannabe mass murderers are well deterred from going to places where they are likely to be readily stopped. This funnels wannabe mass killers into the small number of soft areas. Many other countries don't have this deterrent, so the killings are more widespread.
    Last edited by wufwugy; 03-17-2018 at 09:15 PM.
  22. #1747
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    When the indication is made that kids are less safe when around guns, I ask if kids are less safe around guns in a way that triggers cognitive dissonance.
    But it's a parlor trick...you're reductio ad bananuming him, just in a more subtle way than the standard method of completely changing the meaning.

    He said (i paraphrase) 'arming teachers is bad because some of them are fucking idiots who can't be trusted with guns, as recent events have shown. There are better ways to deal with school shootings such as getting at the root causes'.

    You rephrase the question to be (paraphrasing again) 'well can't guns make kids safer?', and he rightly says 'i already answered that; it's not a yes or no question'
  23. #1748
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Schools are a soft target in the United States. Other countries have many more soft targets all over their domain. This is because of like what we've discussed in the past, that in America wannabe mass murderers are well deterred from going to places where they are likely to be readily stopped. This funnels wannabe mass killers into the small number of soft areas. Many other countries don't have this deterrent, so the killings are more widespread.
    Dunno. Guy in LV managed to find a soft target area that wasn't a school.

    I think there is a large copycat element in the fact mostly schools are being targeted. Just like there was a fad for a while of running over crowds of pedestrians with vehicles. My guess is the thought process goes 'imma kill everybody! where should i go?' and the first thing that pops into their head is 'a school' because they've just watched 7000 news hours of coverage about school shootings. Simple priming effect. If the media didn't go all nonstop 24 hour coverage for days over every school shooting, the crazies would probably just go to the closest crowd they could find and start blasting away. Maybe it's a school, maybe it's a mall, maybe it's a baseball game. It's not as if there isn't a choice of soft targets.#

    Edit: could be wrong though. Maybe they go to schools because that's where they experienced their alienation the most and during their formative years. That could be part of it too.
    Last edited by Poopadoop; 03-17-2018 at 09:23 PM.
  24. #1749
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    But it's a parlor trick...you're reductio ad bananuming him, just in a more subtle way than the standard method of completely changing the meaning.

    He said (i paraphrase) 'arming teachers is bad because some of them are fucking idiots who can't be trusted with guns, as recent events have shown. There are better ways to deal with school shootings such as getting at the root causes'.

    You rephrase the question to be (paraphrasing again) 'well can't guns make kids safer?', and he rightly says 'i already answered that; it's not a yes or no question'
    I wasn't intending to reply to just what I quoted, but more of taking in all of what he has opined so far.
  25. #1750
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,712
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    When the indication is made that kids are less safe when around guns, I ask if kids are less safe around guns in a way that triggers cognitive dissonance.
    Stop trying to be spoon. Spoon is a terrible role model, and he's not nearly as smart as he lead you to believe. Neither is Jordan Peterson. He's a reasonably eloquent man with a tenuous grasp on reality. If you want to impress me, just answer the question deductively.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  26. #1751
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    I wasn't intending to reply to just what I quoted, but more of taking in all of what he has opined so far.
    I don't understand what you mean here, sorry.
  27. #1752
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    Spoon is a terrible role model, and he's not nearly as smart as he lead you to believe.
    I always wondered if it was just me missing the point or why some people spoke so highly of his intellect here. He just seemed like a mega-troll to me.
  28. #1753
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,712
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Schools are a soft target in the United States. Other countries have many more soft targets all over their domain. This is because of like what we've discussed in the past, that in America wannabe mass murderers are well deterred from going to places where they are likely to be readily stopped. This funnels wannabe mass killers into the small number of soft areas. Many other countries don't have this deterrent, so the killings are more widespread.
    School shootings are not committed by random lunatics. The threat comes from inside. Schools are not attracting these people, they are already there.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  29. #1754
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,712
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    I always wondered if it was just me missing the point or why some people spoke so highly of his intellect here. He just seemed like a mega-troll to me.
    Not even a good one. I'm glad we can agree for once.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  30. #1755
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Dunno. Guy in LV managed to find a soft target area that wasn't a school.
    That he did. Gun free zones aren't the only soft spots.

    my assessment is that when it comes to just the logic of it all, school shootings are a slam dunk on the gun advocacy side. The LV shooting is the opposite. It's closer to a logical slam dunk for the gun adversary side. Which makes it strange why the LV shooting is not the go-to example for gun adversaries. Except it isn't strange since emotion is the more powerful persuader, so the debate always boils down to the emotion-inducing school stuff.

