Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - easytiger95

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 83
1
General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Politics...
« on: July 17, 2020, 04:28:23 PM »
Ah, the soft bigotry of low expectations...

Of course he would say that, who wouldn't? What, your father wouldn't? Is he from the States? Because if he was he would definitely use the N-word at some stage. He never did?? Bet he hates travellers though. Wouldn't drink with them, would he? Oh he does....emm....ok, good for him.

How about just -

Using the N-word is and was wrong, at any stage of life. And while we hope that people who did use it, at any stage, can grow and evolve, the fact is that the person we are talking about was sued by the Federal Govt in the 70s for discrimination in housing, called for the death of innocent black young men and refused to retract his words even after that innocence was proved, said that he didn't want black people handling his money, just Jews, ran a campaign of delegitimising the first President of colour, started his own campaign by calling Mexicans' rapists, instituted a Muslim ban, separated thousands of children from their parents at the border, and has actively gone after POC in the media, including female reporters asking him questions, Nascar drivers and, of course, Colin Kapernick.

After all that, can we conclude that him saying the N-word was just something that happened in the 70s, or can we safely say that he was, is and will continue to be a degenerate, horrible racist without one redeeming quality?


2
General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Politics...
« on: July 16, 2020, 04:07:56 PM »
LOL

Even Bill Maher thinks the bias at The NY Times is off the hook, but keep it up guys

Thatís the head in the sand attitude that got Trump elected in the first place

https://mobile.twitter.com/billmaher/status/1283120122521989120

ďResignation Letter ó Bari Weiss.    As a longtime reader who has in recent years read the paper with increasing dismay over just the reasons outlined here, I hope this letter finds receptive ears at the paper. But for the reasons outlined here,I doubtď

I don't get to vote in the US, more's the pity. But making a free speech martyr out of a journalist who a) resigned rather than being fired and b) made her name by campaigning to have academics fired because their views did not mirror hers - makes you rather more of an ostrich than me Whitey. But that is just more of the attitude that got Trump elected in the first place, but won't help him in this cycle.

As for why more journos would leave NYT over philosophical differences than WSJ - well that is obvious - they hire a more diverse staff at NYT in the hope of stimulating debate (unadvisedly in the case of Weiss and Stephens, who are only trolls) whereas WSJ has a much more defined conservative bent, and they hire along that line, hence less disagreements.


So are Matt Talibbi and Bill Maher both wrong about the New York Times?

WSJ has plenty of Op Edís written by liberals-their readership just donít go in meltdown mode every time someone writes something they disagree with.

NY Times is the left wing version of Fox News. Itís subscribers are a bunch of sheeple who vilify anyone who holds opinions different to themselves

Yes, I think they are.

Amazingly enough, just because some people share some of the same views I have, I don't have to agree with them on everything.

And I subscribe to the NYT app, and am regularly annoyed by some of the views I see posited there.

I think they are far too soft on the right and Trump, especially their sub editors and headline writers.

In the pursuit of balance they often eschew telling the truth, like when they don't describe Trumps lies as lies.

Although, unlike Fox News, they regularly hire and publish contributors with diametrically opposed views to any progressive consensus.

Which has its drawbacks as I have stated, but in general is healthy for an institution like it. Just unfortunate that some of those hires, like Weiss and Stephens, are such whiny snowflakes, and are unwilling to participate in the free and robust exchange of ideas.

But I'm just a sheeple, what would I know?


 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

3
General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Politics...
« on: July 16, 2020, 03:57:32 PM »
"Sheeple..."
 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

4
General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Politics...
« on: July 16, 2020, 03:10:35 PM »
LOL

Even Bill Maher thinks the bias at The NY Times is off the hook, but keep it up guys

Thatís the head in the sand attitude that got Trump elected in the first place

https://mobile.twitter.com/billmaher/status/1283120122521989120

ďResignation Letter ó Bari Weiss.    As a longtime reader who has in recent years read the paper with increasing dismay over just the reasons outlined here, I hope this letter finds receptive ears at the paper. But for the reasons outlined here,I doubtď

I don't get to vote in the US, more's the pity. But making a free speech martyr out of a journalist who a) resigned rather than being fired and b) made her name by campaigning to have academics fired because their views did not mirror hers - makes you rather more of an ostrich than me Whitey. But that is just more of the attitude that got Trump elected in the first place, but won't help him in this cycle.

