[Livia]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Notice my use of the word 'free' there...

I'd say you're just nit picking to be frank, there are people who appear to be trump loyalists ... what's wrong with voicing that?

I may have quoted the DM in the past, who cares? Not sure why you've hijacked this thread to discuss it :/

You started this whole ridiculous, off-topic discussion when you replied to a post of mine that I made to someone else. I'd call that nit picking.

Aaaanyhoo.... back on topic.

I see that Kuwait has stopped issuing visas for five majority Muslim countries, including Pakistan. Racists and Nazis? Can we expect some outraged protesters outside the Kuwaiti embassy today, or is the issue just with Trump? Interestingly, there's no word of the Kuwaiti ban in mainstream media. Funny that.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Livia

You started this whole ridiculous, off-topic discussion when you replied to a post of mine that I made to someone else. I'd call that nit picking.

Aaaanyhoo.... back on topic.

I see that Kuwait has stopped issuing visas for five majority Muslim countries, including Pakistan. Racists and Nazis? Can we expect some outraged protesters outside the Kuwaiti embassy today, or is the issue just with Trump? Interestingly, there's no word of the Kuwaiti ban in mainstream media. Funny that.

Just Trump.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Livia

You started this whole ridiculous, off-topic discussion when you replied to a post of mine that I made to someone else. I'd call that nit picking.

Aaaanyhoo.... back on topic.

I see that Kuwait has stopped issuing visas for five majority Muslim countries, including Pakistan. Racists and Nazis? Can we expect some outraged protesters outside the Kuwaiti embassy today, or is the issue just with Trump? Interestingly, there's no word of the Kuwaiti ban in mainstream media. Funny that.

From my point of view, I think the problem people have with Trump (and why it's not publicised as much as the example you gave) is because he's a leader of a Western country, like the UK, like Ireland, like Australia etc etc So, it feels like he's speaking for us in a way, as a western society. It's like everytime there's a terror attack in a Western country or not even a terror attack any type of disaster or tragedy, it's publicised much more in our media because it feels more relate-able, we're not part of the same country but it would be silly to suggest that western countries don't share a commonality and feel some sort of kinship towards eachother. He in a way represents us as in the Wests way of life

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

From my point of view, I think the problem people have with Trump (and why it's not publicised as much as the example you gave) is because he's a leader of a Western country, like the UK, like Ireland, like Australia etc etc So, it feels like he's speaking for us in a way, as a western society. It's like everytime there's a terror attack in a Western country or not even a terror attack any type of disaster or tragedy, it's publicised much more in our media because it feels more relate-able, we're not part of the same country but it would be silly to suggest that western countries don't share a commonality and feel some sort of kinship towards eachother. He in a way represents us as in the Wests way of life

Yeah, I don't disagree with what you're saying. But it does kind of endorse the nature of the Trump protest which has mostly been carried out by people who claim to be aware of the world's injustice but seem quite blinkered in which cause they choose to stand against. (I am not referring to anyone specifically on this site, I'm making a general statement.) It's a similar position, I think, to Russia bombing the bejesus out of Aleppo and the Stop The War Coalition, who are aggressive in their opposition to the involvement of the UK and the USA but who were ominously silent about Russia. If you're going to be outraged, you're going to have to be outraged about all of them. We've hosted more odious people than Trump, and in any case, I wouldn't be at all surprised if his term of office is considerably less than four years. And I'd be happy with that.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Livia

Yeah, I don't disagree with what you're saying. But it does kind of endorse the nature of the Trump protest which has mostly been carried out by people who claim to be aware of the world's injustice but seem quite blinkered in which cause they choose to stand against. (I am not referring to anyone specifically on this site, I'm making a general statement.) It's a similar position, I think, to Russia bombing the bejesus out of Aleppo and the Stop The War Coalition, who are aggressive in their opposition to the involvement of the UK and the USA but who were ominously silent about Russia. If you're going to be outraged, you're going to have to be outraged about all of them. We've hosted more odious people than Trump, and in any case, I wouldn't be at all surprised if his term of office is considerably less than four years. And I'd be happy with that.

I think this point is just plain silly and various versions of it have been brought up repeatedly in this thrad. People are allowed to care about whichever causes they want to choose to care about. They don't have to fulfill some sort of protest quota to validate their opinion.

I could probably go into any thread and say 'well that point of view is irrelevant since you don't care about all these other issues relating to the subject at hand so your opinion is invalid.' It's just a lazy way of trying to shut down someone's opinion without dealing with their argument.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I think this point is just plain silly and various versions of it have been brought up repeatedly in this thrad. People are allowed to care about whichever causes they want to choose to care about. They don't have to fulfill some sort of protest quota to validate their opinion.