    I think there is a large copycat element in the fact mostly schools are being targeted. Just like there was a fad for a while of running over crowds of pedestrians with vehicles. My guess is the thought process goes 'imma kill everybody! where should i go?' and the first thing that pops into their head is 'a school' because they've just watched 7000 news hours of coverage about school shootings. Simple priming effect. If the media didn't go all nonstop 24 hour coverage for days over every school shooting, the crazies would probably just go to the closest crowd they could find and start blasting away. Maybe it's a school, maybe it's a mall, maybe it's a baseball game.
    I totally agree.

    See we agree on lots of stuff. We agree on this, we agree that the sky is blue, that dogs bark, that Obama is a racist criminal communist. You know, the basics.
  31. #1756
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    Stop trying to be spoon. Spoon is a terrible role model, and he's not nearly as smart as he lead you to believe. Neither is Jordan Peterson. He's a reasonably eloquent man with a tenuous grasp on reality. If you want to impress me, just answer the question deductively.
    I thought it was me trying to be Scott Adams. I guess now it's me trying to be Spoon.
  32. #1757
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    School shootings are not committed by random lunatics. The threat comes from inside. Schools are not attracting these people, they are already there.
    They are attracting them to a degree. I covered this in the excellent cost breakdown from several weeks ago of how wannabe mass murderers change behavior based on perceived costs. This dynamic is the base for why deterrence of anything exists in the first place.
  33. #1758
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post

    See we agree on lots of stuff. We agree on this, we agree that the sky is blue, that dogs bark, that Trump is criminally stupid and a danger to everyone's well-being. You know, the basics.
    Awww, you're so kind.
  34. #1759
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    I always wondered if it was just me missing the point or why some people spoke so highly of his intellect here. He just seemed like a mega-troll to me.
    He is both smart and a troll. Sometimes he would engage just one, other times he would play a fine line between them.
  35. #1760
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Awww, you're so kind.
    lol when i read that i was like "oh shit did i accidentally say trump"

    you bastard.
  36. #1761
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    That he did. Gun free zones aren't the only soft spots.

    my assessment is that when it comes to just the logic of it all, school shootings are a slam dunk on the gun advocacy side.
    I think a fair number of people reduce school shootings down to "easy gun access = dead kids", and that's why they oppose easy gun access.

    "easy gun access = dead country music fans" is possibly less emotive.
  37. #1762
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    lol when i read that i was like "oh shit did i accidentally say trump"
    I think that was the rational part of your brain trying to make itself heard.

    It's ok Wuf, you can join the side of reason and sanity. We will take you!
  38. #1763
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    I think that was the rational part of your brain trying to make itself heard.

    It's ok Wuf, you can join the side of reason and sanity. We will take you!
    i totes would but im not into blue hair and septum piercings.
  39. #1764
    This is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've ever seen. I love how straight-faced they are about it too.

  40. #1765
    Why do you think that?
  41. #1766
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Why do you think that?
    Why not think that? She's carrying a gun strapped to her bra.
  42. #1767
    What should she do instead?
  43. #1768
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Some cliffs would help.

    Who is Porton Down. What is a novichok? What is OPCW?

    We're not all following this case with the same level of interest as you.

    Maybe not every coincidence has meaning either.
    Porton Down is a where, not a who. It's a military base, it's the UK chemical weapons lab. It's where the VX nerve agent was developed. It's 8 miles from where this happened.

    Novichok is a class of nerve agents. Developed by the Soviets, just like we developed VX. That's the cute use of the word "developed". North Korea recently used VX, but we "developed" it.

    OPCW can be googled very quickly, but I'll save you the trauma...Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

    So it's not quite the case that we're refusing to let the Russians see what we've got. We're refusing to let OPCW see what we've got... even though we're a signatory to the treay and are duty bound. They would really like a sample of what we claim to have, since they haven't seen it yet. If we provide them with a sample, it will allow them to analyse it and perhaps develop countermeasures against it. That's precisely why we're duty bound to hand over a sample. fwiw, North Korea are not a signatory. Russia are though, and they comply with their obligations.