As for why more journos would leave NYT over philosophical differences than WSJ - well that is obvious - they hire a more diverse staff at NYT in the hope of stimulating debate (unadvisedly in the case of Weiss and Stephens, who are only trolls) whereas WSJ has a much more defined conservative bent, and they hire along that line, hence less disagreements.


5
General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Politics...
« on: July 16, 2020, 12:38:33 PM »
I disagree with Greenwald on a lot, particularly his attitude towards Putin, but his work on Lula's imprisonment in Brazil, and stuff like the article above really show his forensic skills as a reporter.

I haven't been following Taaibi recently, where is his head at?

6
General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Politics...
« on: July 16, 2020, 12:07:02 PM »
Hmm, right wing opinion writer on the NYT complains about the threat to free speech (despite her having a platform that size to publicize her views....)

then resigns (she was not fired or silenced) claiming that she was intimidated into doing so....

without anyone bringing up the reason for her rise to prominence, which was leading a campaign of intimidation against professors working in the Middle East department of Columbia University because they disagreed with Israel's Palestinian policy....

https://theintercept.com/2018/03/08/the-nyts-bari-weiss-falsely-denies-her-years-of-attacks-on-the-academic-freedom-of-arab-scholars-who-criticize-israel/ 

(Greenwald wrote this two years ago, she has been at this a long time)....

or without anyone on this site recognising her role in publicizing what she termed "the intellectual dark web", a loosely affiliated group of supposed "classical liberals" and "free-speech advocates" (Rubin, Shapiro, the Weinsteins, Jordan Peterson et al) who do nothing but avoid debate with leftists, main stream gruesome right wing bigots like Stefan Molyneux, Gavin McInnes and others, and complain about their speech being restricted despite all of them having access to huge online and broadcast platforms (including but not limited to, Fox News, CNN, HBO, Daily Wire, Joe Rogan Show....)

and at the time of her resignation, Andrew Sullivan and also, apparently, Ben Shapiro have decided to move on to non-defined new chapters in their careers. Watch out for some kind of new site, a right wing Vox perhaps, or a rival for Breitbart, but with added helpings of self pity, as they decry their speech being limited, while they rake in the corporate dollars and have unlimited scope for regurgitating their right wing dross into the MSM.

The right wing grift is an amazing one, and would almost make you want to applaud their stunning mendacity. It's a nice gig if you can get it.

7
General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Politics...
« on: February 27, 2020, 11:08:49 AM »
take a look at what are common diseases in Guatemala and see what u think,  but there should be a revolving door at the border according to eamon j70 and his fellow Democrats

Only an imbecile would be unable to grasp there is a vast swath of grey between a closed border and an open border.

Did you realise that by making it solely a civil, rather than also criminal offence - the US borderland security could more quickly remove illegals from US soil?

Doubt Fox News told you that.


What Castro is referring to is Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, which stipulates that anyone caught crossing the border illegally is to be tried before a judge and fined, imprisoned for up to two years, or both. At no point does it provide for deportation. Deportation is the penalty for the civil offense of illegal immigration. The criminal offense outlined in Section 1325 simply puts illegal immigrants through the criminal justice system and imprisons them for up to two years.
if u  cross border and surrender to border patrol u are released in the us and are given a court date to show up to court and plea your case (10% of people show up)for amnesty , if you enter illegally and are caught u are locked up and deported which is proper order , only a sick imbecile would be hoping the corona virus would be the reason a president lost an election.

Only 10 percent show up for hearings????

As soon as I read this, I knew it was completely wrong. And I haven't lived in the States for nearly 25 years.

It literally took me 10secs on Google to find this link - by using the search terms "percentage of illegal immigrants who attend hearings following catch and release"

https://www.vox.com/2020/1/10/21059924/trump-asylum-seekers-show-up-court-hearing

So if you're basic premise is wrong, why should anyone believe anything else you say re immigration? The vast majority of people who cross the border want to be there legally, want to obey laws and pay taxes (which they do whilst illegal and percentage wise are more law abiding than citizens) and are an economic boon to the communities they live in.