I could probably go into any thread and say 'well that point of view is irrelevant since you don't care about all these other issues relating to the subject at hand so your opinion is invalid.' It's just a lazy way of trying to shut down someone's opinion without dealing with their argument.

Just as people can choose to leave Europe and oppose mass immigration.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Just as people can choose to leave Europe and oppose mass immigration.

That has nothing to do with what I'm saying but okay? Thank you for stating the obvious, I guess?

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

That has nothing to do with what I'm saying but okay? Thank you for stating the obvious, I guess?

It's about freedom of choice and validity of opinion so it's relevant.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I think this point is just plain silly and various versions of it have been brought up repeatedly in this thrad. People are allowed to care about whichever causes they want to choose to care about. They don't have to fulfill some sort of protest quota to validate their opinion.

I could probably go into any thread and say 'well that point of view is irrelevant since you don't care about all these other issues relating to the subject at hand so your opinion is invalid.' It's just a lazy way of trying to shut down someone's opinion without dealing with their argument.

From everything I said in my thread, that's all you took? The opportunity to intimate I'm silly and lazy and like to shut down people's opinions? I think you'll find the rest of my post was relevant but you chose not to address any other part if it.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Livia

From everything I said in my thread, that's all you took? The opportunity to intimate I'm silly and lazy and like to shut down people's opinions? I think you'll find the rest of my post was relevant but you chose not to address any other part if it.

I said that the argument you were making was silly and lazy, not you.

Also your post was pretty much summed up in the part I bolded, You weren't saying anything other than the people who oppose Trump should also oppose Russia's actions in Aleppo which was essentially what you were saying in the bolded point, thus speaking about the rest of the post is pointless, it's an example not an argument.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I think this point is just plain silly and various versions of it have been brought up repeatedly in this thrad. People are allowed to care about whichever causes they want to choose to care about. They don't have to fulfill some sort of protest quota to validate their opinion.

I could probably go into any thread and say 'well that point of view is irrelevant since you don't care about all these other issues relating to the subject at hand so your opinion is invalid.' It's just a lazy way of trying to shut down someone's opinion without dealing with their argument.

It's not lazy it's pointing out blatant hypocrisy.
It's not about "not caring about all these other issues".
The post you quoted mentioned the 'Stop the war coalition'.
An obvious anti-western organisation who have been quoted as saying they "oppose the west"
"The real enemy, Mr Nineham informed listeners, is the West: “Everyone who has got a sense of duty for the peace of the planet needs to mobilise everything they can against that and that means opposing the West.”

Another quote

Take this quote from 2006 by John Rees, the national officer of Stop the War: “Socialists should unconditionally stand with the oppressed against the oppressor [a STW euphemism for the West], even if the people who run the oppressed country are undemocratic and persecute minorities, like Saddam Hussein.”

Oh and

'But in the context of STW’s other leaders, siding with Saddam is almost moderate. Its former chair, Andrew Murray, is a proud Stalinist who on the anniversary of his hero’s birth attacked "hack propagandists [who] abominate the name of Stalin beyond all others".

Unsurprisingly, he reveres North Korea, and has pointed out that his “basic position of solidarity with People[']s Korea [is] clear”.

Many of(not all) these protesters are communist and have anti western views.
It's not a lazy argument to point this out.There is a clear agenda with sections of these protests to support anyone who is not on our side.
If they're against western involvement in Syria because it is seen as unnecessary killing then why wouldn't they be against Russia who actually are brutally killing civilians and blowing up aid convoys?It's part of the same "issue".Only the worst half of it apparently slips by these people.
Everyone rallying against Trump is fine.He is a liability but there is far far worse **** going on that many of these people don't care about or in worse cases (i.e Stop the war) actually support the brutal regimes.So it does appear extremely hypocritical.When we get protests outside the Russian embassy aswell and against the brutal dictators killing people on the daily and against terror attacks on western soil then maybe anti Trump protests won't look so hypocritical.








https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.tel...?client=safari

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

It's not lazy it's pointing out blatant hypocrisy.
It's not about "not caring about all these other issues".
The post you quoted mentioned the 'Stop the war coalition'.
An obvious anti-western organisation who have been quoted as saying they "oppose the west"
"The real enemy, Mr Nineham informed listeners, is the West: “Everyone who has got a sense of duty for the peace of the planet needs to mobilise everything they can against that and that means opposing the West.”

Another quote

Take this quote from 2006 by John Rees, the national officer of Stop the War: “Socialists should unconditionally stand with the oppressed against the oppressor [a STW euphemism for the West], even if the people who run the oppressed country are undemocratic and persecute minorities, like Saddam Hussein.”