    You're not following this case, but if you were, you might start to see it for the absolute crock of shit it is. Aren't you remotely curious why we would make such a thing up?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  44. #1769
    The line we're going with is the Russians are "taking advantage of our lack of union with our allies", and our "allies" are all rallying round to let us know we're not alone.

    This is to make us think again about leaving the EU.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  45. #1770
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,712
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    Not even a good one. I'm glad we can agree for once.
    Whoops for some reason I thought you were banana. my bad

    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    They are attracting them to a degree. I covered this in the excellent cost breakdown from several weeks ago of how wannabe mass murderers change behavior based on perceived costs. This dynamic is the base for why deterrence of anything exists in the first place.
    You always seem to do really well in your own retrospective, but when I ask you a really simple question I have to prod you like a 5 year old to ever get it answered.
    Last edited by oskar; 03-18-2018 at 07:02 AM.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  46. #1771
    It's worth noting that media reports suggest this stuff is 5 to 8 times more deadly than VX.

    VX is the stuff the Koreans smeared on the face of Kim's half brother. He died an agonising death.
    So the Russians came here with something at least x5 as deadly, spiked a dude and his daughter, left traces around Salisbury, and there's three people ill and 500 odd people need to wash their clothes.

    Meanwhile, not once have we said the Russians "made" it. You will continue to see the word "developed". Very careful language.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  47. #1772
    Kim's half brother was killed by a nerve agent of a type developed by the British.

    That is a loaded, factual statement very similar to what we're using as evidence that Russia did this in Salisbury.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  48. #1773
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,712
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    So what's the conspiracy? They're trying to blame russia to what end?
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  49. #1774
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post

    OPCW can be googled very quickly, but I'll save you the trauma...Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
    Next time you can save us ALL more trauma by not posting stuff about obscure terms without telling us what they mean.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    So it's not quite the case that we're refusing to let the Russians see what we've got. We're refusing to let OPCW see what we've got... even though we're a signatory to the treay and are duty bound. They would really like a sample of what we claim to have, since they haven't seen it yet. If we provide them with a sample, it will allow them to analyse it and perhaps develop countermeasures against it. That's precisely why we're duty bound to hand over a sample. fwiw, North Korea are not a signatory. Russia are though, and they comply with their obligations.
    Yup seems fishy.
  50. #1775
    Quote Originally Posted by poop
    Next time you can save us ALL more trauma by not posting stuff about obscure terms without telling us what they mean.
    Do you know what I'd have done if I saw "obscure terms" and I was interested in the context? Well, I'd either google it, or have a moan. Hint - the opposite of what you did.


    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    So what's the conspiracy? They're trying to blame russia to what end?
    Initially I thought Trident... that's our nuclear programme that is the subject of much controversy. It's due for renewal and will cost a LOT of money. But do we actually need it? Well sure we do if Russia are a threat.

    Now I think that "allies" is an important factor. There's a lot being said about the "solidarity" and "resolve" of our allies. This could also be used to support the idea that we need to remain in the EU.

    I tell you this much... we have a lot more reason to do this than Russia.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  51. #1776
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Do you know what I'd have done if I saw "obscure terms" and I was interested in the context? Well, I'd either google it, or have a moan. Hint - the opposite of what you did.
    Posts something with a bunch of non-sequiturs.

    Gets asked for clarification.

    Bitches at person for not using google.

    wp gg
  52. #1777
    hi five

    cmon talk about this spy shit. Why the fuck are we doing our utmost to cause shit?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  53. #1778
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post

    I tell you this much... we have a lot more reason to do this than Russia.
    So, we poison a Russian spy and blame it on Russia. It's not a good thing to do, but it's not quite on the level of invading another country or fixing your own country's elections is it?
  54. #1779
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post

    cmon talk about this spy shit.