The information to educate yourself is keystrokes away. You should try it.
educate yourself says the guy quoting vox donít believe too much they report .
The acting dhs secretary McAleenan said at a may 23rd senate Judiciary Committee hearing that 90% of final deportation orders were given to absent parolees.  I live in the community you are talking about but you know more than me ? I would never start talking about Ireland like I know more than you do and base my claims from a google search.

No, I was linking to Vox who were quoting a report - you can do that on the internet now - here's the link https://trac.syr.edu/whatsnew/email.200108.html
The acting dhs secretary McAleenan said at a may 23rd senate Judiciary Committee hearing that 90% of final deportation orders were given to absent parolees
is very different from saying only 10 percent of immigrants turn up for hearings. Again pointing to a need to educate yourself - as does the basic lack of awareness that an acting DHS sec would have an inherent political bias whereas Syracuse University conducting an academic study would not. I didn't say I know more than you about this subject because I live in Ireland - I'm saying I know more than you because I have a decent respect for civics and maths.

If I were you, I'd try and google a bit more around this subject and also apply a bit of critical thinking to the sources that you use.

8
General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Politics...
« on: February 26, 2020, 11:15:56 AM »
take a look at what are common diseases in Guatemala and see what u think,  but there should be a revolving door at the border according to eamon j70 and his fellow Democrats

Only an imbecile would be unable to grasp there is a vast swath of grey between a closed border and an open border.

Did you realise that by making it solely a civil, rather than also criminal offence - the US borderland security could more quickly remove illegals from US soil?

Doubt Fox News told you that.


What Castro is referring to is Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, which stipulates that anyone caught crossing the border illegally is to be tried before a judge and fined, imprisoned for up to two years, or both. At no point does it provide for deportation. Deportation is the penalty for the civil offense of illegal immigration. The criminal offense outlined in Section 1325 simply puts illegal immigrants through the criminal justice system and imprisons them for up to two years.
if u  cross border and surrender to border patrol u are released in the us and are given a court date to show up to court and plea your case (10% of people show up)for amnesty , if you enter illegally and are caught u are locked up and deported which is proper order , only a sick imbecile would be hoping the corona virus would be the reason a president lost an election.

Only 10 percent show up for hearings????

As soon as I read this, I knew it was completely wrong. And I haven't lived in the States for nearly 25 years.

It literally took me 10secs on Google to find this link - by using the search terms "percentage of illegal immigrants who attend hearings following catch and release"

https://www.vox.com/2020/1/10/21059924/trump-asylum-seekers-show-up-court-hearing

So if you're basic premise is wrong, why should anyone believe anything else you say re immigration? The vast majority of people who cross the border want to be there legally, want to obey laws and pay taxes (which they do whilst illegal and percentage wise are more law abiding than citizens) and are an economic boon to the communities they live in.

The information to educate yourself is keystrokes away. You should try it.

9
General discussion / Re: Westminster Election 12th December 2019
« on: December 09, 2019, 05:00:46 PM »
Cheer up lads - Bojo might just have had his Gordon Brown "awful woman" moment. Did you not see this today?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/09/refuses-to-look-at-picture-of-boy-forced-to-sleep-on-hospital-floor

I think he is cracking under the pressure - might not be the time to exploit it for a hung parliament result, but a narrow Tory win makes Brexit of the kind that Boris wants extremely hard to achieve. He needs a landslide and a parliament full of swivel eyed loons to insure him against the remains of the centrist fringe rebelling - I'd say the odds of that are receding.

If he comes home with a ten or 15 seat majority, he doesn't look like the Heineken candidate that he was puffed up to be - and there should be enough relatively sane MPs in there to block him from no deal at the end of next year.

10
General discussion / Re: Climate change
« on: September 25, 2019, 04:51:20 PM »
If there were 5 natural mass extinctions before, then another natural one is surely inevitable.

I wouldnít possibly suggest that human excess isnít contributing to the event. It might even be speeding it up at a rate of knots. This seems likely.

But proclaiming every environmental change as the result of global warming /climate change is basically two fingers up to a planet that has seen off all its species at least 5 times, and continued to do its own thing throughout. People should take a step back and think about what theyíre saying, before latching these words onto everything.  Thatís the point Iím trying to make here.