Oh and

'But in the context of STW’s other leaders, siding with Saddam is almost moderate. Its former chair, Andrew Murray, is a proud Stalinist who on the anniversary of his hero’s birth attacked "hack propagandists [who] abominate the name of Stalin beyond all others".

Unsurprisingly, he reveres North Korea, and has pointed out that his “basic position of solidarity with People[']s Korea [is] clear”.

Many of(not all) these protesters are communist and have anti western views.
It's not a lazy argument to point this out.There is a clear agenda with sections of these protests to support anyone who is not on our side.
If they're against western involvement in Syria because it is seen as unnecessary killing then why wouldn't they be against Russia who actually are brutally killing civilians and blowing up aid convoys?It's part of the same "issue".Only the worst half of it apparently slips by these people.
Everyone rallying against Trump is fine.He is a liability but there is far far worse **** going on that many of these people don't care about or in worse cases (i.e Stop the war) actually support the brutal regimes.So it does appear extremely hypocritical.When we get protests outside the Russian embassy aswell and against the brutal dictators killing people on the daily and against terror attacks on western soil then maybe anti Trump protests won't look so hypocritical.








https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.tel...?client=safari

And none of this affects people's right to choose to protest Trump or any issue they personally care about.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

And none of this affects people's right to choose to protest Trump or any issue they personally care about.

It's not a "silly" or "lazy" point of view though to ask just where the hell are these protesters when anyone other than our own country or the US are carrying out far worse atrocities.It is of course everyone's right to protest on whatever issue they choose.But to question what seems like a very one sided agenda is also anyone's right.Specially when an organisation called 'Stop The War' only wants to stop one side of it.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

And none of this affects people's right to choose to protest Trump or any cissue they personally care about.

No but it shows their choice is not based on any reasoned argument, just personal opinion and has bugger all to do being right.

So getting off their high horses would be appropriate if they don't want to be exposed as complete hypocrites.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Livia

Yeah, I don't disagree with what you're saying. But it does kind of endorse the nature of the Trump protest which has mostly been carried out by people who claim to be aware of the world's injustice but seem quite blinkered in which cause they choose to stand against. (I am not referring to anyone specifically on this site, I'm making a general statement.) It's a similar position, I think, to Russia bombing the bejesus out of Aleppo and the Stop The War Coalition, who are aggressive in their opposition to the involvement of the UK and the USA but who were ominously silent about Russia. If you're going to be outraged, you're going to have to be outraged about all of them. We've hosted more odious people than Trump, and in any case, I wouldn't be at all surprised if his term of office is considerably less than four years. And I'd be happy with that.

Again, it goes back to my original point, Putin is basically a dictator of a communist country, he isn't "one of us" the UK and the USA are, so we(the royal we) feel like they will listen to us, It's hard to articulate what i mean to say. Do you understand what I mean?

Putin is a nut job, the Russians hold very different values to us as a society where as the USA in general are quite like us, alot of them are unhappy with how things are in the States atm too. I don't think people protesting about Russia would make any bit of difference but it might do in a democratic and free society like ours.

ETA :

Basically imo ISIS is succeeding even more than we think by dividing Western society, pitting us all against eachother and destroying the values we spent years building. Trump is an example of this especially, building walls, banning refugees, hang up on other western world leaders, making us enemies rather than allies. In my opinion this is a more successful terrorist attack on our society than any of the bombs they set off

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Again, it goes back to my original point, Putin is basically a dictator of a communist country, he isn't "one of us" the UK and the USA are, so we(the royal we) feel like they will listen to us, It's hard to articulate what i mean to say. Do you understand what I mean?

Putin is a nut job, the Russians hold very different values to us as a society where as the USA in general are quite like us, alot of them are unhappy with how things are in the States atm too. I don't think people protesting about Russia would make any bit of difference but it might do in a democratic and free society like ours.

ETA :

Basically imo ISIS is succeeding even more than we think by dividing Western society, pitting us all against eachother and destroying the values we spent years building. Trump is an example of this especially, building walls, banning refugees, hang up on other western world leaders, making us enemies rather than allies. In my opinion this is a more successful terrorist attack on our society than any of the bombs they set off

I do understand what you're saying. However... I don't agree that people in the UK and Ireland (etc) are only interested in Trump because he is Western. People are concerned about the Middle East, they are concerned about Syria, North Africa, they're aware of the refugee crisis etc. In these times of mass media we can all see what's going on the world over. So I find it hard to believe that people don't demonstrate against non-western dickheads because they don't identify with them.

