The long nightmare has just begun: Inauguration of a fraud.
- Thread starter annabenedetti
- Start date
No it wasn't. The time you rushed you literally posted nothing.
The one I referenced wasn't that. You made a particular declaration and I challenged you. Eight days later you hadn't come up with a thing other than the "But I really thought I'd read it all over the place" defense. You still haven't.
No, you were deliberately lying. And you knew it. Because the alternative is that you're crazy.
Only crazy or dishonest people say or "believe" they read something all over the place when it literally never happened.
That's a good question. Wanted to keep your bump going.
How about it, Tam?
ClimateSanity
New member
That was a rush to post something.....I stand by it
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
What does rushing have to do with making a claim of fact that wasn't factual?
It isn't like you got a name or color wrong. The whole bit was pure invention represented as something true that was, literally, "all over right wing media".
Do you think if you'd had more time you'd have remembered that you didn't actually read or hear what wasn't actually written or said anywhere?
lain:
ClimateSanity
New member
I was not deliberately lying . You do know that false witness will send you to hell? God does a lot more than threaten.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
ClimateSanity
New member
You saw the video of the Egyptian pilot burning in that cage? That's you and worse in the future if you don't stop bearing false witness.
This time God will burn you instead of ISIS.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
This time God will burn you instead of ISIS.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Then explain it. First you tried "believing" it away.
Now it's this:
What does rushing have to do with making a claim of fact that wasn't factual?
Do you think if you'd had more time you'd have remembered that you didn't actually read or hear what wasn't actually written or said anywhere?
lain:
Bump the bump...
How about it, Tam?
That's a good question. Wanted to keep your bump going.
How about it, Tam?
ClimateSanity
New member
I said exactly what I remembered. I'm sorry if I don't have perfect recall like you.Then explain it. First you tried "believing" it away.
Now it's this:
What does rushing have to do with making a claim of fact that wasn't factual?
Do you think if you'd had more time you'd have remembered that you didn't actually read or hear what wasn't actually written or said anywhere?
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
It isn't about having perfect recall, or being a librarian, or rushing to post.
I don't remember someone saying the Pope loves to break dance. I don't remember it because it never happened. Nothing could put it in my memory because nothing did. And that's the truth.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
I hope she comes back to this.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
The Reality Remains the Same
Trump is talking tough on North Korea, but he faces the same limited policy options as previous presidents.
Trump is talking tough on North Korea, but he faces the same limited policy options as previous presidents.
Is the "era of strategic patience over," as Vice President Pence said this week? More succinctly: Is this time different?
The short answer is: No.
U.S. President Donald Trump may come up with a new phrase to describe his approach to North Korea ("maximum pressure and engagement"?), but he still has the same limited set of policy options for dealing with North Korea that previous president have had. For over half a century, those options have been a narrow band of economic sanctions, limited economic and diplomatic engagement and threats that the United States and South Korea will retaliate if attacked. Deterrence works on the peninsula, but it works both ways: It stops North Korea from attacking the South, but it also stops the United States and South Korea from attacking the North.
Pressure has not worked on North Korea in the past, and there is no evidence that more pressure will work today. China could pull the economic plug on North Korea and send the country into a tail-spin, but it won't. The United States could start a war on the peninsula through preemptive strikes and devastate the regime, but it won't. Neither China nor the United States will take such strong measures because the costs are far too high and far too obvious, while the unknowns of what would happen after remain too unknown.
The short answer is: No.
U.S. President Donald Trump may come up with a new phrase to describe his approach to North Korea ("maximum pressure and engagement"?), but he still has the same limited set of policy options for dealing with North Korea that previous president have had. For over half a century, those options have been a narrow band of economic sanctions, limited economic and diplomatic engagement and threats that the United States and South Korea will retaliate if attacked. Deterrence works on the peninsula, but it works both ways: It stops North Korea from attacking the South, but it also stops the United States and South Korea from attacking the North.
Pressure has not worked on North Korea in the past, and there is no evidence that more pressure will work today. China could pull the economic plug on North Korea and send the country into a tail-spin, but it won't. The United States could start a war on the peninsula through preemptive strikes and devastate the regime, but it won't. Neither China nor the United States will take such strong measures because the costs are far too high and far too obvious, while the unknowns of what would happen after remain too unknown.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
ClimateSanity
New member
There was a lot of right wing talk in the early days of the administration concerning the role of bannon.
I remember people talking about his role as shaking things up. There was also much speculation about how Trump was installing people with opposite visions. A state of temporary shakeup was front and center and was all part of draining the swamp.
By the time bannon was removed, it confirmed in my mind what his purpose was from the start ...drain the swamp. If I was mistaken in my understanding, then that's what happened especially if you are only aware of MSM. Its very hard to go back and find transcripts in right wing talk media and Google shoves our articles way at the back where it's impossible to find them. Google admits doing that to Alex Jones.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
What does rushing have to do with making a claim of fact that wasn't factual?
Do you think if you'd had more time you'd have remembered that you didn't actually read or hear what wasn't actually written or said anywhere?
He's not going to listen to you, he lives in his own reality. Maybe just put this out there one last time for the record and then leave him to his alternate facts?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Guess What: South Koreans Are Furious at Prez Trump
Let’s stop for a moment and note that President Trump and his skeletal foreign policy team have accomplished the fairly difficult feat of deeply alienating South Koreans (and seemingly many Japanese as well) while notionally protecting them from the threat of a militaristic and aggressive North Korea.
As the AP noted here yesterday, countries in the region are looking at Trump as, to quote the AP, “Unpredictable. Unhinged. Dangerous.”
. . . .
Just as a point of perspective, here’s the online front page of The Korea Times, an English language Korean news publication, that I just grabbed as I was writing.
As the AP noted here yesterday, countries in the region are looking at Trump as, to quote the AP, “Unpredictable. Unhinged. Dangerous.”
. . . .
Just as a point of perspective, here’s the online front page of The Korea Times, an English language Korean news publication, that I just grabbed as I was writing.
ClimateSanity
New member
Looks like Anna is free to reference me and ridicule me, but I cannot return fire or risk being banned.
Where is the fairness in that?
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Where is the fairness in that?
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Return fire? This isn't a war, it's just an internet forum, and you're obviously free to reference me, since you just did.
Now as you can see this thread is about Trump and things related to Trump, and the alternate facts that swirl about Trump and his fellow travelers. I'll go back to ignoring you most of the time, but if I see something of yours I want to quote (like alternative facts), I'll quote it.