Re. the bit in bold - so if it was 95+% the result of human activity?  [and its likely 99%+ human activity - as there have been no external events such as notable increase/decrease in solar activity or volcanic ash or from a meteor impact which could be associated to many (if not all!) previous extinction events]

He's right to an extent tho.... everything gets blamed on Global Warming when there are other factors. As an example the increase in intensity of wildfires in the Western US is widely blamed on Global Warming but  research shows that extinguishing every wild fire disrupts the natural cycle of burning and actually creates denser forests (unsurprisingly) with more  fuel and so more explosive fires when they do get going.

But is that not textbook, observable, human activity-caused climate change at work? If we accept your premise (and I'm sure forestry management has a large part to play in wildfire spread) then human activity has contributed to the prevalence of wildfires, those wildfires release huge amounts of carbon into the air, contributing to global warming, which then feedbacks into providing drier, hotter, more combustible conditions for future fires, again in explosively full forests?

It's a bit chicken and egg, but to say that everything gets blamed on global warming, misses the fact that we are to blame for global warming.

11
General discussion / Re: Climate change
« on: September 24, 2019, 04:45:44 PM »
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/video/2019/sep/18/listen-to-the-scientists-greta-thunberg-tells-congress-video

Greta says it better than anyone - she doesn't want anyone to listen to her per se, she wants them to listen to the scientists. But given that one of the two main parties in the world's biggest emitter is committed to climate change denial, then she feels no choice but to speak out - given that her generation are the ones who will bear the biggest cost.

Perhaps people should get over the fact that she is a 16 year old girl and acknowledge the sense she is talking - she says we should follow the considered, peer reviewed conclusions of over 99 percent of studies that climate change is caused by human activity. If you disagree with her, I assume you are disagreeing with that?

Or maybe you just don't think a 16 year old girl should speak truth to power - a position I find as repellent as climate change denial. We won't get a solution without a functioning global democratic system. Her stand renews faith in the power of free speech, protest and democracy on the ground. The tragedy is that a 16 year old girl is displaying more maturity than the majority of lawmakers in Western societies.

12
General discussion / Re: Climate change
« on: September 24, 2019, 09:36:52 AM »
Great article from an incredibly brave and articulate person. I agree with Eamonn, those who are criticising her are basically engaging in child abuse for hire. Good clip below from the Majority Report on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSFEcG0CKB0

These are very dark times (I've also been bingeing on a lot of Scott Walker music recently, which definitely hasn't helped  :o) but as we settle down to wait for our Mad Max style hellscape to fully appear, at least we can say we were told, and clearly, what we should do to prevent it. People like her are a wonder and she should be cherished.

Just on the nuclear issue, I don't know near enough about it. For me the big questions re its use is the production of the waste material - where and how can it be safely dealt with? Also, are these new reactor designs safe enough to deal with natural disasters, earthquakes, hurricanes, typhoons, tsunami etc? Given that a lot of these phenomena are exacerbated by climate change, are these risks being built into design?

Genuine questions, I'd love some answers. Nuclear has always seemed to me that it should or could be part of a solution.

13
GAA Discussion / Re: Dublin v Kerry All Ireland Final 2019
« on: September 16, 2019, 01:07:18 PM »
Very, very happy. I was shook after the drawn game, even though I had predicted here that it would be very close, and that we rarely kick on in finals. I had to watch the replay from home (the little fella's birthday party) but I was actually looking forward to having a bit of distance from it, given how draining the first game was.

First half was just an expression of everything great in the game, and the second half was an expression of the peculiar ruthlessness that the Dubs have developed since 2011 - if you crack, even a little, they take advantage, and as soon as Murchan gave them some daylight, they were able to play the game on their own terms. Even when Kerry reeled them in, it was taking so much out of them to do that, whilst the Dubs were taking long breathers in possession and were able to pace themselves better.

I was able to get out and in to the city afterwards ("Where is Daddy going???"). Great atmosphere and the Kerry fans were, as usual, graceful to a fault. Saw a lot of people who I have been meeting at matches since the early 90s - we are lucky to have seen this team and these times.