And Trump is a dickhead, I totally buy that.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Livia

I do understand what you're saying. However... I don't agree that people in the UK and Ireland (etc) are only interested in Trump because he is Western. People are concerned about the Middle East, they are concerned about Syria, North Africa, they're aware of the refugee crisis etc. In these times of mass media we can all see what's going on the world over. So I find it hard to believe that people don't demonstrate against non-western dickheads because they don't identify with them.

And Trump is a dickhead, I totally buy that.

I know you aren't a Trump fan, don't worry

I can't speak for everyone who is anti trump etc but that is how I feel about it anyway, I worry that our western society is going backwards or in a direction I don't like

[arista]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I know you aren't a Trump fan, don't worry

I can't speak for everyone who is anti trump etc but that is how I feel about it anyway, I worry that our western society is going backwards or in a direction I don't like

Fine Lady
its good for free trade
8 years of a better way of life.


Folks can protest forever
it changes nothing.




Business is as Usual
no fuss is needed.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Livia

Yeah, I don't disagree with what you're saying. But it does kind of endorse the nature of the Trump protest which has mostly been carried out by people who claim to be aware of the world's injustice but seem quite blinkered in which cause they choose to stand against. (I am not referring to anyone specifically on this site, I'm making a general statement.) It's a similar position, I think, to Russia bombing the bejesus out of Aleppo and the Stop The War Coalition, who are aggressive in their opposition to the involvement of the UK and the USA but who were ominously silent about Russia. If you're going to be outraged, you're going to have to be outraged about all of them. We've hosted more odious people than Trump, and in any case, I wouldn't be at all surprised if his term of office is considerably less than four years. And I'd be happy with that.

Totally agree

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

From my point of view, I think the problem people have with Trump (and why it's not publicised as much as the example you gave) is because he's a leader of a Western country, like the UK, like Ireland, like Australia etc etc So, it feels like he's speaking for us in a way, as a western society. It's like everytime there's a terror attack in a Western country or not even a terror attack any type of disaster or tragedy, it's publicised much more in our media because it feels more relate-able, we're not part of the same country but it would be silly to suggest that western countries don't share a commonality and feel some sort of kinship towards eachother. He in a way represents us as in the Wests way of life

Exactly.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

You started this whole ridiculous, off-topic discussion when you replied to a post of mine that I made to someone else. I'd call that nit picking.

Aaaanyhoo.... back on topic.

I see that Kuwait has stopped issuing visas for five majority Muslim countries, including Pakistan. Racists and Nazis? Can we expect some outraged protesters outside the Kuwaiti embassy today, or is the issue just with Trump? Interestingly, there's no word of the Kuwaiti ban in mainstream media. Funny that.

Nope I questioned if it was offensive, it's a debate .... I got involved in the debate.
Once again you attempt to muddy the waters by deferring to other parts of the world those of which you could never consider as part of the free world, or have any cultural connection whatsoever to western cultural norms.

So yes, it is just with trump, for the reasons outlined above, there is a duty to remain progressive. .. To accept so readily regressive autocratic decisions from him is funny.
No that's the wrong word not funny......horrifying, yes, that's a better word.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Nope I questioned if it was offensive, it's a debate .... I got involved in the debate.
Once again you attempt to muddy the waters by deferring to other parts of the world those of which you could never consider as part of the free world, or have any cultural connection whatsoever to western cultural norms.

So yes, it is just with trump, for the reasons outlined above, there is a duty to remain progressive. .. To accept so readily regressive autocratic decisions from him is funny.
No that's the wrong word not funny......horrifying, yes, that's a better word.

I don't really see the logic of only holding progressive societies to account and letting more primitive ones off the hook because they are more primitive.

The Saudis for instance are hardly primitive, they just choose to hide behind it when it suits and the same pretty much applies to the rest of them.

When there are plenty of Western mugs out there defending their primitiveness to the hilt they are laughing their stinking sandals off.

I thought the general belief in this country was 'ignorance was no defence'. Just one rule for them then. I find that pretty horrifying!

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I don't really see the logic of only holding progressive societies to account and letting more primitive ones off the hook because they are more primitive.

The Saudis for instance are hardly primitive, they just choose to hide behind it when it suits and the same pretty much applies to the rest of them.

When there are plenty of Western mugs out there defending their primitiveness to the hilt they are laughing their stinking sandals off.

I thought the general belief in this country was 'ignorance was no defence'. Just one rule for them then. I find that pretty horrifying!

What are you suggesting... It's ok for the western world to regress because thw rest of the world isn't progressive enough?
I've heard of fuzzy logic but jeeeeez