    I just find it all a bit banal as far as spy shit goes. Just seems like (if it is what you say it is) false flag 101. What in particular about this story do you find so interesting? That people will believe the gov't line? Well, yea, that's what Joe Public sheep-types generally do; that's also false flag 101.
  55. #1780
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    Whoops for some reason I thought you were banana. my bad
    Pay attention.
  56. #1781
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    I just find it all a bit banal as far as spy shit goes. Just seems like (if it is what you say it is) false flag 101. What in particular about this story do you find so interesting? That people will believe the gov't line? Well, yea, that's what Joe Public sheep-types generally do; that's also false flag 101.
    I find it recklessly dangerous. I'm left hoping that Russia are just part of this theatre, they're in on it and don't give a fuck. But if not, well how many times can you poke a bear with a stick before it rips your face off?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  57. #1782
    It's also evidence that government are liars, and that they have complete control of the mainstream media.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  58. #1783
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I find it recklessly dangerous. I'm left hoping that Russia are just part of this theatre, they're in on it and don't give a fuck. But if not, well how many times can you poke a bear with a stick before it rips your face off?
    We and our allies are together about 3x as strong as Russia I reckon. If you include the US in that equation it's more like 10x as strong. So no, I'm not worried about Russia kicking our ass in WW III.
  59. #1784
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    It's also evidence that government are liars
    Oh good, I'll add that to the giant pile of other evidence they are liars.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    and that they have complete control of the mainstream media.
    Inasmuch as the mainstream media don't generally take controversial lines, I agree. Not sure that equates to 'complete control'.
  60. #1785
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    We and our allies are together about 3x as strong as Russia I reckon. If you include the US in that equation it's more like 10x as strong. So no, I'm not worried about Russia kicking our ass in WW III.
    We are a member of NATO, therefore USA are absolutely our allies when it comes to a non-NATO country. Furthermore, we're one of the few who pay our way, which wins Trump's favour. No question he sees us as an ally. Whether he trusts May is a completely different matter.

    I'm sick of this anti-Russia bollocks. Sure, the leaders of Russia are nasty people. So are ours. Out of May, Putin and Trump, I trust Trump the most. That really is saying something.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  61. #1786
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Inasmuch as the mainstream media don't generally take controversial lines, I agree. Not sure that equates to 'complete control'.
    They report state propaganda, they don't question obvious flaws in the official line, and they ridicule those who do. That's "complete control" afaic.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  62. #1787
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    We are a member of NATO, therefore USA are absolutely our allies when it comes to a non-NATO country.
    As long as Trump is president, I would not be confident of US support. He just fired his Secretary of State the day after he took an anti-Russia line.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    'm sick of this anti-Russia bollocks. Sure, the leaders of Russia are nasty people. So are ours. Out of May, Putin and Trump, I trust Trump the most. That really is saying something.
    I consider nearly all politicians reprehensible by default. Whether one is a bit more or less reprehensible than the next doesn't keep me up at night. But if it came down to our scumbag leaders against Russia's scumbag leaders, well I'm not going to side up against my own country because I think our scumbag leaders are scumbags.
  63. #1788
    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archi...oped-by-liars/

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig Murray
    I have now received confirmation from a well placed FCO source that Porton Down scientists are not able to identify the nerve agent as being of Russian manufacture, and have been resentful of the pressure being placed on them to do so. Porton Down would only sign up to the formulation “of a type developed by Russia” after a rather difficult meeting where this was agreed as a compromise formulation. The Russians were allegedly researching, in the “Novichok” programme a generation of nerve agents which could be produced from commercially available precursors such as insecticides and fertilisers. This substance is a “novichok” in that sense. It is of that type. Just as I am typing on a laptop of a type developed by the United States, though this one was made in China.
    Quote Originally Posted by UK Govt
    “We have no idea what Mr Murray is referring to. The Prime Minister told MP’s on Monday that world leading experts at Porton Down had positively identified this chemical agent. It is clear that it is a military grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia. None of that is in any doubt”.
    Who do you trust more? A former ambassador who blew his career for principle? Or Boris and Theresa? I can't believe they actually replied to him directly, referring to him by name. That's an official FCO statement I quoted.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  64. #1789
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    they don't question obvious flaws in the official line
    Sometimes they do. I seem to recall the BBC being pretty critical of the gov't in the lead-up to the Iraq war. They certainly weren't all 'rah rah, it's a long way to Tipperary' about it like you would expect of a state propaganda machine.

    I've lived in three countries, Canada the US and the UK. Of those, I find the MSM in the UK the most likely to question gov't when it comes to issues of national security. That's not to say they are impartial, but they're not on the level of Fox News in being loyalist.
  65. #1790
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    But if it came down to our scumbag leaders against Russia's scumbag leaders...
    Why does it come down to that? It doesn't. I couldn't give a fuck about Putin, he's not my "leader". Boris and Terry, them fuckers are. I expect the people who assume the position of "leaders" of the UK to subscribe to a sense of morality that we should be proud to export, not this hypocritical geopolitical theatrical bullshit that is designed purely to make stupid people feel scared of Russia.