Kerry will be back - just as the 12 minute spell against Mayo led to an over estimation of our capabilities, our second half here shouldn't obscure the immense strain this young team must have been under - if the first game was a free hit, having gone so close the pressure was on the Kerry lads to close the deal. That is a lot to ask of young fellas. There were plenty of seasoned veterans on the team that broke through in 2011 (Cullen, the two Brogans, Cahill, Cluxton etc) and they were needed. These lads will grow immeasurably from this experience.

Saw Ciaran Kilkenny getting his MOTM award, talking of the teachers that instilled the love in him for our games, our culture and his county. Men from Kerry and Wexford. He is from around my home area - only ever met him the once, when I was bringing the little fella to see the Sam. Just very proud that men like him, with an appreciation of all that this means, are still being produced around our way.

Rare auld times. Thanks to all who have congratulated us on our win.


14
General discussion / Re: Brexit.
« on: August 29, 2019, 04:02:11 PM »
Read the tea leaves here guys - Johnson seems buoyed by his visits to Europe - Merkel and Macron (wisely) didn't go too hard on him. It as  likely that prorogation is about getting a deal rather than forcing through a no deal.

Bojo shuts up shop without a legislative bar on no deal and without a no confidence vote being laid (Labour still not sure of their numbers or the number of Tory rebels) then goes into the tunnel and comes out with a donkey dressed as a unicorn - something like a time limited back stop (DUP can get on board with it but because the backstop couldn't conceivably start until after the transition period, even a five year limit gets us up to at least 2027) or an agribusiness only backstop (more difficult for the DUP and for us but still a runner) or full NI backstop if needed but with a NI only referendum promised to decide when to leave a backstop (more dangerous for the DUPers as it would become a proxy border poll).

Anyhow, he gets the DUP onside, loses perhaps 20-30 ERG members but gains enough Labour rebels either terrified of the ticking clock or fed up of Corbyn's backsliding towards a referendum. Job's a good un because no one has enough time to game it out, it's Noel Edwards time.

Long term the DUP are still doomed because even the best Brexit is worse than full EU membership (and even in a backstop there is going to be enough people in NI with UK passports getting delayed at Benidorm with sterling at parity or worse with the Euro, to be complaining). They are locked tight to Brexit at that stage, and lets face it, that's like having concrete slippers and going for a swim.

Or Boris could go into the tunnel and get scared himself, bring back the withdrawal agreement with an NI only backstop as originally envisaged, knife the DUP, and hope that he has enough scared Labour rebels to back him. Either way the DUP are screwed as an electoral force longterm. Their incompetence on this will not be forgotten.

So overall, I reckon that whilst the chance of no deal has increased considerably (if you try and rob a bank with an imitation gun, there's always a chance someone will shoot you) but I think Johnson's intentions are still to get a deal - he just has to scare the bejesus out of everyone to get enough votes for it.

Still don't see what SF could add to this - they would have loads to lose and nothing to gain - except if they see Remainer slippage to the Alliance, but even then it costs them too much to go to Westminster so they should stay where they are.

15
GAA Discussion / Re: Dublin v Kerry All Ireland Final 2019
« on: August 28, 2019, 04:34:19 PM »
I don't think Cian starts unless MDMA loses his place and McCarthy is pushed to midfield. Unlikely that Gavin will make changes in the defence - if people go well for him they tend to stay in. Davey Byrne looks to have reinvented himself this year, and I'd say Mick Fitzsimons is the one under pressure of that back line - but I think he will still start.

I think the sweeper position for Dublin will really depend on who starts and where for Kerry - if Geaney and Clifford stay in close, expect Byrne and Fitzsimons to take them and Jonny to be a spare man, getting on breaks and keeping an eye for O'Brien and Shea breaking in from half forward. If they have a 3 man full forward line, that is when I'd expect to see Cian to get on early - he's terrific (when fit) at providing cover from the half back position - just has a great positional sense, and that could put pressure on Kerry getting ball into their forward line.

I expect the first half to be cagey before it gradually opens up in the second half (in which case Dubs win due to being further down the road conditioning wise). If Kerry though go ahead early and stay ahead into half time, then some doubts could start creeping into Dublin minds. Really can't wait now.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 83