    Am I scared of Russia? No, we're in NATO. Am I glad we're in NATO? No, I'd like us to leave, and lobby for a defence alliance than includes USA, Russia and China. Won't happen though. Why not? Why isn't that in everyone's mutual interests?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  66. #1791
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Sometimes they do.
    Yes you're right. That's because not everyone is easy to control. People have a conscience. But the people who do challenge the official line... they don't tend to earn as much money over their career.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  67. #1792
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Who do you trust more? A former ambassador who blew his career for principle? Or Boris and Theresa? I can't believe they actually replied to him directly, referring to him by name. That's an official FCO statement I quoted.
    Here we go again.

    How do you know this Murray guy is telling the truth? Maybe he is bitter about being fired? And how does a former ambassador to Uzbekistan have a well-placed source in FCO?

    Frankly, you seem a bit biased. You think everyone against us is pure and noble (like Assange), whereas our guys are all liars. My view is it's impossible to tell who is lying about what, so why believe any of them?
  68. #1793
    I don't trust Snowden, it's not like I throw around blind trust for people who tell me they're fighting for the little man.

    I seem biased? Aren't we all? You seem biased when we talk about Trump.

    And how does a former ambassador to Uzbekistan have a well-placed source in FCO?
    Do you have any idea how stupid this question is?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  69. #1794
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Why does it come down to that? It doesn't. I couldn't give a fuck about Putin, he's not my "leader". Boris and Terry, them fuckers are. I expect the people who assume the position of "leaders" of the UK to subscribe to a sense of morality that we should be proud to export, not this hypocritical geopolitical theatrical bullshit that is designed purely to make stupid people feel scared of Russia.
    You are asking a leopard to be a tiger. It ain't gonna happen because that is the nature of politics.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Am I glad we're in NATO? No, I'd like us to leave, and lobby for a defence alliance than includes USA, Russia and China. Won't happen though. Why not? Why isn't that in everyone's mutual interests?
    Well first, it's hard to align with non-democratic countries on any popular basis. We can't just start going all Molotov-Ribbentrop left and right and expect the public to understand.

    Second, what is so terrible about NATO? It started as a ways to keep Russia in check. Russia is still aggressive and still needs a deterrent to keep them from waltzing all over their neighbors. They are not going to stop unless there is some threat, a united front against them.
  70. #1795
    I trust Murray because he is yet to be proven to be talking bollocks.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  71. #1796
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Do you have any idea how stupid this question is?
    If I did I wouldn't have asked it. Please educate me.
  72. #1797
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Second, what is so terrible about NATO? It started as a ways to keep Russia in check.
    You just answered your own question.

    Russia is still aggressive and still needs a deterrent to keep them from waltzing all over their neighbors. They are not going to stop unless there is some threat, a united front against them.
    We're more aggressive than they are. They have interests in places where the majority of people speak Russian. Who are we to judge the morality of that? Maybe these people want to be in Russia, who knows if they get a fair referendum to make their own minds up? If most people speak Russian, it doesn't surprise me they vote to be Russian.

    Where are our interests?

    It's the West who need keeping in check, not Russia.

    The point about NATO being an alliance to counter Russia... that's the very point of it, so its continued existence relies on the constant threat Russia poses.

    NATO is creating the problem it claims to solve.
    Last edited by OngBonga; 03-18-2018 at 08:55 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  73. #1798
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    If I did I wouldn't have asked it. Please educate me.
    Well I used to work for the West Midland Safari Park. I reckon if I went there now, I'd get a free go on the log flume.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  74. #1799
    What you're asking is... how does someone who used to work for the FCO have a contact in the FCO?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  75. #1800
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    You seem biased when we talk about Trump.
    The problem with Trump is he has 'I'm guilty' stamped all over him. He won't say a bad word about Russia no matter what, he fired his Sec. State the day after he criticised Russia. His campaign team was full of people tied to Russia in shady ways. He fires anyone who is sniffing around Russia like Comey and wants to fire Mueller and ...the list goes on and on. I mean how many quacks do you need to hear before you say 'that's a duck'?

    If May had all these things linking her suspiciously to an adversarial nation that interfered with our election, and was behaving suspiciously about it, do you not think that would be a problem?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •